NRA: Friend or Loyal Opposition

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Elimination of Gun Control is simple.
Click to expand...

The simplest way is when they start talking about gun bans,1,000,000 or more (prefer 50,000,000) march on DC with our toys in hand. That would kill the debate once and for all. I'm ready if everyone else is.......
 
Pointer,
I am saying that if 80,000,000 voters can decide what is the so-called will of 300,000,000 Americans... Then 50,000,000 NRA MEMBERS will have one hell of a lot of influence! And even if they fail to go to the polls on election day...their gun rights will be a whole lot safer...
Click to expand...

So you're suggesting that 50 million pro-gunners aren't voting their guns.
Once again, I have a problem with this line of reasoning.
You claim that there are 50 million pro-gun Americans out there, but they're not voting. Not so sure that's true, but let's assume it is just for the sake of argument.
In that case, what's the point of sending money to an organization that represents non-voters? I can just imagine the exchange with Sen. Gungrabber:
"You'd better do as we say. We've got a lotta members!"
"Do they vote?"
"err...no."
*click*

You see... a membership list of people who can't bother to get involved is nothing but a paper tiger; an empty threat.

So here's a better idea: If those 50 million people *actually got involved* by contacting their representatives and voting, then the threat becomes real.
And if those 50 million *voters* took just one day each year to introduce just one of the people "misguided by anti-gun-bleeding-heart propaganda" to the sport and the community, gun control would cease to be.

Now, I'm not suggesting that anybody should not join the NRA, but the idea that merely sending $35 to the NRA will keep us safe is specious at best.
 
This is, again, a stupid thing to ask for. Nobody is arguing that gun rights aren't on the agenda for the NRA, in which case they'd never endorse an anti-gun candidate over a pro-gun candidate, regardless of party. Period.
Click to expand...

Juan, re-read my post above to Shotgun Minister - he has admitted he would support the NRA if he could afford it and sports a tag line that is decidedly partisan, while at the same time stating the NRA is a front for the GOP because they don't endorse ANY democrats. That's BS and you and I both know it. You may have problems with certain positions of the GOP, but to state that the NRA is a front for the GOP is ridiculous. They DO support democrats where appropriate and not inimical to the interests of gun owners. The fact that you don't like how they determine who gets the nod in close cases does not support your point - it only proves the NRA is dedicated to their interests of protecting gun ownership. The NRA is not in the business of supporting candidates for office who support gun control, and where all else is equal between two, they don't support those from a party which supports gun control. Sorry if the NRA's 'second tier' of decision making in close calls isn't jobs or another democratic issue you'd prefer; it ramains guns (as it should). If fact you admitted it:

It has been explained why this would make sense for a pro-gun organization. However, I think I explained pretty clearly why this doesn't do much good for somebody whose only priority isn't gun control...depending, of course, on what their opinion is of the rest of the Republican platform.
Click to expand...
 
So you're suggesting that 50 million pro-gunners aren't voting their guns.
Once again, I have a problem with this line of reasoning.
Click to expand...
I think the biggest problem here is that everyone is assuming gun owners will vote for a pro-gun candidate regardless of his other stances on important issues.
I am pro-gun. I am an NRA member (and a member of couple other pro-gun organizations). Do I vote for a candidate simply becauuse he is pro gun? Absolutely not.

If I had two candidates and their platforms were something like...

Candidate 1- Against all forms of gun control, supported govt wire tapping, supports corporate welfare system, supported drilling in Alaska, anti-choice, supports detaining citizens and non-citizens without trial, etc.

Candidate 2- Supports auto weapons bans and waiting periods, condemned wire tapping, supported raising minimum wage, supported protecting Alaska, believes oil subsidies should be revoked, pro-choice, pro civil rights and against HS act, etc.

I will take candidate 2 every time.

Guns are very important to me but I am willing to compromise on things like waiting periods and automatic weapons if it means I am doing what I feel is best for the country and it's citizens in every other field.
 
Can we *please* stop with the NRA-bashing threads? There are plenty already out there. Find one and comment if you like. I'll give you a hint, though: you won't change anybody's mind one way or the other.

Tim
 
GoSlash27
You see... a (n NRA) membership list of people who can't bother to get involved, is nothing but a paper tiger; an empty threat.
Click to expand...
Oh, you just wish it were that simple! But it's only half truth at best... (propaganda?)

The fact is, that the voters don't get to vote and rarely get a voice, on anything the Congress runs through it's "hallowed halls"... and it's Liberal leftwing committees...

The NRA is working behind the scenes, on the Congress, all the time, and good election results help them to achieve their pro-gun goals...

If the NRA had 50,000,000 members, and Congress ignored them anyway... there would be a grassroots backlash that would carry gun rights on a pro-gun current for fifty years...

You know this is true and yet you will continue to argue against the NRA anyway...
This is why I said pro-gun politics is failing because of people like you...

You even argue like a Liberal anti-gunner. Constantly mincing words and side-tracking the point...

You might ask if I am "suggesting" that you are a Liberal anti-gunner...
No, I am not...

However, I am suspicious of your continual "wormtonguing" on behalf of the opposition in nearly everything pro-gun; all the while
claiming to be pro-gun... :( :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
If just half of the lazy, cheap, excuse making gun owners
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a real good way to win people over. :rolleyes: People like you are part of the reason I don't join. For a lasy SOB (yeah I know you didn't say but I know you wanted to) My money is just as green ain't it? I will put in different terms. A white man calls a black man a (insert name here) then in his next sentence asks him to join his club. Do you realty expect him to join? Yeah I know it was very extreme but I felt it was the only way to get the message across.



I believe my comment was misunderstood. I would donate to the NRA but I would also doante equal amounts to the other (yes I said other) gun organizations. I am personaly dumb founded by NRA members. How can anyone be so arrogant and yet be blind to it. This thread is yet another example of how NRA is arrogant. I think that there should be more of these threads. Everytime one starts it incriminates the NRA membership even more.

Why should I join the NRA if according to the members there of I ain't worth a damn. Gee if I made $30K a year and sent $30 into the NRA I would be less lazy? Just because I walk to the mail box to send 0.001% of my pay check to the NRA I'm no longer lazy? Even if I had $30K a year I would not send it to them. Personaly I think NRA members are the lazy. Basicly their too lazy to call their congressman so they pay the NRA to do it for them. I also am not a fan a the fear mongering. I guess I was wrong in thinking gun owners were any better the the antis.

ETA: Shaggy:

First and fore ost you question about my tag line shows how blinded by the two party attitude this nation realy is. The DFL and GOP are not the only choices. This despite what so many would want you to belive. The GOP is just as anti-gun as is the DFL, FYI Second I never said the NRA never endorses DFL canidates as you've implied. In fact I said that they do indead endorse DFL canidates. But only to draw attention away from the fact that they are a front for the GOP. Maybe not affiliated, But a front none the less.


Moving on. Just because someone is a NRA meber does not mean they wll vote accordingly. I know of a couple of NRA members who are die hard DFL.

One more thing. Only 30% of Americans actauly own guns. So even if every gun owner joined the NRA what about the other 70%.
 
" It lets people know that the NRA has some glaring flaws."

So do I. My friends don't worry about them much.

Tim
 
Ask your self why the NRA would be opposed to Vermont style carry.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it was a bill that had absolutely zero chance of passing and was stealing oxygen from a bill that meaningfully loosened carry restrictions that would otherwise have a chance of passing?

I voted in the last NRA BoD elections very carefully, by the way.
 
rhgunguy
Pointer, we may not have a unified voice on the details, but the important part is that we all like and want to keep our guns. See GoSlash27's sig line. What I said is simply an organization that says we are pro-gun and we vote. No endorsement of canidates, just essentialy political blackmail: we vote our guns, you do the same and we keep electing you. You have said it yourself, power is in numbers. If politicians actualy see the numbers and do the math, that would be the way to stop gun control.
Click to expand...
The two highlighted phrases above, conflict with each other...

When you create this idealistic "voiceless internet list" you will have to convince congressmen to believe it is a "REAL" list...

You will not go to the work, and time, and expense of creating and advertising and bringing "your idealistic list" to the attention of potential "petitioners" and Congress... nor do I believe you can actually make it happen...

However, when you prove me wrong, I will put my name on it, and I will try to convince my friends to put their names on it... and other people like you and GoSlash will find excuses to "pooh pooh" it and drag it down...

And say things like, "I would, if I could, but I can't." and, "Because you are not exactly the image of me... I will find some excuse to refuse to join you, even in a subject we otherwise agree on..."

What is it the young "parrots" oft repeat these days...?

"Get real!!" :rolleyes:
 
For anyone doubting the NRA’s power on our behalf:

http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/siliconvalley/1805Results.html

Note in particular this quote from Feinstein (speaking of the NRA):

Quote:
"I'm a bit numb ... They had the power to turn around at least 60 votes in the Senate. That's amazing to me."
- Senator Feinstein as quoted in the NY Times 3/3/04
Click to expand...

Since then, the gun-liability bill has been passed without the AWB renewal provision.

Anyone wanting more facts can carefully review this thread:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228378&page=3,

in particular posts #56 and #66.
 
Pointer, the list is just an idea. More along the lines of what I am thinking is getting gunowners to do their own leg-work and call their reps, local state and federal and let them know how they feel.

To better put my "conflicting statements" into focus for you: The balance of power we have now is the one we will have for the next 2 years. There is nothing we can realy do about that now. What I am saying is people need to call their reps that they have right now. Let them know that you did/didn't vote for them in the last election, but you would find any attempts made to further restrict our constitutional rights unreasonable. If however, they stand up for your rights they will keep/gain your vote. Don't tell me that if every politician that is up for re-election in two years hears that 5 or 6 times a day, all from different people, it would be less effective than sending the NRA $35 to do it for you.

I have met and been disgusted by your type before. The NRA members who look down at me simply becasue I am young. The ones who think I am dangerous because my pistol sport involves drawing from a holster and shooting more rounds in seconds than they do in minutes. The ones who think I am a stupid red-neck becasue I shoot trap with a Rem 870 and not a custom made O/U.

Now, I am not saying that this is indicitive of all or even a majority of NRA members. But just enough to turn me off to the NRA. Their "send us money or loose your guns" approach is also quite annoying. But most annoying of all is the members that try to give me that same line when logic states otherwise. The hard and fast truth is if I send my money to the NRA and quit doing my own legwork, I am still going to lose my guns. Brady Bill and AWB are proof. The democrats didn't loose control last time because of the NRA, they lost because gun owners voted their guns. Too little, too late, but hey, at least now we are ready for the next go-round.

And just to be shifty like a gungrabbing liberal, how about a question for you: What have you done for our gun rights lately?(besides your donation to the NRA)
 
To better put my "conflicting statements" into focus for you: The balance of power we have now is the one we will have for the next 2 years. There is nothing we can realy do about that now. What I am saying is people need to call their reps that they have right now. Let them know that you did/didn't vote for them in the last election, but you would find any attempts made to further restrict our constitutional rights unreasonable. If however, they stand up for your rights they will keep/gain your vote. Don't tell me that if every politician that is up for re-election in two years hears that 5 or 6 times a day, all from different people, it would be less effective than sending the NRA $35 to do it for you.

I have met and been disgusted by your type before. The NRA members who look down at me simply becasue I am young. The ones who think I am dangerous because my pistol sport involves drawing from a holster and shooting more rounds in seconds than they do in minutes. The ones who think I am a stupid red-neck becasue I shoot trap with a Rem 870 and not a custom made O/U.

Now, I am not saying that this is indicitive of all or even a majority of NRA members. But just enough to turn me off to the NRA. Their "send us money or loose your guns" approach is also quite annoying. But most annoying of all is the members that try to give me that same line when logic states otherwise. The hard and fast truth is if I send my money to the NRA and quit doing my own legwork, I am still going to lose my guns. Brady Bill and AWB are proof. The democrats didn't loose control last time because of the NRA, they lost because gun owners voted their guns. Too little, too late, but hey, at least now we are ready for the next go-round.

And just to be shifty like a gungrabbing liberal, how about a question for you: What have you done for our gun rights lately?(besides your donation to the NRA)
Click to expand...
Ditto
 
"I'm a bit numb ... They had the power to turn around at least 60 votes in the Senate. That's amazing to me."
- Senator Feinstein as quoted in the NY Times 3/3/04
Click to expand...

Redding is mine. The past tense is appropriate.

The NRA also in the last few years had a Republican run house and senate and could have passed bills to prevent erosions of our gun rights. But all they did was let a bad law sunset. I like watching the sunset. You know why? Because it requires no effort. There is your $35+ a year folks. Oh yeah, and protected mfrs from liability. Not a bad thing but, could it be that the NRA cares more about money and protects the highest bidder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top