NRA Ordered To Stand Trial in Washington, DC

thallub

New member
Last edited:
This is what I was worried about. The NRA Foundation is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. That classification grants tax exemptions, but it also means they can't use that money for lobbying and such.

The NRA itself is a 501(c)(4) "social welfare" organization, which is allowed to engage in lobbying.

There have been allegations they've been funneling money from the first group to the second for years. If true, this could be catastrophic for them.
 
I hope Wayne goes to Federal Prison before this is all over.


This is the kind of crap Chris Cox was worried about when Wayne was asking for loans from the ILA and had to plans as to repay the money.


All of these lawsuits and investigations got kicked off by the corrupt Carry Guard program.
 
Last edited:
thmsmgnm said:
I hope Wayne goes to Federal Prison before this is all over.


This is the kind of crap Chris Cox was worried about when Wayne was asking for loans from the ILA and had to plans as to repay the money.
And, if I'm not mis-remembering, that's why Chris Cox became no longer employed by the NRA-ILA.

All of these lawsuits and investigations got kicked off by the corrupt Carry Guard program.
The Carry Guard program was another of the insiders looking after the insiders fiascos. As a certified NRA instructor in multiple disciplines, when Carry Guard was announced I was naturally interested in becoming certified as a Carry Guard instructor, so I inquired how I could get certified. I was told that I had to take such-and-such class. But there WAS NO such-and-such class. It was something they made up, and only certain people were on the list and they only delivered the class to a select few other insiders.
 
I got dead fish smell when I skimmed first article covering “training” and requirements. No revolvers or single stacks stood out like a sore penis in a room full of open cabinet doors and drawers.
 
I don't see how decimating the NRA is good for Gun Owners. I wouldn't be cheering this on. Being in the NRA has cost most of us less than $1,000. Good deal IMHO to protect our gun rights. They get the job done lobbying Congress - I still support them.
 
Dismantling the NRA entirely probably would not be great for us. Restructuring it to return control of OUR [membership] organization to us -- the members -- would IMHO be a very good thing.
 
thallub said:
By voting in the WLP bylaw changes NRA members did more damage to the organization than the antis.
True. But, in fairness to the membership, they (and I don't include myself, because I voted against the by-laws changes) were snookered by the WLP fan club. We were assured that the then-proposed by-laws changes were for the good of the organization.

Jeff Knox tried to warn us, but either not enough people saw/heard his warnings, or not enough people paid attention to them. Yes, the membership approved the by-laws changes, but I'm fairly certain a large percentage of those who voted for them were loyal NRA members who believed that anything recommended by the board of directors must be good for the membership -- when, in fact, what the board was interested in was what was good for the board and for WLP, not what was good for the membership.
 
“Sometimes, you have to destroy something in order to build something better.” ― Brandon Sanderson, The Hero of Ages
 
NRA BOD member Joaquiin Jackson said this during an interview with Texas Monthly:
aa
y Texas Monthly and stated, "I personally believe a weapon should never have over, as far as a civilian, a five-round capacity. If you’re a hunter, if you’re going to go hunting with a weapon, you shouldn’t need over but one round. So five rounds would be plenty ... Personally, I think assault weapons basically…need to be in the hands of the military, and in the hands of the police.” After receiving angry criticism from pro-gun activists, Jackson backpedalled and claimed that he was referring to fully automatic rifles (i.e., mac

The BOD coninued to support Jackaon .
 
Last edited:
Back
Top