Silver Bullet
New member
No, I wouldn’t !
I agree on both counts.
I like the way you qualified your statement with “on the national level”, because I have a lot of respect for certain state organizations as well.
NRA - What should be its role or mission?
- Thread starter oboe
- Start date
- Status
No, I wouldn’t !
I agree on both counts.
I like the way you qualified your statement with “on the national level”, because I have a lot of respect for certain state organizations as well.
NRA should stay single issue. No doubt in my mind there.
How they operate sometimes troubles me. I can see the merits of a cherry picking cases in the judicial fight and "living to fight another day", so most of my gripes and grumbles are a matter of a differing opinion of how to skin the same cat there.
The only real gripe I have is when they endorse one pro gun candidate over another because of seniority in congress. When the old boy that votes pro gun 90% is endorsed over the newbie pledging 100% … it causes me to make a phone call and stop contributing for awhile … and use my/their grassroots manual against their candidate if it’s a local thing.
I can understand the reasoning, but can’t quite stomach the compromise. To me, the endorsed candidate should be greater than or equal to the other, to get an endorsement. I can see rating the unknown 100 percenter as an "A" while the proven 95 percenter rates an "A+", but an endorsement should be withheld in that case … The NRA should just say they gave X number of bonus points for the incumbent’s record, give the number scores for both, and leave it at that.
Sometimes their strategy sucks when they hedge in the primary by supporting a weak pro gun in one party and simultaneously a strong pro gunner in the other. When they win both, it can set up a "no big loss" attitude among RKBA voters in the election where the weak one doesn’t look so bad. It’s very hard to fire up voter turn-out when there isn’t a lot of difference between the two and there have been several close elections where RKBA voters were lost to other issues or stayed home. This usually only matters in close elections, and could be avoided by NRA paying attention to other issues from a tactical standpoint, but without direct support of other issues. ... imo
How they operate sometimes troubles me. I can see the merits of a cherry picking cases in the judicial fight and "living to fight another day", so most of my gripes and grumbles are a matter of a differing opinion of how to skin the same cat there.
The only real gripe I have is when they endorse one pro gun candidate over another because of seniority in congress. When the old boy that votes pro gun 90% is endorsed over the newbie pledging 100% … it causes me to make a phone call and stop contributing for awhile … and use my/their grassroots manual against their candidate if it’s a local thing.
I can understand the reasoning, but can’t quite stomach the compromise. To me, the endorsed candidate should be greater than or equal to the other, to get an endorsement. I can see rating the unknown 100 percenter as an "A" while the proven 95 percenter rates an "A+", but an endorsement should be withheld in that case … The NRA should just say they gave X number of bonus points for the incumbent’s record, give the number scores for both, and leave it at that.
Sometimes their strategy sucks when they hedge in the primary by supporting a weak pro gun in one party and simultaneously a strong pro gunner in the other. When they win both, it can set up a "no big loss" attitude among RKBA voters in the election where the weak one doesn’t look so bad. It’s very hard to fire up voter turn-out when there isn’t a lot of difference between the two and there have been several close elections where RKBA voters were lost to other issues or stayed home. This usually only matters in close elections, and could be avoided by NRA paying attention to other issues from a tactical standpoint, but without direct support of other issues. ... imo
Silver Bullet
New member
The newbie pledging ? You mean, as in talking the talk ?
An actual voting record trumps all.
Specifically, when I typed that, I had in mind an actual guy that had a long traceable pro RKBA record but no experience in politics. You have a great point about the politician that just pops up out of nowhere and starts talking the talk.
I still say lay out the method of grading openly.
A perfect voting record would indeed trump all and warrant a full endorsement, imo.
90 doesn’t make the grade for me and 95 becomes a close call against a untried 100 with a pro-RKBA resume and no political experience.
I still say lay out the method of grading openly.
A perfect voting record would indeed trump all and warrant a full endorsement, imo.
90 doesn’t make the grade for me and 95 becomes a close call against a untried 100 with a pro-RKBA resume and no political experience.
I've belonged to the NRA for over 50 years. Were it not for the NRA, the entire country would have draconian anti-gun laws like those of NJ and NY. About 15 years ago someone did a survey of gun owners. About 40 percent of gunowners claimed to be NRA members. At the time the NRA membership was about 3.5 million. 99 percent of the people who get on these sites and whine about the NRA have never, ever been NRA members.
What did the the politicians who are whining about the NRA not being
"conservative" do for US owners when they ran the congress and the white house? The answer is: They did nothing for US gunowners. Now that the opposition has put forth some genuine supporters of the Second Amendment, "conservative" DC politicians are beside themselves. They are demanding that the NRA buy into their complete agenda.
The NRA needs to stay the course and not buy into a total package of feel good stuff that is put forward as "conservatism."
Last edited:
Mike Irwin
Staff
Even if SAF did have NRA's money, it's very doubtful that they could match NRA's clout simply because money isn't the sole determinant of power when dealing with elected officials...
Being able to look at the elected official and say "The 275,000 NRA members in your district are pretty ticked at your position on XXXX."
It would take years for SAF to equal the power, both real and perceived, that NRA has cultivated over the past 35 or so years.
I also passionately disagree that NRA should go back to non-legislative activities.
Let NRA continue to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room, but let them also welcome SAF as a growing ally. One organization promoting a position can be effective, two tag teaming members of congress can be spectacular.
Being able to look at the elected official and say "The 275,000 NRA members in your district are pretty ticked at your position on XXXX."
It would take years for SAF to equal the power, both real and perceived, that NRA has cultivated over the past 35 or so years.
I also passionately disagree that NRA should go back to non-legislative activities.
Let NRA continue to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room, but let them also welcome SAF as a growing ally. One organization promoting a position can be effective, two tag teaming members of congress can be spectacular.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
First of all, SAF is a §501 (c) (3) corporation, so the DISCLOSE Act doesn't affect them. Also, I'm not sure why state firearms groups would care about playing in Washington DC? In any case, SAF has basically succeeded by A) doing pro-RKBA activities that no one else was doing (i.e. litigation that the NRA had basically abandoned after losing a bunch of cases in the 1980s and 1990s) and B) working hand in hand with other RKBA groups without being concerned about who got the credit. I'm not sure what GOA does for RKBA besides send out weekly dispatches criticizing the NRA, so I can't speak to them.
This is THE most critical function of the NRA in my opinion. Without places to shoot and people to teach firearms safety and knowledge, we will eventually become a political minority who can be dismissed. As urban areas grow, shooting is going to need new places amenable to that kind of lifestyle if it is going to continue to be a part of popular culture. Michael Bane has made some good points on this.
If the NRA never did another lick of political work, their work in this area alone would easily merit every dime I've sent them and then some.
I take a different approach to the goals and mission of the NRA. Yes fighting for the 2nd amendment rights is important and I don't want to see them step back from that fight.
BUT
The NRA was started by some National Guard Officers who were concerned with the lack of marksmanship abilities of our military. They have been working on that mission since their conception. Not just the military but Civilians and LE also.
Look at the training they provide for LE and civilian shooters. In cahoots with two other organizations they have strived to help us with training. The NRA and later the Division of Civilian Marksmanship (now Civilian Marksmanship Program) and Gen Ike's starting the Army Marksmanship Unit have increased the over all marksmanship abilities of the entire country.
Just look around at the civilian gun clubs and see how much money they get in grants from the NRA for the building and up keep of ranges. I know my local club, with our low population base, would be sucking if it wasn't for the grants from the NRA. How may small police departments could afford the training they get from the NRA.
Don't sell the NRA short, even if you don't agree totally with their political actions, they've done and are doing a lot for the shooting community.
BUT
The NRA was started by some National Guard Officers who were concerned with the lack of marksmanship abilities of our military. They have been working on that mission since their conception. Not just the military but Civilians and LE also.
Look at the training they provide for LE and civilian shooters. In cahoots with two other organizations they have strived to help us with training. The NRA and later the Division of Civilian Marksmanship (now Civilian Marksmanship Program) and Gen Ike's starting the Army Marksmanship Unit have increased the over all marksmanship abilities of the entire country.
Just look around at the civilian gun clubs and see how much money they get in grants from the NRA for the building and up keep of ranges. I know my local club, with our low population base, would be sucking if it wasn't for the grants from the NRA. How may small police departments could afford the training they get from the NRA.
Don't sell the NRA short, even if you don't agree totally with their political actions, they've done and are doing a lot for the shooting community.
The National Guard didn't exist in the 1870s when retired Yankee officers established the NRA. They were trying to figure out why the rebs were typically such better marksmen and they decided it was the way southerners were raised, where firearms were a part of the culture. Making firearms part of the Northern culture was the key goal.
If you compare the average city boy to the average country boy the difference in proficiency and knowledge of firearms is quite obvious.
If you compare the average city boy to the average country boy the difference in proficiency and knowledge of firearms is quite obvious.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Another positive aspect for the NRA is that they have produced a legit child safety program with Eddie Eagle. What other organization has the rep or resources to do such?
While antis don't like it - if you want to institute a program - that's where you start.
While antis don't like it - if you want to institute a program - that's where you start.
I won't belabor what has been said already - NRA is right to stay focused on the RKBA and support politicians who support the RKBA regardless of party. Also the NRA protects the RKBA in ways that no other national pro-RKBA group can - by supporting the shooting sports, hunting, firearms training and safety programs, they help to introduce the next generation to responsible gun ownership. (The best argument to change an anti-RKBA persons mind is to take them shooting and give them a fun and safe experience - do it more than once and introduce them to other responsible and open minded shooters and you will destroy their prejudices and ignorance and more often than not plant the seeds for a new RKBA's advocate)
I think it is a good thing that we have so many pro-RKBA groups - none of us are going to agree all the time with any of them - but I think they all serve an important role - NRA, SAF, the many state level organizations, JPFO, GOA, the Appleseed project, and so on. There is no reason not to support more than one.
As far as Redstate or like minded conservative commentators or groups - I hope they understand that by attacking the NRA, in the manner they have been, they may suffer blowback. Whereas they hope to alienate voters and members from the NRA - instead what they may end up doing is alienating voters and NRA members from their causes - people who might have been inclined to support them. I for one look not just to the message but also the method as that often is a clue to character - and to me character is important. The over the top and exagerated claims and attacks of Redstate undercut their message for me. Such that I am not inclined to support or give much credence to anything they say - as in my opinion they are acting like cheap political hacks.
I think it is a good thing that we have so many pro-RKBA groups - none of us are going to agree all the time with any of them - but I think they all serve an important role - NRA, SAF, the many state level organizations, JPFO, GOA, the Appleseed project, and so on. There is no reason not to support more than one.
As far as Redstate or like minded conservative commentators or groups - I hope they understand that by attacking the NRA, in the manner they have been, they may suffer blowback. Whereas they hope to alienate voters and members from the NRA - instead what they may end up doing is alienating voters and NRA members from their causes - people who might have been inclined to support them. I for one look not just to the message but also the method as that often is a clue to character - and to me character is important. The over the top and exagerated claims and attacks of Redstate undercut their message for me. Such that I am not inclined to support or give much credence to anything they say - as in my opinion they are acting like cheap political hacks.
It's disputable whether it was NG or Reg Officers, regardless, the National Guard has been around since conception, or should I say shortly after the Mayflower Compat, about 370 years to be exact.
A bit off topic, but still shooting related since (excluding the AMU) they've (the NG) has the top shooters.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
Sorry Tom, I can remember most of the threads and often what was said, but rarely who said what.
If you know that the NRA membership does very little for RKBA, then why do you seem to defend it so?
If the NRA pushed the NRA-ILA I could probably stomach that.
NRA certainly should not tie themselves any more to the Republicans than they already have. They should open more and more to anyone who is pro-gun, as should all the RKBA groups.
BFA supported Strickland and some people are really upset about it. How in the world could a RKBA organization support Kasich over Strickland though? Foolishness.
I will listen to the argument that supporting one liberal politician with close non-RKBA ties to other liberal politicians can bolster their careers. For instance Lee Fisher is running for Senate after being Stricklands Lt. Gov. Of course, Kasich is running with Mike Dewine as AG candidate and they are old buddies. I say defeat the supporting characters when that race comes along and support pro-2a politicians.
Anyone who thinks otherwise should trade in their rifle and NRA membership for a lollipop and Heritage foundation card.
I really have not seen NRA programs advertised to the general community. If they did you might really have a point. As it is they introduce OUR next generation, something I think we should be doing on our own. You might call it parenting or something similar.
They are worried about politically active gun owners, not what banner they ride under.
I would be incredibly impressed if the NRA had been trying to bring this program to classrooms around the country for the last 20 years, but they have not.
If you know that the NRA membership does very little for RKBA, then why do you seem to defend it so?
And my point is the time has probably come for the NRA to back out entirely. What if IDPA had been the one to step in 30 years ago? I don't think IDPA was even around, but how absurd would it be for IDPA to be the national RKBA group.
If the NRA pushed the NRA-ILA I could probably stomach that.
NRA certainly should not tie themselves any more to the Republicans than they already have. They should open more and more to anyone who is pro-gun, as should all the RKBA groups.
BFA supported Strickland and some people are really upset about it. How in the world could a RKBA organization support Kasich over Strickland though? Foolishness.
I will listen to the argument that supporting one liberal politician with close non-RKBA ties to other liberal politicians can bolster their careers. For instance Lee Fisher is running for Senate after being Stricklands Lt. Gov. Of course, Kasich is running with Mike Dewine as AG candidate and they are old buddies. I say defeat the supporting characters when that race comes along and support pro-2a politicians.
Anyone who thinks otherwise should trade in their rifle and NRA membership for a lollipop and Heritage foundation card.
How many of these programs actually reach outside the shooting community?
I really have not seen NRA programs advertised to the general community. If they did you might really have a point. As it is they introduce OUR next generation, something I think we should be doing on our own. You might call it parenting or something similar.
As if there will be less gun owners in the district....
They are worried about politically active gun owners, not what banner they ride under.
ANd how many kids from non-shooter parents take this class each year. You can't teach your own kids gun safety?
I would be incredibly impressed if the NRA had been trying to bring this program to classrooms around the country for the last 20 years, but they have not.
Last edited:
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
School systems have tried to adopt Eddie Eagle and been blocked. Some have. So I suppose it's better if they don't have a program.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
It is only better if it gets used by a group that actually needs it. Has the NRA ever used their member list to cram a schoolboard meeting full of RKBA proponents when they are looking at the issue?
Have they contacted the local NRA affiliated clubs to see if they can be brought on board?
The NRA is really putting very little energy into contacting people outside the shooting community.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Oh, dear. I guess you won't be a member then.
I suppose that the GOA appears at every school board meeting.
I suppose that the GOA appears at every school board meeting.
- Status