Hi Folks.
I wanted to post my 2 cents here and see if I was alone in this train of thought. I welcome responses and opinions both pro and con. Thanks.
I really don't understand some of the NRA's decisions, lately. (I'm very close to paying off my life membership dues, so I've been a supporter and contributor for a long time.) The June issue of "America's First Freedom" has a good article in it about a new gun range that was built in Nevada, and shows Chris Cox and Wayne LaPierre buddying up with Sen Harry Reid (D) and thanking him profusely for helping push the bill to allocate the funding. This is a man who has repeatedly cast anti-second amendment votes and sided with the hard left liberals.
The NRA has also recently endorsed John McCain in the current AZ Senators Race, and he was the co-author of the McCain-Feingold bill, which restricted the rights of organizations' ability to politically advertise 30-60 days prior to an election.
In McCains case, for this one election, it's probably just a case of the devil you know, because his opponent is said to have a worse gun-rights voting record than McCain; but a photo op with Harry Reid? Do they think he's suddenly a good guy and worthy of such accolades?
Are any other members out there a bit put-off by this?
Another prominent gun-rights organization is the GOA, of which I'm also a member. They do a great job with their action alert emails, and are more timely than the NRA's alerts; however, those pre-written letters they offer for members to contact their representatives with are a little pigeon-holed and harshly worded for my taste. I appreciate the contact and info, but I usually re-write a portion of them before I send them out, or simply author my own letter altogether.
These two groups seem to often differ on contents and interpretations of bills, and gradings of politicians. However, what they both do well is prompt people to get involved and do some homework. (The thomas.gov web site is a great resource for all things legislative. If you haven't tried it yet, check it out for full versions of bills, updates on their movements, and how your legislators voted.)
Don't get me wrong, I thank God that there are advocacy groups out there, and I will continue to support them and get active in my local elections. But I may have to reconsider that if I continue to see conflicting information on the same issues adn news items from these two pro-gun groups - because it forces me to wonder who's info is accurate, and who's dropping the ball.
Thanks for letting me vent. Your thoughts?
I wanted to post my 2 cents here and see if I was alone in this train of thought. I welcome responses and opinions both pro and con. Thanks.
I really don't understand some of the NRA's decisions, lately. (I'm very close to paying off my life membership dues, so I've been a supporter and contributor for a long time.) The June issue of "America's First Freedom" has a good article in it about a new gun range that was built in Nevada, and shows Chris Cox and Wayne LaPierre buddying up with Sen Harry Reid (D) and thanking him profusely for helping push the bill to allocate the funding. This is a man who has repeatedly cast anti-second amendment votes and sided with the hard left liberals.
The NRA has also recently endorsed John McCain in the current AZ Senators Race, and he was the co-author of the McCain-Feingold bill, which restricted the rights of organizations' ability to politically advertise 30-60 days prior to an election.
In McCains case, for this one election, it's probably just a case of the devil you know, because his opponent is said to have a worse gun-rights voting record than McCain; but a photo op with Harry Reid? Do they think he's suddenly a good guy and worthy of such accolades?
Are any other members out there a bit put-off by this?
Another prominent gun-rights organization is the GOA, of which I'm also a member. They do a great job with their action alert emails, and are more timely than the NRA's alerts; however, those pre-written letters they offer for members to contact their representatives with are a little pigeon-holed and harshly worded for my taste. I appreciate the contact and info, but I usually re-write a portion of them before I send them out, or simply author my own letter altogether.
These two groups seem to often differ on contents and interpretations of bills, and gradings of politicians. However, what they both do well is prompt people to get involved and do some homework. (The thomas.gov web site is a great resource for all things legislative. If you haven't tried it yet, check it out for full versions of bills, updates on their movements, and how your legislators voted.)
Don't get me wrong, I thank God that there are advocacy groups out there, and I will continue to support them and get active in my local elections. But I may have to reconsider that if I continue to see conflicting information on the same issues adn news items from these two pro-gun groups - because it forces me to wonder who's info is accurate, and who's dropping the ball.
Thanks for letting me vent. Your thoughts?