The NRA Mess Explained
- Thread starter Aguila Blanca
- Start date
At last years NRA Convention Oliver North demanded an external audit of NRA finances and showed some of Wayne La Pierre's dirty laundry. WLP is still attempting to remove Oliver North from the BOD.
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/whats-going-on-with-the-nra
TruthTellers
New member
Because the "members" aren't employees or executives of Wayne & Company, the "members" are customers for Wayne & Company. The "members" pay their bill each year and in return they get a sticker, a card, a hat, some other NRA branded schlock, and a nice letter thanking you for your business.
When said company gets shut down for being a front for the Wayne Family, the customers can take their business elsewhere, such as the SAF, GOA, and local/state 2A orgs. In fact, nothing is stopping the customers from doing that now.
TruthTellers
New member
It still amazes me how low information NRA members and supporters don't know that this happened and still believe that the change can be done.
It can't. It's not a question of putting in the work or convincing others, you could convince EVERY SINGLE MEMBER and it would DO NOTHING to throw the BOD and the executives out.
The NRA is the face of gun lobbying.
WLP is the person pulling the strings on this organization. If we don’t get rid of him, we will lose that face. Either from members walking away or withholding their money.
Trouble is WLP and cronies have been working to change the bylaws to limit their exposure to removal.
I wonder if the members have a leg to stand on removing him through the courts or some internal process. We need a leader to rise up against WLP and lead this effort. They will need industry and big donor support. Have you heard of anything brewing? I wonder if somebody like Adam Kraut has some ideas.
WLP is the person pulling the strings on this organization. If we don’t get rid of him, we will lose that face. Either from members walking away or withholding their money.
Trouble is WLP and cronies have been working to change the bylaws to limit their exposure to removal.
I wonder if the members have a leg to stand on removing him through the courts or some internal process. We need a leader to rise up against WLP and lead this effort. They will need industry and big donor support. Have you heard of anything brewing? I wonder if somebody like Adam Kraut has some ideas.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
You make it sound like a present tense situation, as if they are still in the process of changing the by-laws. It's not present tense. The change was made a few (3? 5?) years ago and is now a done deal. There were warnings sent out to ALL members (or at least all voting members) at the time, but I suspect most members ignored the warnings and now don't even remember having received them. Most probably didn't bother to read them. I read the warning, and I voted against the by-laws revision, but it passed because too many voting members either didn't understand the implications, or were blissfully unaware that there was anything to be concerned about.Nathan said:
One of the arguments the NY attorney general is using in her lawsuit is that LaPierre and his cronies have been abusing their positions. In a sane world, this argument would be followed by a request for the court to remove the offending people from office and to turn the organization back to the members. However, because the NY attorney general's agenda is to eliminate the NRA, she is asking the court to do that rather than simply to punish the malfactors. It remains to be seen how that will play out in the courts.
Does anyone know where/how to find a copy of the current NRA by-laws?
[Edit to add] I found this link through an Internet search. It might be a starting point for those who wish to get a better understanding of the by-laws situation:
https://www.nrabylaws.com/
Notice how Mr. Cors portrays the then-proposed revisions (which actually make it almost impossible for the membership to either amend the by-laws or vote out directors or officers of the NRA) as positive changes. They were not positive changes. They basically made it impossible for the rank-and-file members to have any say in the operation of the NRA.
I think this copy of the by-laws is the current version: https://www.savethe2a.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/NRA_Bylaws-1.pdf
The 2020 NRA meeting is on 24 October. It will be interesting to see what shakes out: Will the dumpster fire flare up or be tamped down?
https://onlygunsandmoney.com/2020/0...zer, Secretary and General Counsel of the NRA.
https://onlygunsandmoney.com/2020/0...zer, Secretary and General Counsel of the NRA.
TruthTellers
New member
That leader is called the GOA and the SAF. Send both of them your NRA dues. More competition in the pro 2A lobbies is a very good thing because relying on one, big leviathan like the NRA is the road to perdition.
This tells all you have to know about the internal corruption of the NRA at the very top.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
To me, the real question is “Would we have know about any of this if WLP hadn’t tried to ditch AckMac?” I’m pretty sure AckMac, and several of the paid pro-2A spokespersons getting their paychecks signed by AckMac, would have been happy to quietly bill $2 million/month in legal fees without pointing out the irregularities.
I don’t think it is enough to get rid of WLP. NRA needs a 1977 equivalent or it needs to die and let a phoenix rebirth from the ashes. Sadly, the current board has made sure a 1977 equivalent is not an option.
I don’t think it is enough to get rid of WLP. NRA needs a 1977 equivalent or it needs to die and let a phoenix rebirth from the ashes. Sadly, the current board has made sure a 1977 equivalent is not an option.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Here's the link to the by-laws again: https://www.savethe2a.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/NRA_Bylaws-1.pdf
Scroll down to Article IX -- it starts on page 20 (of the PDF). Read what's required to recall a director or officer.
First, the process can't be initiated ahead of an annual meeting. But the petition has to be submitted not less than 270 days before the next annual meeting. That leaves (lemme see, 365 - 270 = 95) three months to gather all the signatures and to submit the petition.
How many signatures? 5% of the number of valid votes cast in the last election of directors. That's going to vary from year to year. Let's choose 1 million as the number of valid votes cast -- that means a petition will need 50,000 (that's fifty thousand) signatures -- and the signatures must be members who are eligible to vote; new-ish members who pay their dues annually can't vote, so their signatures can't be used on a petition.
But there's more -- the signatures can't all be from the same state. "(3) At least three states of the United States of America shall be represented on the petition by the signatures of no fewer than 100 residents of each such state, as reflected by each signor's last address of record furnished to the Secretary."
In any petition situation you can count on some signatures being disqualified, so you'll really need to collect more than 50,000 signatures -- from at least three states. Then the NRA secretary will check all the names against the membership roster to verify that they all qualify. If the petition is ruled valid, then it goes to the membership for a vote, right?
Nope -- wrong. Keep reading. Subparagraph (d) says the person you want to remove gets to appeal the petition before it has gone to a vote Before, in fact, the membership at large has even been informed that the petition has been submitted. The petition gets submitted to the Committee on Hearings, which can decide to not allow the petition to go forward.
The Committee on Hearings is one of the standing committees established under the bylaws. See Article XI. Its members are appointed by the president of the NRA. You can probably rest assured that the president isn't going to appoint to any sensitive or potentially sensitive committee anyone who might be considered a dissident or a rebel, so the deck is still further stack against petitions for recall.
Remember -- three years ago this was all sold to the membership as being better for the members. What a joke!
So, yes, we have a means in the by-laws to recall Wayne LaPierre. On paper. Read through Article IX and you'll see that it's a paper tiger -- IMHO it would be impossible for the membership at large to surmount all the hurdles and bring a recall petition to a voite.
Scroll down to Article IX -- it starts on page 20 (of the PDF). Read what's required to recall a director or officer.
First, the process can't be initiated ahead of an annual meeting. But the petition has to be submitted not less than 270 days before the next annual meeting. That leaves (lemme see, 365 - 270 = 95) three months to gather all the signatures and to submit the petition.
How many signatures? 5% of the number of valid votes cast in the last election of directors. That's going to vary from year to year. Let's choose 1 million as the number of valid votes cast -- that means a petition will need 50,000 (that's fifty thousand) signatures -- and the signatures must be members who are eligible to vote; new-ish members who pay their dues annually can't vote, so their signatures can't be used on a petition.
But there's more -- the signatures can't all be from the same state. "(3) At least three states of the United States of America shall be represented on the petition by the signatures of no fewer than 100 residents of each such state, as reflected by each signor's last address of record furnished to the Secretary."
In any petition situation you can count on some signatures being disqualified, so you'll really need to collect more than 50,000 signatures -- from at least three states. Then the NRA secretary will check all the names against the membership roster to verify that they all qualify. If the petition is ruled valid, then it goes to the membership for a vote, right?
Nope -- wrong. Keep reading. Subparagraph (d) says the person you want to remove gets to appeal the petition before it has gone to a vote Before, in fact, the membership at large has even been informed that the petition has been submitted. The petition gets submitted to the Committee on Hearings, which can decide to not allow the petition to go forward.
The Committee on Hearings is one of the standing committees established under the bylaws. See Article XI. Its members are appointed by the president of the NRA. You can probably rest assured that the president isn't going to appoint to any sensitive or potentially sensitive committee anyone who might be considered a dissident or a rebel, so the deck is still further stack against petitions for recall.
Remember -- three years ago this was all sold to the membership as being better for the members. What a joke!
So, yes, we have a means in the by-laws to recall Wayne LaPierre. On paper. Read through Article IX and you'll see that it's a paper tiger -- IMHO it would be impossible for the membership at large to surmount all the hurdles and bring a recall petition to a voite.
TruthTellers
New member
I'm looking at an article (I'll link to it below) and it says that about 150k people usually vote each year and there are over 2m members who could vote. So, 5% of 150k is 7,500, but let's say 10k signatures from three states to get the ball rolling.
Not impossible, but still not easy and like Aguila Blanca said, it's pretty much a wash once it gets appealed.
What I'd like to know is before the by laws changes were made, what was the original process to recall an officer or director?
Not impossible, but still not easy and like Aguila Blanca said, it's pretty much a wash once it gets appealed.
What I'd like to know is before the by laws changes were made, what was the original process to recall an officer or director?
I think it would be easy to get this ball rolling . Just get a couple credible people to go on Joe Rogan for a long format interview and BAM 10k signature's in about an hour from likely half the states .
I don't see the power vacuum the NRA collapsing creates will produce anything as robust and recognizable for decades . Depending how Nov 3rd goes we literally may have less then 2 years if the anti's take all the branches of government . Maybe we can hope the NY lawsuit will take 6+years to be final like it does for us to get a anti law overturned .
I don't know but with Nancy setting up the ability to remove Biden ( don't even think for a second this is about Trump ) possible packing of the SCOTUS and no NRA
. Not a good forecast for the pro 2nd Americans or maybe America as a whole .
I don't see the power vacuum the NRA collapsing creates will produce anything as robust and recognizable for decades . Depending how Nov 3rd goes we literally may have less then 2 years if the anti's take all the branches of government . Maybe we can hope the NY lawsuit will take 6+years to be final like it does for us to get a anti law overturned .
I don't know but with Nancy setting up the ability to remove Biden ( don't even think for a second this is about Trump ) possible packing of the SCOTUS and no NRA
. Not a good forecast for the pro 2nd Americans or maybe America as a whole .Although I can’t disagree completely . I will say if the NRA is still around at least there “may” be a chance , if they’re gone there will be an zero chance to fight it . Only because when there gone there will be 30 chimps in the room vying for funds and the 900lb gorilla will be nowhere in sight .
the NRA only has their current clout because they were around the longest and prominent from the beginning when other groups weren't even thought of. since then, there have been 30 chimps spawned from the dissatisfaction of the gorilla. The more the gorilla NRA sat on the sidelines or negotiated away things, the more chimps were spawned.
TruthTellers
New member
All the NRA members can blame themselves then because instead of spreading some of their money around, they put all their eggs in one basket and over time corruption rotted the basket from the inside out and now the basket is about to collapse into dust and the eggs will go with it.
We can point fingers all we want at Wayne & Co., but power corrupts and NRA members were too focusedd with the enemy at the gates and forgot about the enemy within.
TT , yeah , yeah yeah , and your point ? Screw it no 2nd for us ? I/we get it , many of us dropped the ball . This is not a time for haha told you so neyner neyner . I’m sorry but I’ve been one of us that took it for granted. About a year ago I renewed my 5year membership like I did every 5 years and did not give to much more thought and that’s on me I get it .
Sounds like this ain’t to different then politics in general. So when the anti’s ban semi auto center fire weapons we just say oh well we saw this coming and did nothing about it ?
Well not true we invested in the NRA through memberships and upped our round up donations when buying from midway and other places . Did we do enough ? No but nor did we to allow all these anti’s in congress. Do we just give up cus everything is us voters fault and except in ten years very few defensive firearms that can easily be offensive weapons will not be legal anymore?
There must be a constructive way forward and I’d like to figure out ways that could work rather then the haha it’s our own faults strategy .
Sounds like this ain’t to different then politics in general. So when the anti’s ban semi auto center fire weapons we just say oh well we saw this coming and did nothing about it ?
Well not true we invested in the NRA through memberships and upped our round up donations when buying from midway and other places . Did we do enough ? No but nor did we to allow all these anti’s in congress. Do we just give up cus everything is us voters fault and except in ten years very few defensive firearms that can easily be offensive weapons will not be legal anymore?
There must be a constructive way forward and I’d like to figure out ways that could work rather then the haha it’s our own faults strategy .
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Well, here's one thought, which I'll throw out there for the lawyers in the audience to comment on:Metal god said:
If you follow Supreme Court cases at all, you probably know that it's very common for all sorts of groups who are not parties to a case but who have an interest in the outcome to submit friend of the court briefs. Often, groups on both sides of the issue do this, in hopes of swaying the court to decide the way they want the decision to go.
This case is still at the trial court level. I don't know if friend of the court briefs can be submitted at that level. If not, skip to the paragraph below. If friend of the court briefs can be submitted at the trial level, then one constructive thing NRA members could do is engage an attorney or three to draft and submit friend of the court briefs on behalf of the membership. What such a brief might say is best left up to the attorneys -- one of which I am not.
If friend of the court brifs are not allowed, my next thought is to investigate whether or not the NRA membership can establish "standing" to petition the court to intervene as a group/class of interested parties. To my non-lawyerly dinosaur brain the argument seems pretty straightforward. Certain officers and executives of the NRA abused their fiduciary duty to the membership and engaged in various schemes of self-enrichment, at the expense of the rank-and-file membership. Such acts should rightly be prosecutred and punished. BUT ... the NY Attorney General is taking a seemingly illogical approach in charging individuals (not the organization) with wrongdoing but, rather than punish the individuals, she wants to disband the organization -- which essentially and effectively amounts to punishing the real victims of the alleged offenses rather than attempting to make the victims whole (to whatever extent is possible).
So, if a group/class of members can be allowed toi intervene, the argument would be something along the line of "We agree with the State of NY that Wayne LaPierre and certain other named defendants are scumvermin and lower than whale poop at the bottom of the ocean, so we join the State of NY in seeking their removal from office. We then respectfully request that the court give us members back our organization so that we can go back to being a membership owned and driven organization, as we were always intended to be."
Are either (or both) of these avenues open to us? I dunno. Perhaps Spats McGee, Frank Ettin, Zukiphile, or some of the other attorneys who are members of this forum will chime in and let us know if these are even possible.