I am a member of the NRA for one main reason. They are the only guys doing anything about anything. The NRA has been around since just after the Civil War and frankly they have done more to raise awareness than just about all other combined. Ya maybe they go overboard sometimes but there still doing a boat load of good.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
NRA- More damage than good?
- Thread starter johnwilliamson062
- Start date
The Bishop
New member
NRA GOA Comparisons ?
Will some one please list 10 "gun owner-2nd ammendment right" things each of the organizations have accomplished in the past 10 years ?
Who is the leadership behind the GOA ? Where does their major funding come from ?
Where was GOA in the Washington DC suit ? How about Shall issue rights ? Castle doctrine laws ? Etc., etc.
The Bishop
Will some one please list 10 "gun owner-2nd ammendment right" things each of the organizations have accomplished in the past 10 years ?
Who is the leadership behind the GOA ? Where does their major funding come from ?
Where was GOA in the Washington DC suit ? How about Shall issue rights ? Castle doctrine laws ? Etc., etc.
The Bishop
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
If the key is controlling a swing state(and I agree it is), why doesn't the NRA put any money into that? Just send a mailing out that says everyone that is able should move to Florida, Ohio and wherever else. Most people are locked into a location, but many "self sufficient" people are not. Surprisingly NRA membership overlaps greatly with that group of people.
Well, Pennsylvania has the highest per-capita number of NRA members of any state in the Union. It has also been a key swing state in the last 3 elections and has swung to the Democrats in every single one of them. Around 30% of gun owners supported Gore, 33% supported Kerry and more than that clearly supported Obama (including one of my own AR15 owning relatives much to my dismay).
As you may recall, the NRA spent millions of dollars trying to swing Pennsylvania in this election (not to mention Ohio and Florida). They touted Obama's past record on firearms quite extensively - to the degree that the Obama campaign even threatened them with lawsuits in an attempt to silence them. Despite that all of these swing states went to Obama. The NRA can only inform and educate its members, it can't kick in doors and prevent its members from making votes that do not place a priority on the Second Amendment.
Given the NRA has been unable to swing the state where it has the highest number of members per capita, I would probably regard an NRA flyer advising me to move to Pennsylvania with some disdain - and can you imagine what the people who regularly complain about the NRA would say in response to that?
Having spent a fair piece of my life in Pennsylvania and a few other places where people like me are "bitter" and "clinging to our guns and religion" -- most people (not most on this board, but most in general) vote economic issues ahead of everything, and their general feeling on foreign policy second.
Mr. Roberts earlier, excellent post on party politics and John Dingell illustrates that not everyone can or will be a one issue voter. I met Congressman Dingell only a year or two before that. He told me at the time he spent over 30% of his time on RKBA issues. He also a large amount of his time on auto industry related issues, logical given his constituency. So he apparently he decided he had to compromise on one vote to retain his considerable leverage to accomplish good in the future.
Successful long-term political activism is realistic. We live in a country where maybe 50%, maybe 75%, of our population is lukewarm or ignorant or apathetic about RKBA. We all need to take that into account in our advocacy. Changing tactics is not necessarily compromising core principles.
Mr. Roberts earlier, excellent post on party politics and John Dingell illustrates that not everyone can or will be a one issue voter. I met Congressman Dingell only a year or two before that. He told me at the time he spent over 30% of his time on RKBA issues. He also a large amount of his time on auto industry related issues, logical given his constituency. So he apparently he decided he had to compromise on one vote to retain his considerable leverage to accomplish good in the future.
Successful long-term political activism is realistic. We live in a country where maybe 50%, maybe 75%, of our population is lukewarm or ignorant or apathetic about RKBA. We all need to take that into account in our advocacy. Changing tactics is not necessarily compromising core principles.