I fear the intentions of those who we need in the RKBA fight. THIS IS NOT AN ACCUSATION - I AM AN NRA MEMBER (and have signed up others free).
I just fear what a lot of orgs/companies may find to be in their own best interests.
We've seen how the mag ban helped nullify the difference between pistol makers who made 9s of different capacities.
I just see how some gun control is good for dealers, good for the NRA, or good for manufacturers (although, ultimately, very bad for the first two WHEN civilian firearms ownership is halted).
Whenever some lousy ban is about to be passed, many people sign up to the NRA. If their org has any intention to increase membership, this is when it happens. If all GC were repealed tomorrow (e.g. 2nd amendment recognized) they'd lose a lot of members (only keeping the people who join to participate in certain sports).
Thing is, look at their counterpart in Australia, the ssaa, their membership went thru the ROOF after the last (incremental) ban, as it seriously impeded hunters. Hunters may join NRA for some reason or other; but I think few hunter/skeet types join the NRA because they think their boltaction/double-barrel is in jeopardy.
I know the NRA will fight licencing/registration like lions (and I'll be there); but WHEN licencing/registration passes the NRA as an organization that can count its success based on membership, WILL be better off.
I see the same thing with dealers, although future civilian bans that make firearms purchases more difficult and stigmatized will ultimately destroy them, temporary measures like banning private sales give them a short term gain, as they get fees for every firearms transfer.
The NRA has the most to gain WHEN hunters' activities are in jeopardy. They must fight the gun grabbers; but must simeltaneously fight the temptation to grow.
Again, I'm not accusing NRA of doing this; just hoping they (continue to) put the second ahead of what's good for their organization.
Battler.
I just fear what a lot of orgs/companies may find to be in their own best interests.
We've seen how the mag ban helped nullify the difference between pistol makers who made 9s of different capacities.
I just see how some gun control is good for dealers, good for the NRA, or good for manufacturers (although, ultimately, very bad for the first two WHEN civilian firearms ownership is halted).
Whenever some lousy ban is about to be passed, many people sign up to the NRA. If their org has any intention to increase membership, this is when it happens. If all GC were repealed tomorrow (e.g. 2nd amendment recognized) they'd lose a lot of members (only keeping the people who join to participate in certain sports).
Thing is, look at their counterpart in Australia, the ssaa, their membership went thru the ROOF after the last (incremental) ban, as it seriously impeded hunters. Hunters may join NRA for some reason or other; but I think few hunter/skeet types join the NRA because they think their boltaction/double-barrel is in jeopardy.
I know the NRA will fight licencing/registration like lions (and I'll be there); but WHEN licencing/registration passes the NRA as an organization that can count its success based on membership, WILL be better off.
I see the same thing with dealers, although future civilian bans that make firearms purchases more difficult and stigmatized will ultimately destroy them, temporary measures like banning private sales give them a short term gain, as they get fees for every firearms transfer.
The NRA has the most to gain WHEN hunters' activities are in jeopardy. They must fight the gun grabbers; but must simeltaneously fight the temptation to grow.
Again, I'm not accusing NRA of doing this; just hoping they (continue to) put the second ahead of what's good for their organization.
Battler.