Member of NRA board wants limited magazine capacity

Don't want to Hijack, but I found this quote by PBP a little unsettling, so wanted to give my point of view.

I also have no problem with regulations concerning non-regulated military forces or militias. Companies or organizations should not be allowed to fund private armies. Just looking at the middle east should convince anyone of that fact.

PBP, those forces are what secured our liberty in the first place. As for Blackwater, I believe the government is merely getting what it wants, and if it has to find a different way to have goons for dirty work, it will. Meanwhile, in my opinion, our method of counterbalance should not be taken away!
 
What? Your not an NRA member yourself?

Regards, and Respectfully,

Walt
Benefactor Life Member, The National Rifle Association of America

Yes I am a member:D, I went to a gun show today, and the guy that signed me up in the N.R.A. is always there. He said that Joaquin Jackson doesn't speak for Entire N.R.A. and should be voted off the board!!! He never heard the interview, I told him how to find it.
 
He couldn't at this time, but I did.


I wonder if there is an impeachment procedure for members of the BoD? I also wonder if he is the only one with that mindset. Maybe the NRA should have a role call vote, and publish it, just to clarify that point.

This is very old news - happened in 2003, I believe. Jackson later came out to say he meant "assault rifle" as full auto only, and he wanted limited mag capacity for hunters only similar to the limited capacity for shotgun hunters. I don't buy his explanations.

Thanks Mal H ,

I think the video was 2005, That means he should be gone by now. atleast I hope!!! If he's not he needs to be!!!
 
Recently, concerns have been raised in response to statements made by NRA Board Member Joaquin Jackson to Texas Monthly in 2005. We have received questions from NRA members who are seeking clarity as to NRA’s positions on the subject matter discussed in Mr. Jackson’s interview. To be clear, NRA supports the right of all law-abiding citizens to Keep and Bear Arms for all lawful purposes. We will continue, as we have in the past, to vigorously oppose any efforts to limit gun ownership by law-abiding citizens as an unconstitutional infringement on our Second Amendment freedoms. These efforts include opposition to any attempts to ban firearms, including firearms incorrectly referred to as "assault weapons", and any attempts to place arbitrary limits on magazine capacity.

For more information on NRA's legislative efforts to protect and defend the Second Amendment, please visit www.NRAILA.org and www.Clintongunban.com.





STATEMENT OF JOAQUIN JACKSON



Recently, some misunderstandings have arisen about a news interview in which I participated a few years ago. After recently watching a tape of that interview, I understand the sincere concerns of many people, including dear friends of mine. And I am pleased and eager to clear up any confusion about my long held belief in the sanctity of the Second Amendment.



In the interview, when asked about my views of “assault weapons,” I was talking about true assault weapons – fully automatic firearms. I was not speaking, in any way, about semiautomatic rifles. While the media may not understand this critical distinction, I take it very seriously. But, as a result, I understand how some people may mistakenly take my comments to mean that I support a ban on civilian ownership of semiautomatic firearms. Nothing could be further from the truth. And, unfortunately, the interview was cut short before I could fully explain my thoughts and beliefs.



In fact, I am a proud owner of such rifles, as are millions of law-abiding Americans. And many Americans also enjoy owning fully automatic firearms, after being cleared by a background check and meeting the rigorous regulations to own such firearms. And these millions of lawful gun owners have every right – and a Second Amendment right – to own them.



As a hunter, I take great pride in my marksmanship. Every hunter should practice to be skilled to take prey with a single shot, if possible. That represents ethical, humane, skilled hunting. In the interview several years ago, I spoke about this aspect of hunting and my belief that no hunter should take the field and rely upon high capacity magazines to take their prey.



But that comment should never be mistaken as support for the outright banning of any ammunition magazines. In fact, such bans have been pursued over the years by state legislatures and the United States Congress and these magazine bans have always proven to be abject failures.



Let me be very clear. As a retired Texas Ranger, during 36 years of law enforcement service, I was sworn to uphold the United States Constitution. As a longtime hunter and shooter, an NRA Board Member, and as an American – I believe the Second Amendment is a sacred right of all law-abiding Americans and, as I stated in the interview in question, I believe it is the Second Amendment that ensures all of our other rights handed down by our Founding Fathers.



I have actively opposed gun bans and ammunition and magazine bans in the past, and I will continue to actively oppose such anti-gun schemes in the future.



I appreciate my friends who have brought this misunderstanding to light, for it has provided me an opportunity to alleviate any doubts about my strong support for the NRA and our Second Amendment freedom.

Posted: 8/15/2007 3:22:01 PM

This is very old news - happened in 2003, I believe. Jackson later came out to say he meant "assault rifle" as full auto only, and he wanted limited mag capacity for hunters only similar to the limited capacity for shotgun hunters. I don't buy his explanations.

His explination does sound weak on the video. The above explanation came out. Posted: 8/15/2007 3:22:01 PM That was not to long ago.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=9899
 
It was last summer. Let's see, 8/07 to 5/08 is (counts on fingers) the better part of a year.

So the question is, does he do more good for the cause than that one poorly worded and edited interview about full-auto weapons?

And he's one of how many directors, 70-some?

John
 
I honestly don't find his clarification much of an improvement, but neither is it much of a surprise, the NRA threw machine gun owners to the wolves decades ago.

Jackson is elected by the membership, not appointed by the NRA.

He's a member of "the winning team", the NRA's own endorsed slate of candidates. Who, thanks to that full page advertisement right next to the ballot, and the 'reforms' that got pushed through to beat back the Knox challenge, pretty much automatically win.

So I'd say the distinction between elected by the membership, and appointed by the NRA, is pretty threadbare.
 
"Sounds like the NRA is coming out of the closet."

Another swing, and another miss.

Are you able to grasp the concept that this one individual was:

A) Not speaking for NRA at the time.

B) Never represented his position as being official NRA policy.

C) Had his statements repeatedly disavowed by NRA?
 
Bizarro World! Just finished reading Jackson's book, "One Ranger," an excellent book if you're into the Texas Rangers ... that said, appears the NRA has repudiated his position and I'm guessing the next time he's up for election, he'll be sent packing ...

Join the NRA ... strength in numbers ...
 
I think a lot of people look for excuses not to join the NRA, and simply enjoy the fruits of the NRA's labor without actually joining and donating to the cause.

One board member out of many goes running his mouth. His position is repeatedly repudiated by the NRA. He was not speaking for the NRA at the time.
 
I just sent an angry E-mail to the N.R.A. telling them to have Jerk Off Jackson removed from his position,or remove my Life Membership. I will not tolerate any Infringement of OUR rights,and they will no longer receive any monitary contributions,from me ,until this bum is tarred and feathered,and run out of town.
 
Last edited:
I am a current member of the NRA. I just purchased an AR-15 and I'm thinking about buying an AK-47 as well. Guess I better hurry the heck up before these guys give away my right to do so. This Jackson guy can take his 5 round capacity and shove it up his butt! I seriously hope there aren't too many more like him on the board of directors.
 
I just sent an angry E-mail to the N.R.A. telling them to have Jerk Off Jackson removed from his position,or remove my Life Membership. I will not tolerate any Infringement of OUR rights,and they will no longer receive any monitary contributions,from me ,until this bum is tarred and feathered,and run out of town.

You do realize he was elected by the membership of the the NRA dont you? That means people like you and me voted for this guy. How can the NRA staff remove someone that was elected? Maybe there is an impeachment process, but I seriously doubt the NRA staff could just fire a duly elected board member.

Have you thought what you are saying through?
 
Back
Top