Official NRA critic's thread (NO NRA BASHING DANG IT)

Status
Not open for further replies.
When the NRA actively supports and defends rather than merely tolerates those of us who like the EBR hobby maybe I would consider joining. As my firearms knowledge and experience has changed so has my perception of the world, and the NRA. I feel if it came right down to it, all of us with AKs ARs and FALs and any other EBR would be gladly thrown to the wolves of banishment if it would keep deer rifles and birding pieces in hunters' hands. When I see Charleton Heston waving around an FAL instead of a black powder musket during a speech- I will believe. (Yes, I know he's not the president anymore...you get my point I hope.)
I get the feeling that if something like happened in England came down, there would be folks sitting around a table saying, "Ya know, we took their dues for that long, but, we have to consider the greater good, so EBR's & NFA's are gone in exchange for a guarantee that SPORTING weapons are never banned. Sucks to be you, charlie."

Of course I don't have too much hard evidence to back this up other than anecdotal derived from conversations with lots 'o people at gun ranges, gun shops, gun gatherings, etc.

"My $.02 and worth every penny you paid"
 
When the NRA actively supports and defends rather than merely tolerates those of us who like the EBR hobby maybe I would consider joining.
Click to expand...

Well first I have to ask what the Sam Hill is an EBR? I assume it is something like a full auto/destructive device.

It is funny you take umbrage with the NRA for not protecting those when it seems those who are only concearned with their trap guns and deer rifles seem to think it is the other way around. According to that crowd the NRA does TOO MUCH for what they call the "fringe crazies with their black rifles."

I am sorry but I see this as only another excuse in the vein of "The NRA does not do everything exactly as I like it so I won't support them!" Ignore the fact that what they do do for your 2A rights is far in excess of what is done by any other group. People would rather sit on the outside, point fingers and complain rather than actually do something about it.
 
"Of course I don't have too much hard evidence to back this up other than anecdotal derived from conversations with lots 'o people at gun ranges, gun shops, gun gatherings, etc."

You don't have even a shread of hard evidence. You can't, because it's absolutely not true. If you were a member, most likely you would be getting American Rifleman magazine, where past and present military firearms are prominently featured and advertised. To state that the NRA is prepared to sit on its hands while military-style weapons are banned just to save hunting-style weapons is patently absurd.

Tim
 
I'm not saying the NRA is prepared to throw us under the bus yet.

What I am saying is, given the upcoming political regime change in the US, all we need is a couple of high visibility nutcases (like in England) creating furor in the US. Then a total firearms ban is put up ("To protect the children!") similar to England. There is strong press sympathy which influences the majority of unconcerned or uncaring Americans that maybe, yes, we need to Do Something About Guns Once And For All.

In a last ditch effort to save "the sporting shooter" we 2A types get tossed under the bus so that hunters walk away with their gear. How many times do you hear the 2A referenced to hunting? A lot of people believe that propaganda. I used to long ago before I became politically aware, questioning the media and my public school education and started actually studying the Constitution and our Founding Fathers.

I guess that makes me a tinfoil hatter, then.
 
"When the NRA actively supports and defends rather than merely tolerates those of us who like the EBR hobby maybe I would consider joining."

You're dreaming this stuff up. Even the proponents of the AWB recognize the NRA's interest in those so-called EBR's/assault weapons.

"But instead of using his bully pulpit to push for the ban's renewal, Bush is feigning support for the measure while effectively ensuring its demise. The reason is as simple as it is craven: It's all about placating the NRA, which has promised to withhold its presidential endorsement until after the assault weapons ban has expired. What a profound failure of leadership." - A. Huffington
__________________


"I'm not saying the NRA is prepared to throw us under the bus yet."

So join and make your voice heard. What are planning to do, wait until all of your doomsday senarios come true and then send in your $35? Join now. Join several groups. Write letters.

John
 
"So join and make your voice heard. What are planning to do, wait until all of your doomsday senarios come true and then send in your $35? Join now."

There it is.

And it's even better than that. If money is a problem, you can get an "Associate" membership for 10 bucks, but you don't get a magazine. TEN BUCKS!!!

Add a tick mark to the NRA membership tally and make a difference.

https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp

Tim
 
NRA question

My question about the NRA is:
In 1993 Slick Willie Clinton propigandized gun ownership as evil and ramed THE BRADY BILL and at least 2 ASSAULT WEAPON bills through on us. Why didn't the NRA tell the public the truth about Gun Control, instead of asking for membership and money?
 
"Why didn't the NRA tell the public the truth about Gun Control, instead of asking for membership and money?"

Well, the NRA has been *trying* to tell the public the truth for years, but the simple fact is that they can't. The reason they can't is that they are denied media access. Major print and broadcast venues routinely refuse the NRA's business.

Tim
 
Musketeer and JuanCarlos hit the nail on the head as to the types of gun owners who are not NRA members - esp. JC pointin out that the hard-care liberals/democrats won't join - I have two immediate friends like this, who are strong believers in the RKBA - one of them's comment was "I'll never join them as long as they are the 'National Republican Army' ". Now he is wrong to have that attitude because the proper solution is to join and try to effect changes within the organization, but I'm pointing out that there are a definite contingent of folks in that camp. And the NRA *will* in fact support a Republican over a Dem when their records are a tie, and worse, they will support an A or A- Incumbent over an A+ challenger. Reason for both of these is to maintain power of a party, and power of incumbents (committee positions, etc.), rather than supporting strict principle. I understand their reasons, but disagree with it.

The WORST among all the different non-member groups are elitists who only care about their trap guns, etc., and think they'll never be banned even absent fighting the anti-gunners' ploys. Next worse are the people who believe in the RKBA and realize the presence of a threat to our rights, but make ridiculous excuses like "they sold out when they did X, Y, Z", "they send me too much mail, asking for money", "I don't want to be on some list, and if I join, I will be on the list", etc., etc. They are just cheap, don't want to spend a measly $20 a year or whatever it is, and make excuses. They're leechers like the rest.

The solution we need to undertake as the more hard-core constituency is to become life member, or 5-year consecutive member, so you can vote for directors, and then have talks with those directors, and try to influence them. And write to all the directors, just like you would your legislators.

"Why didn't the NRA tell the public the truth about Gun Control, instead of asking for membership and money?"

Well, the NRA has been *trying* to tell the public the truth for years, but the simple fact is that they can't. The reason they can't is that they are denied media access. Major print and broadcast venues routinely refuse the NRA's business.
Click to expand...

That's exactly correct.
 
Your arguments make no sense.
I said, I believe this way and I have seen no proof otherwise.

You say, It's because of the GLOBAL CONSPIRACY preventing the truth from being told.

I said, I do not want to join the NRA, and this is why I feel this way.

Your response?

So Join the NRA!


Well....hmm. "Don't like it? Join it!"
What a provocative and moving argument to persuade me to abandon my position!
 
Of course, your position is based on very, very little hard evidence.

"Of course I don't have too much hard evidence to back this up other than anecdotal derived from conversations with lots 'o people at gun ranges, gun shops, gun gatherings, etc."

Hard to debate a bunch of "I heard."

John
 
"I said, I do not want to join the NRA, and this is why I feel this way."

Go here and read:

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/

This is where the NRA has posted its position on various gun-related issues. If you read it, and I know you won't, you'll see that the NRA is interested in all aspects of firearms rights, including, but far from limited to, the rights of hunters.

Tim
 
TimRB: Been there, read the site. Lots of facts. Knew most of them already. So what?

Why did the '94 AWB EXPIRE instead of being defeated by legislation, that resulted in an affirmation of the 2A? Everybody basically just held their breath and kept their fingers in their ears until it sunsetted. We had a Republican congress and president. Why wasn't this pushed?
Why was it that for ten years I had to endure the questions and accusations whenever I took Glock 18 mags for my G17 to the range?
Why did they saw the muzzle device off of my FAL?
Why can't we get good quality surplus barrels for anything from overseas anymore?

Why is it that I look at the upcoming 2008 elections with a cold dreadful certainty that we will look back upon the time between 2004 and 2008 as the "Good Old Days"?

Fifty Bucks is a small price to pay if it gets me something of value.
What has the NRA done to justify the money they have now, let alone what they want, which is 75 million new members?
Obviously, the antis aren't afraid of the NRA anymore.
Why is that?

Edited to add:

I'm not against being persuaded. Convince me and I'll join your club. As I said, fifty bucks ain't nothin'. I spend more than that on ammo on range days.
Am I the only one on here who is brave enough to say they aren't an NRA member or is this entire thread nothing more than a kiss the NRA thread?
 
Last edited:
evan price said:
Why did the '94 AWB EXPIRE instead of being defeated by legislation, that resulted in an affirmation of the 2A? Everybody basically just held their breath and kept their fingers in their ears until it sunsetted. We had a Republican congress and president. Why wasn't this pushed?
...
What has the NRA done to justify the money they have now, let alone what they want, which is 75 million new members?
Click to expand...

The answer to your second question is your first. The bottom line is the NRA could not stop the AWB in 94. You may not like to hear it but that is the truth. What they did do was fight to get a sunset clause included in it. The reason it is no longer a Federal law is because the NRA had enough leverage to have the sunset clause included. Would you rather they had fought the AWB to the bloody end with no compromise, loose as they would have done, and be stuck with an AWB that had NO expiration?

It is easy to be an idealist and not condone compromise but the bottom line is in any type of representative government compromise the only way to move forward. The NRA picks its fights and when you do not see them making a bloody stand to the end on something you can be certain it is because they see no realistic chance of victory in it but do see a path to minimize the damage. The AWB sunset was one such case. The insta-check clause in the Brady Bill to eliminate the waiting period was another. Both pieces of legislation were going to pass no matter WHAT the NRA did. Both pieces though were moderated by the NRA's lobbying efforts.

With the amount of Neo Cons who populated the Republican ranks do you really believe the NRA could use solely the Republicans to push through a "definitive" piece of 2A legislation. In case you didn't notice many of those Neos carry pretty lousy ratings. Now look at many of the new Dems in the house. A fair share of them are actually rated highly by the NRA. There may be leadership issues in the Dem party against the 2A but there is a crisis of leadership now between Pelosi and many of the new Dems who do not share her agenda. Having 2A supporting Dems, especially with Reps on the outs, is very important. If you want to blame someone for not getting the pro legislation you want blame the Reps who sold out the party to the Neos and gave up on our agenda. The NRA having a stronger tie with the Dems is incredibly important in getting the Reps to really ally with us. Until now the Reps could always count on the NRA vote, pro 2A Dems endorsed by the NRA destroys that assumption and in the long run strengthens our chances. Why does the Dem party not need to do a damn thing for the African American community? Becasue they already have their vote locked up. That is how the Reps looked at the 2A crowd.
 
"I'm not against being persuaded. Convince me and I'll join your club."

Join or don't join. It's up to you, and either way, I could care less. I only make these postings for the lurkers.

Tim
 
I'm joing this week

I plan to visit the NRA Headquarters range this week (hopefully) and plan to join the NRA. I'm mostly a target shooter, but love EBRs myself. I can't afford to join for life, at least not yet, but I do believe in what the NRA works for.

PS. I'm a liberal Democrat. ;)
 
"Obviously, the antis aren't afraid of the NRA anymore."

That's funny. Wrong, but funny. You need to read more of the antis' publications.

The $35 that the NRA charges for dues CANNOT BY FEDERAL LAW be used for lobbying and donations to candidates. That's why the NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF were created - to raise money for political purposes.

It's clear you don't understand much about politics.

John
 
What level of NRA membership does one need in order to vote on personnel and policy in general?

Or is that even obtainable?
 
"Obviously, the antis aren't afraid of the NRA anymore."

That's funny. Wrong, but funny. You need to read more of the antis' publications.

The $35 that the NRA charges for dues CANNOT BY FEDERAL LAW be used for lobbying and donations to candidates. That's why the NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF were created - to raise money for political purposes.

It's clear you don't understand much about politics.

John
Click to expand...


Hunh? Where in there do you get the idea that I said the money would be used for lobbying or donations? And how does what I said indicate that I don't know much about politics?

I put an open invitation to convince me to join the NRA and all I've gotten so far is:
1. "Join or not, I could care less."
2. "It's clear you don't understand politics."

What convincing arguments, again. Total apathy from someone who on the surface tried to fake being an NRA supporter. A statement of ignorance from someone who wanted to sling an insult.

So far Musketeer has the best ideas yet, rational discourse.

To that end, I recall the NRA was the veritable 1000-lb gorilla of the political world- about the same position as the AARP occupies now. Guns were a third rail of politics. What happened? Where has the NRA gone? Why aren't they relevant now? The NRA is now nothing more than the symbol and whipping post for the antis and the democommies. The citizens of a state want CCW? Blame the devil-NRA!

I want to be proved wrong here. Can I make it any clearer? I want to believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top