things not known or loved about the NRA

R

ruger45

Moderator
While some of this may be well known to you, I thought you might like to see the transcripts and background information. I will be send out some new information as I come accross it.


Letter to Charlton Heston about his comments on the AK-47 http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/moses.htm

No More A's for Gun Grabbers http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-1.htm

New York State Judges Opinion http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-2.htm

Transcript of NRA court hearings http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-6.htm

Plantiffs Statement agianst the NRA http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-7.htm

NRA held in Contempt of Court http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-8.htm

Where did the 1998 Amendment Bylaws go? http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra99-3.htm

NRA, ACK-Mac, and the Mercury group http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra99-4.htm

Wag the Dog http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra2k-2.htm

--------------------
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>

<DIV>While some of this may be well known to you, I
thought you might like to see the transcripts and background information. I will
be send out some new information as I come accross it.
</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Letter to Charlton Heston about his comments on the AK-47</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/moses.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>No More A's for Gun Grabbers</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-1.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>New York State Judges Opinion</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-2.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Transcript of NRA court hearings</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-6.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Plantiffs Statement agianst the NRA</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-7.htm</DIV><DIV>
NRA held in Contempt of Court</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra98-8.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Where did the 1998 Amendment Bylaws go?</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra99-3.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>NRA, ACK-Mac, and the Mercury group</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra99-4.htm</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Wag the Dog</DIV><DIV>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/nra2k-2.htm</DIV>
)))))

I didnt know half this stuff and still thought the leadership
was full of spineless traitors who love to compromise when it
$$$ suits them.
www.ccops.org www.gunowners.org www.keepandbeararms.org www.jpfo.org www.citizensofamerica.org


Patriot.45

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
Hardly a day goes by that the NRA doesn't end up agreeing with the anti-gun
crowd (Project Gestapo being the chief instance) but rarely does the NRA
allow this to become public knowledge.

In the October issue of Outdoor Life, NRA President Charlton Heston put
Colorado gun owners out to dry by supporting the concept of SAFE's anti-gun
ballot initiative.

RMGO Executive Director Dudley Brown learned about the article after being
blind-sided by a reporter, who claimed anyone opposing SAFE's ballot
initiative was clearly out of the mainstream since Charlton Heston, Tom
Mauser AND Sarah Brady agreed on the issue.
To see the entire article, go to: http://www.outdoorlife.com/sportsmansissues/olhestonbrady.html

"1. Do you support mandatory background checks for anyone purchasing
firearms at gun shows?
Heston: Yes. Sixty percent of sales at gun shows are by licensed firearms
dealers and already go through the instant background check. Last year, the
NRA supported legislation to extend instant background checks to the
remainder of sales at firearm shows, just like those done at gun stores
today. But at the urging of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, the Democratic
leadership in the U.S. House defeated the background check bill, sponsored
by pro-gun Congressman John Dingell (D-Mich.)."

Some blind loyalists of the NRA claimed it was an old interview, and that
Heston was taken out of context. In fact, several tried to physically bully
RMGO board member Tom Minsel last weekend when Minsel was handing out copies
of the article. Minsel, however, was practicing confrontational politics at
its best by arming himself with facts and boldly standing his ground.
But RMGO staff talked to Outdoor Life Associate Editor Scott Bowen on Sept.
20 to determine the origin of Heston's comments.
Bowen said OL sent both Heston and Brady a list of questions in early
September of this year. Heston's comments were indeed his own, and official
statements of the NRA.

Some readers might want to know what is gained by "inside bickering." But
every gun rights activist, especially NRA members, should know what the NRA
-- which has been dubbed "Too Afraid to Fight" for their lack of intestinal
fortitude -- is doing with their dues, and their soapbox.

--
- Melissa R -> If you advocate Individual Rights For The New Millennium
Please link to : http://www.UPAlliance.org

Liberal: Someone who would rather see a gay guy dead on a fence post
in Wyoming than alive with a gun in his hand.
>>>


OUCH!

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
On my way to purchase a money order to send to the Rocky moutain gunowners.
Personally I dont support registration
in any form.
But MANY OF US........

send money to the NRA.

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
One thing to remember, the more of us that join the NRA, the more of us to vote the spineless out of power.

------------------
The Alcove

I twist the facts until they tell the truth. -Some intellectual sadist

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power. -Me
 
From the Five-Minute Handbook by JASPAR@aol.com

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>THE NRA STINKS. So does GOA, SAF, JPFO, and any or all of the rest of the gun rights organizations. At the same time, all of these organizations are the best thing since sliced bread. We won't keep our rights without them. It's normal to love them and hate them at the same time. Be sure your complaints about them go to the person who can do something about your problem. Never give up your membership -- it's much easier to fix things from the inside. Avoid griping in public -- our opponents love it when we do. Always handle our dirty laundry behind closed doors. Always.[/quote]

------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4
Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website
 
TheBluesMan,

I understand about the NRA stinking. It really sticks in my craw to write the membership check.

I am also a member of both GOA and JPFO. I do not understand why you say that they too stink. Could you please elaborate?

Thanks



------------------
Audemus jura nostra defendere
 
11xray,

My post above is an excerpt from a document called The Five-Minute Handbook by JASPAR@aol.com

What Mr. Jaspar is basically saying, IMO, is that no single organization is a panacea for gun owners. One person thinks that the NRA stinks because they compromise. Another person thinks that the GOA stinks because they don't compromise. Another person thinks that JPFO stinks because their name has a religious connotation.

My point is that we need ALL these organizations, warts and all, to represent the diverse group that is gun owners. There is no perfect gun group. And bashing one group repeatedly on an open forum is airing our dirty laundry, which hurts our cause.
 
Things not known or loved about Ruger45:

He posted a news article recently that had been deliberately hacked up in a fashion detrimental to the NRA, and that radically altered the words of a gun rights activist into an NRA attack when the activist meant no such thing.

When I detected the fraud, Ruger45 first said it had come to him in vandalized form, but when asked the source, he said he did not "care to" go into that.

So either he's a fraud artist, or one of his sources is. Either way, he's simply not trustworthy as a source.

The fraud in question: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=28092

Jim March
 
My point is when many find out how the NRA compromises if your PC enough to call it that , that they BARF breakfast and get Irate so I like to let many know.
Im a part of every lobby except the NRA because I dont see one that likes to meander and do behind closed doors deals like they do and not have to pay for it because their
'our leader'.
This largest group crap and the 'wed lose our guns without them'line seems to me to let them get away with waaaay too much for my red american blood.
And I really feel sorry for those fools that can say such things with the view that we have such a tight hold on our guns.
Weve been forced to 'legally' turn in previsouly legally owned guns in atleast 3 different parts of our 'free'country and our leader the largest and wealthiest gun lobby the NRA wasnt exactly leading the fight in any of these cases.
GOA's not even a third their size but love and support them because they atleast dont give their blessing to more laws and enforcing laws they claimed to have fought much less giving money to republicans who have continually sold us out.
We need all the lobbies ?
Do we need all of their policies too?
If your sending them money your supporting their tactics/policies.
JPFO may have a different religion but I have yet to see them verbally or by lobby support any new or old gunlaws as a solution to crime.
IN a push to enforce current gunlaws the NRA has led the way for even more ineffective state trained police who have no duty to protect citizens from criminals and who are many times taught policy by the ever anti-gun FBI.
Not the kind of america I want.
The constitution is set up for the people to be able to protect themselves not be 'taken care of' by either government agent or LAWS.

On a positive note.
Neal Knox has mentioned that the by-laws hes been lobbying for have passed and the way most NRA directors will be elected will now change.... well in 2002.
So in 4 years we could be seeing a very different NRA.
Some BOD members might even be 'getting' the courage to oppose Sell out Lapierre as they feel the opinoins of the people in their state that elected them ...or wont.

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
To have given you my source would have changed nothing.
Which is a GOA newsletter I have, post or email your pobox or Bluesman can give the forum address it is no longer on their website but is on the newsletter.
The only change the unclipped version added was that the NRA supported the anti-gun bill because it supposedly had some pro-gun things in it also.
NONE of those were listed for anyone to read.
Hmmmm??
Besided jumping threads and going into the past (yeah I did that too,past thing) what of the above posted are you saying didnt happen Jim.
Which of the court listings,or was it the stance that Heston took totally agreeing with SAFE (sane alternative to gun violence ????) in colorado about closing the so called 'gunshow loophole'.
Or was it NRA's A rating to different candidates that have repeatedly voted for more gunlaws/control.Let us know where Im leading the group astray this time with more
MISINFORMATION.

Its probaly just me not getting on much too but its good to hear from you again Jim I feel like I havent seen you on here in a while.
While are opinion's differ greatly Im glad your on our side you sound experienced.

Patriot.45
www.gunowners.org www.ccops.org www.jpfo.org

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
Ruger45: the fastest way to send me the docs is by fax: 707-221-7152 - set the machine on "fine" resolution and they'll dump into my EMail as .TIF files which I can convert to .GIF or .JPG and put on the web. I'll link 'em right here.

I read over most of the "Plaintiff's statement" link above, which I assume is a fair overview of the issues involved?

Not having any sort of "insider access" whatsoever in the areas related to these issues, I have no idea what's going on here for sure. I admit, many of the charges are downright ugly.

However.

I seriously believe that the "no compromise faction" led by the GOA and others will eventually get us stripped of all rights. That is my *honest* opinion. A "no compromise" policy leaves us no room to maneuver in the battleground that REALLY matters: public opinion (and the voting booth, another way of saying "public opinion with teeth").

*IF* I'm right, and if the current NRA leadership feels the same way, then "screwing over" the no-compromise faction within the NRA will ultimately benefit the RKBA, even if the details are ugly bordering on grotesque.

Understand where I'm coming from so far?

Let's take one example from last year. The GOP/NRA alliance was publicly supporting insta-checks at gun shows, of a type that did NOT delay the transaction and therefore lead to a crippling of the shows themselves. The HCI/Dem axis countered with a 72-hour-wait program that was even worse. In the bickering to resolve the differences, a deadlock was reached and NEITHER the semi-bad or really nasty versions passed.

Maybe it was ugly, but it was the BEST possible outcome!!! Because not only did no bad bill pass, the NRA came out in the "public opinion war" as being MORE reasonable than the HCI/Dem crowd. WE were willing to "give up something", they were percieved as "greedy".

Neal Knox, bless his straight'n'narrow heart, just isn't crafty enough to pull something like this off. There's others I could name who flat-out ain't smart enough.

And it's this sort of high-stakes gamesmanship that led to Bush beating Gore in polls on the gun issue.

In other words, when the Colorado group went "no compromise" on the gun show background check, it ran counter to what the NRA was doing back in Washinton to slow down Fed gun control laws while building up Bush for a win that will stack the Supremes in time for Emerson. Follow? The NRA doesn't see it as a "bunch of little brushfights" - they're fighting a nation-wide war, and they're playing for keeps.

I sincerely believe that LaPierre, Metaska and (to a lesser degree as a figurehead) Heston ARE sneaky enough and politically astute enough to be the most effective leaders the gun rights movement has today, and possibly the best we've *ever* had.

If that's true, then something really sad logically follows: by beating the hell out of the Knox faction in internal NRA politics, the LaPierre group simply proved themselves brutal enough to have a chance at beating Clinton, Gore, DiFi and the rest of the REAL enemies. That's nasty, it's downright Darwinian, but...it's true. Of all the various gameplans to restore the RKBA fully, the only one I've seen that stands a real chance is what the NRA is doing with Bush, the Supremes, Emerson and the rest of that stuff.

It's a war, and we have to become as brutal, as sneaky and as tough as the enemy in order to win. Neal Knox is tough, but there ain't a sneaky bone in his body. I respect him, I'm proud to call him "ally"...but he's not the leader we need right now.

Jim
 
In case you think I'm all talk, this was filed in Federal court a week ago, and served on the defendants yesterday: http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/pleadag.html

Much of the advice and evidence gathered in support of THIS lawsuit came from the NRA's lead attorney in California, Chuck Michel.

Which legal action do you really think is more likely to help advance the cause, mine, or the one you linked to above?

Attacking your allies is just stupid. You do it over, and over, and over.

You want my respect? Go do something that really helps.

Jim

[This message has been edited by Jim March (edited September 22, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top