The NRA and Gun Owners...A Bunch of Useful Fools??

oberkommando,
Thanks. I have heard that for awhile and I will be pleased when it happens. I have a couple to times contacted a CA gunowners org and have been told that such a suit is in the works. I know you can't answer this, but why are they still waiting? The law was passed months ago, and now those who have not complied are (I think) felons. Why didn't the NRA and others seek to get the law blocked until it could be taken to court? I hope this isn't taken as too harsh, but if this type of group had been the WW II generation, I wonder if we might have been under Hitler or Stalin? There is a time to talk and a time to act, and that action has to be timely. Thus far I am not convinced of their timeliness or competence. We'll see. I hope we don't have to wait and wait and wait and see after gunowners are prosecuted and jailed. BTW does anyone know any developments in the case of the person who sent a letter to the gov of CA saying he would not comply with the law? Again,oberkommando, thanks. We are all in this together and I think this CA law is the best chance to get a case to the Supreme Court that we have seen in a long time. Best regards, Jerry
 
Many of us are not satidfied with the NRA, that is true. But the NRA is only a focusing point for ideas and money. If you (we) feel they are not doing enough, then it is time for US to stop being the silent majority. We must be vocal, be visible. We must get out on the streets and protest the infringement of our rights. We can no longer afford to sit in our homes and just write letters and make phone calls. We cannot afford to be "PC" anymore.

Last night I read an article in the 1999 Annual of Handguns by Brian McCombie titled "How the Brits Lost their Guns". In the the article he says how he corresponded with a friend, Russ Orchard, in Britain during during the gun bans. His friend told him that after the shootings at Dunblane, Scotland that the gun owning community kept a low profile to avoid being perceived as heartless lunatics. By the time gun owners felt the need to speak out it was too late. The anti gun movement had gained too much momentum to stop it. Mr Orchard's advice to American gun owners was to forget about being low profile or PC. But to be vocal and visibly protest. We should heed his words. The NRA, GOA, etc, represent us. But the number of people they have is in reality few. They cannot get 10,000 or 50,000 people from their office to march on the steps of a state capitol. Or even the capitol of the U.S. That is up to us. The People. And so far we have done a piss poor job of making our presence felt. I do think the NRA has comprimised to much. But they have certainly made their presence felt more than we have. We, The People, really screwed up a chance in D.C. last year. This year that event is already marked on my agenda. Is it on yours? Next month I will be in the capitol of California to march, protest and make my presence felt. I hope others will do the same. You, and I, cannot sit by and hope that the NRA and others win their court cases. Because if they do lose, then it might be too late to reverse things.
 
Let's see:

80 million 'gun' owners
3 million NRA members

hmmm, the problem seems kinda obvious...

What exactly is the NRA doing wrong in their membership 'drives'? Is the $30 'fee' too high, or do we blame the social/political climate for this as well?

FWIW, I am a member and have helped 5 people sign up(including my dad) since their 'silver bullet' offer of a couple years ago....

The NRA has to have a massive injection of 'new blood', and soon.
Guess I go out and beat the bushes some more...



------------------
...save the 2nd., for it saves us all.
No fate but what we make...
 
Not only has crime been drastically reduced due to CCW and tough on crime/3 strikes crackdowns, but now Clintonite liberals are claiming it's because of THEIR administration and putting more cops on the street. (True it's due in very small part to more cops on the street, but mostly to CCW and increased penalties for crime). Arrrrggghhh.

And, if you think about it, there's a fine line to walk to further the political interests of freedom-lovers such as ourselves. On the one hand, when GUN CRIME is reduced, this reduces ammo for the anti-gunners and we can more effectively fight anti-freedom measures. On the other hand, when CRIME IN GENERAL is reduced, people fear crime less and therefore see less need for owning a firearm for personal defense. Ironically, in a "perfect" world viz-a-viz our cause, violent crime would be rampant, yet no guns would be used in their commission.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited January 21, 2000).]
 
Jerry, I just got letter from Cal Rifle and Pistol Assoc. and they say they have sent 50,000 dollars to NRA to help with the legal fight. This business of waiting is a thing all Kalifionia gun owners are used to. We have been in court over the 1989 Roberti-Roos original assault bill among other court battle such as an atempt to overrided state pre-emption laws. The courts out here seem to care little with reguard to the restrictions passed but put forth injunctions against anything that is not PC such as prop 187. I believe the courts are a large portion of the problem. Though I am not sure how this system works exactly. That is another reason I am disapointed with GOA as they never seem to have any updated info reguarding Kalifornia.
As to your question about everyone in kali with an "assault rifle" it is not a felony until next year as that is the expiration date to register. To clarify it is an infraction to posses a non registerd weapon during this year and I belive a felony next year. However if you are caught this year with more than one non registered weapons I believe it is mis/felony, do not remember which.
One thing the fight is about is the definition of the terms, but I think attacking the unconstitutional nature of the law is our only hope in this state. Say they define it, well next they will just pass a ban on all semi autos, pretty easy to understand.
To bad you cant pick where the Earthquakes happen. :)

------------------
The beauty of the second Amendment is that it is not needed until they try to take it. T JEFFERSON

Do you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. We're after power and we mean it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breakings laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted-and you create a nation of law breakers--and then you cash in on guilt.

A RAND
 
oberkommando,
I appreciate the update. I agree with the points you made and I can imagine the attitude of the courts in CA. I admit to a great deal of frustration. I am just about as interested in what happens in CA as in NM. All of us are affected by what happens there. I have been contributing to organizations that are taking actions as I can determine, and will contribute to the CA suit when it gets past the talking stage. Thanks again, Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top