Unsatisfied with the progress of gun rights? A few facts for you:

In the United States, there are between 44 million and 80 million gun owners, depending on whose statistics you believe. For the purposes of this post, I'm going to assume the lowest number so I don't get even more depressed.

Of those 44 million gun owners, how many belong to a pro-RKBA group? Well, the highest number of members the NRA has ever had was 4.2 million around the 2000 elections. GOA claims about 300,000 members and SAF claims about 100,000 in the brief for the recent Katrina litigation. Assuming that no gun owner belongs to multiple pro-RKBA groups and adding 200,000 for all the smaller groups and activists who are unafiiliated. We get around 4.8 million out of 44 million who are politically active.

These 4.8 million politically active gun owners have donated $18 million in lobbying, PACs, and soft money since 1989. NRA members donated over $15 million of that number. So over a 17 year period, the roughly 10% of gun owners who are politically active have eached chipped in a little less than a dollar a year to maintain their gun rights.

How does that compare to some of the biggest lobbies and donors on the Hill? The National Education Association has 2.8 million members. Over the same time period, they donated $25.5 million. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees has 1.4 million members. Over the same time, they donated $37 million to protect their rights.

These are just two examples; but there are lots more. Note that neither of these two groups counts as a gun control group for donation purposes; but read what AFSCME and NEA have to say about guns. Sound familiar?

I often see grousing about why gun rights advocates don't get what they want when they work hard to put pro-RKBA candidates in place. Here is part of that answer that I think people often forget - there are a lot of strong, organized groups that are not classified as "gun control" that are working against us.

Two things are going to be very important in countering this pull in society - one is that we need new people who appreciate RKBA. There is no other way around it. If we aren't part of the culture of society, we will be excluded from it eventually.

The second thing we need is for those who do appreciate RKBA to step up to the challenge. I know I am speaking to the choir here; but the numbers show that very few gun owners take their rights seriously, even among the politically active lot. When a lobby of government employees that is one-quarter of the size of the NRA can raise twice the money of all the pro-RKBA groups combined to push their agenda, we have a serious motivation problem, even among the hardcore.

I am not sure what to do to address this problem; but one thing I plan to do is to make it my goal to every year find one politically inactive gun owner or fence-sitter and make them an active contributor to RKBA. In the end, votes matter more than money; but a healthy population of pro-RKBA voters can provide both.
 
It is certainly true that we can always use more pro-gun group members, especially when they vote like gun owners. On the other hand, one can take some measure of comfort from the fact that gun owners (even non-activist types) are usually more passionate about guns than gun-grabbers are about hating them.

Where the gun-grabbers win is when they can get anti-gun legislation in front of an ambivalent (or outright non-thinking) legislature and populace. This is basically the story of California.

Tim
 
I was at the Dr's office an he had a new copy of US News and they had a headline about gun control. I opened it up and was a little suprised at what I read.

The author flatly stated that the only effect of the AWB was to annoy legal gun owners. Also stated was that pushing gun control was a losing battle for anyone seeking election. The midwest, which the dems wish to make gains does not support gun control and it is an issue that klinton belived cost gore the election.

However the end of the article was troubling. It praised Marion Berry and his coalition of mayors seeking to end the trade in illegal guns in America. The author made it sound like they were only targeting criminal ownership when we all know that those measures only make gun ownership more difficult for those WHO FOLLOW THE LAW! He said they may be pursuing the only viable gun control measure. As if nothing else matters but passing more gun laws!:barf:
 
Just because one organization gets more money than another does not mean it's more effective. Don't assume that throwing wads of cash at the problem is going to fix anything.
 
Where the gun-grabbers win is when they can get anti-gun legislation in front of an ambivalent (or outright non-thinking) legislature and populace. This is basically the story of California.

And that is exactly the point. I am quite active in prodding other gun owners / enthusiasts to join NRA. I even know of one land owner that will not allow anyone who is not an NRA member to hunt on his land. Complacency and apathy are the biggest enemies and the "Anti gun group are just a noisy lot but we don't really have to worry about them" attitude is exactly what will bring England / Australia like laws into being. If you want to keep them (your guns, that is), then get active. At the very least with your money if not your time. NRA membership is only $35.00 per year. In my opinion, had it not been for the NRA lobbying efforts a lot of the gun ownership rights that we enjoy today would not be there.
 
How much of that $35 a year is spent sending you mail asking for more money? I support local, grass-roots initiatives to promote gun rights in MY AREA. Where was the NRA when they signed the AWB? Out for a nap? I live in the third most populous county in Iowa. I can't get a CCW unless I carry over $500 cash at all times; same with county #1 and 2. Where is the NRA? Grocery shopping?

Face it, the NRA has a huge bullseye on their back for every antigunner in America. Don't pay someone else to do it for you. Talk to your local reps. Mine lives down the street and is already probly sick of me(i just found out where he lives).
 
Don't disagree with you rhgunguy. There is also a TSRA (Texas State Rifle Association) that works on the state level. I am sure that there are similar organizations in other states. Actually I remember the AWB fight, and the NRA was very involved. Just because they didn't prevail doesn't mean that they weren't there. Let's also remember that the NRA provides a very broad range of services to its membership. Lobbying efforts is just one of many. Of course direct contact with one's representative and congressman is best of all.
 
"I live in the third most populous county in Iowa. I can't get a CCW unless I carry over $500 cash at all times; same with county #1 and 2. Where is the NRA? Grocery shopping?"

You blame the NRA because they can't get you a concealed carry permit in Iowa? The NRA is big, but not big enough to win every fight, or even take on every fight. Being a national organization, they mostly take on the national challenges. Everyone should join both the NRA and their own state organization. Here in California, it's the California Rifle and Pistol Association:

http://www.crpa.org/

As for how much of the 35 bucks goes into mailings, it's a non-issue. The mailings more than pay for themselves, and that's a good sign. How many of the Brady bunch do you think are willing not only to pony up some annual dues, but maybe even throw in 10-50-100 bucks once in a while just to help out?

As gun owners, unity is our unique strength. Please don't quit the NRA over some junk mail. Join the NRA and any other pro-gun organizations you have a mind to. It can only help.

Tim
 
Most gun owners aren't gun owners in the sense that the gun is not a crucial thing in their life. Might as well be toaster owners.

Thus, the number of total guns owned is always misleading to the RKBA crowd - they think it means enthusiasts knowledgeable about the 2nd Amend. It doesn't.

I belong to the NRA and TSRA - I feel they are both effective. Is the NRA perfect and do I disagree with some of their stupid things - sure. However, they are the best game at the national level. The TSRA is effective for our state.

I always wonder at those who post the fight and head for the hills threads and seem to abandon the political process for some posturing. The political process serves others well.
 
Glenn E. Meyer wrote in part:

Most gun owners aren't gun owners in the sense that the gun is not a crucial thing in their life. Might as well be toaster owners.

Thus, the number of total guns owned is always misleading to the RKBA crowd - they think it means enthusiasts knowledgeable about the 2nd Amend. It doesn't.

------------------

While the above might be correct, particularly with respect to those who own a toaster, even the "toaster owner" might strenuously object to some pompous smartass telling them that they are evil because they own this toaster, and or that for some unspecified, some undemonstrated or unexplained "greater good", they can no longer own their toaster.
 
Well then - how come with the giant number of gun owners, there hasn't been a dynamic movement in the streets to get gun rights.

Civil rights organizations have had massive street marches. When the AWB went it - I didn't see the million person toaster owner - excuse me - gun owner - march on Washington. We got folks moving to the hills and burying their guns in PVC.

The small number of enthusiasts and specialist organizations like the NRA have had targeted influence in races. However, gun rights has never really become a mass movement like others. What happens is that at election times - gun owners get riled up and in our close to 50/50 elections will throw one to the GOP candidate (given that one is progunnish).

I see politicians continually make speeches about flag burning, abortion, stem cells, the flag, etc. When was the last time you saw a presidential candidate make a clear and central speech about the RKBA and promise to overturn existing laws? No, they say they support the RKBA and SPORTSMEN. Lower level congressional types sometimes spout more RKBA things. When in 1994, IIRC, Newt tried to get the AWB overturned - Dole and the national level of GOP quashed it.

Long Live the Toasters!!

Like I said, IMHO - the RKBA is a targeted special interest group and not a mass movement.
 
rhgunguy,

Also stated was that pushing gun control was a losing battle for anyone seeking election


Unfortunately that isn't the case anymore. You don't know how many threads I've read over the past year where people have been willing(not wanting but willing)to vote Democrat(Hillary etc...) to some how make up for Bush:rolleyes: When they elect someone like that into office and gun laws start occuring again I won't want to hear 1 word or griping about it. They forget all too easy IMO.
 
MoW, and all of those threads, at least the ones I have read, also tout who is worse: Hillery, Guilianni or McCain... Any of these would be bad for RKBA. Any of them.

So is it any wonder why pro-gun people just might vote for Hillery as opposed to the other two?
 
Antipitas,

To a degree. All 3 are not(by far) on the same level of disdain regarding guns. Just like stealing is not just stealing-----stealing a candy bar is different then robbing a bank. Hillary has a true hatred towards guns and would actively pursue her course. Others might be on the opposite side of what we want, but not to the point of going out of the way or making it a crusade.
 
Glenn E. Meyer:

Re the quite well put points in your post/response to my comments, as has been noted by myself as well as others, Gun Owners Are Their Own, Worst Enemies. Other than that, as an answer to your questions, damned if I know.

By the way, HR 1312, by Conyers and McCarthy, Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban Reinstated With a Vengence, has 94 co-sponsors, as of yesterday, according to my congress persons local office. They stated that these 94 co-sponsors are ALL DEMOCRATS, which might be the case, however re that "leaning", how many of the 80,000,000 "gun owners" in this country have gotten on to their congressional reps on this matter?
 
Back
Top