NRA could 'shut down forever,'
Well, yay! Not likely, but yay for the thought.
NRA could 'shut down forever,' group warns in fundraising letter
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/nra-could-shut-down-forever-group-warns-in-fundraising-letter-194322998.html
"In November, alarm bells started to ring about the National Rifle Association?s finances. At the time, the gun rights group was reportedly unable to afford coffee for its employees. At the time, the news was just another financial hit for the organization that had been suffering from declining revenues and membership dues.
Now, in a fundraising letter sent this month, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre has warned that the NRA could shut down forever, blaming New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo."
More BS from Quisling HQ and Wayne La Pee Aire...the poor schmuck who makes over a million bucks yearly, selling out fundamental liberty and Amendment II.
Pffft.
NRA could 'shut down forever,' group warns in fundraising letter
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/nra-could-shut-down-forever-group-warns-in-fundraising-letter-194322998.html
"In November, alarm bells started to ring about the National Rifle Association?s finances. At the time, the gun rights group was reportedly unable to afford coffee for its employees. At the time, the news was just another financial hit for the organization that had been suffering from declining revenues and membership dues.
Now, in a fundraising letter sent this month, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre has warned that the NRA could shut down forever, blaming New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo."
More BS from Quisling HQ and Wayne La Pee Aire...the poor schmuck who makes over a million bucks yearly, selling out fundamental liberty and Amendment II.
Pffft.
0
-
For your reading pleasure and for perspective from a long-time NRA member most should have heard of.
Nice to see a man who is capable of self-examination of his formerly committed belief in the NRA. Such intellectual honesty is near as rare as hen's teeth. It certainly is around this thread to be sure.
This is a few years old, at least.
" Am I the NRA?
by L. Neil Smith
This coming August I'll have been a Life member of the National Rifle Association 22 years. If you're not a member yourself, it may surprise you to learn that, by the standards of that organization, born just after the War between the States, this isn't particularly long. I know people who've been in the NRA twice as long as I have, and one or two who've been members three times that number of years.
It is long enough, however, to make me wonder, as one does upon occasion in any long-term relationship, whether, knowing everything I know today, after 22 years, I'd do it again. Lately, the answer seems to be -- and I'm sure the NRA will be devastated to learn this -- that I'd have to think about it.
Knowing everything I know today, I'd want assurances this time that the NRA is willing and able to perform the task that brought me to it. I'd been in Junior NRA as a Scout, but the course of my life had taken me away from shooting (it seems hard to believe now) until just before that surrealistic year of 1968 when, as a newly-fledged handgun owner (we'd had an incident in the neighborhood) I recall sitting in front of the TV watching the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, knowing the proclivity of liberals to blame everyone but the perpetrator, and thinking, "Boy, we're gonna get it now." And so we did.
And so I joined the NRA, although it took me five more years to get the cash together for Life membership. Since then, we've lost one fight after another until today, the infringements we deal with -- on an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right that was supposed to be absolutely guaranteed -- are beyond anything most members of the NRA 22 years ago would have believed.
I was one of a few who saw the ugly future ahead, even then. Four years after I became a Life member, I wrote my first science fiction novel, full of dire predictions. I also wrote letters, not just to politicians, but to editors of gun magazines, even to the NRA's top banana, the guy who looked so much like Nikita Khrushchev, urging them to stop fighting the Battle of the Second Amendment as a holding action, a tactic we have seen was bound for inevitable defeat, and adopt an offensive strategy.
Those editors (with a remarkable exception whose good judgement I'll repay by NOT associating his name with mine) laughed me off as an alarmist. I never heard from the bald guy at the NRA. And why should I? Who was I? Just some nobody, worried over what was about to happen to his unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human rights. For that matter, who am I today? Just a 22-year Life member wondering whether he'd do it all over again, remember?
As I say, I'd want assurances this time, sort of a prenuptial agreement, before I slipped the metaphorical ring on my trigger finger. My 22 years of experience have taught me a few things -- a dozen of them, roughly -- about defending the Second Amendment. For the life of me, I don't understand why they haven't taught the same things to the NRA.
FIRST, I'd want the NRA not to write any more legislation. It's said the NRA leadership wrote the Gun Control Act of 1968 (before my time, if you'll recall). I know they wrote the Maryland Handgun Ban because they were afraid that something worse was in the works. Fear seems to be their principal motivation, not anger or determination. Invariably it steers them toward a submissive, repulsive "strategy" of doing the enemy's work before he can do it himself.
SECOND, I'd want the NRA not to trade away any more rights it "thinks" are less important for those it "thinks" are more so. The leadership would find, if they ever asked, that their membership often disagrees with them. The "cop-killer" bullet fiasco comes to mind, where we got trivial reforms in a devil's bargain -- letting them make some bullets illegal -- that serves our enemies so well today that one particularly repellent and evil Senator has based the sunset of his career on it.
THIRD, I'd want the NRA to stop supporting government activities irrelevant, even harmful, to the Second Amendment. Increasingly, gun owners see that the War on Drugs, to name an example, was meant from the outset as a calculated assault on the Bill of Rights, especially on the Second Amendment. It must end if there's to be anything left of the Constitution in the 21st century. That isn't the NRA's job, but it should butt out of the debate. Its "Operation Crimestrike", celebrating patently illegal incursions against individual rights is nothing more than a sustained, humiliating grovel -- like having to watch another kind of civil rights advocacy crawl up on the verandah and whine, "See Massah, what a good boy Ah is?"
FOURTH, in the same context, I'd want the NRA to disconnect all future discussion of the Second Amendment from the totally unrelated topic of crime. My rights have nothing whatever to do with anything anybody else does, right or wrong. If the crime rate were only 1/10 that of today, my rights would be unaffected. Likewise, if the rate were TEN TIMES what it is, it would have nothing whatever to do with my individual right to own and carry weapons.
FIFTH, I'd want the NRA to reject all future argument about the "sporting use" of weapons -- why look like an imbecile, pushing the AK-47 as a deer rifle, when it meets the Founding Fathers' ACTUAL criteria so elegantly? -- in favor of frank and frequent public reference to the original Constitutional purpose for an armed citizenry, which is to intimidate the government.
SIXTH -- and this may be the most important point I'll make, so pay attention -- I'd want the NRA to adopt as its principal and publicly-acknowledged objective the repeal or nullification of every weapons law, at every level of government in America. The Second Amendment is explicit about this and requires no esoteric legal interpretation. Check the dictionary meaning of "enfringe" if you doubt my word.
SEVENTH, in support of that objective, I'd want the NRA to print ads, half a page in every issue, in all its periodicals, reminding members of the duty and power of an American jury to nullify any law it believes unjust or unconstitutional. Alcohol prohibition died this way. Gun prohibition could, as well. All it takes is eight and a third percent of the population, one twelfth, to carry it off.
EIGHTH, I'd want the NRA to establish programs to educate the police in their absolute obligation (given the Nuremburg trials after World War II) to enforce only those statutes -- and obey only those commands -- that are lawful, i.e., constitutional. For many decades, the NRA has spent a lot of resources in what can only be described as sucking up disgustingly to the military and the cops; it's past time we got something out of it. (I'm an ex-reservist, my brother's a deputy, and we both grew up in the Air Force, so don't give me a hard time -- this is the truth, and we all know it.)
NINTH, I'd want the NRA to give up the self-defeating notion that you can keep guns OUT of the hands of the "wrong" folks, while simultaneously and miraculously keeping them IN the hands of the "right" folks. Each of us is somebody else's badguy. In the last century, laws were passed to keep guns from Italians and the Irish. Earlier this century it was blacks and now it's those who believe in the Bill of Rights. Get it straight: the latter could never have happened if the former hadn't been possible. No more background checks, NRA, no more prior restraint. History, ancient and recent, clearly shows that if the badguys have guns, the only way to handle it is to make sure as many goodguys have guns as possible.
TENTH, while we're on the subject of prior restraint, I'd want the NRA to abandon its strategically idiotic enthusiasm for government-controlled concealed carry -- illegal under the Second Amendment -- in favor of uncontrolled and legal "Vermont Carry". If it won't, I guarantee that in years to come, someone will say: the NRA wants your name on this piece of paper BEFORE you'll be allowed to exercise your unalienable individual, Constitutional, civil, and human rights. The NRA wants your age, address, phone, sex, race, social security number, photograph, and fingerprints as a cost of doing what the Framers meant you to do without all that. In short, it wants to impose the very system of gun and owner registration we've been fighting more than 60 years!
Huey Long, virtual dictator of Louisiana in the 1930s when Mussolini was making the trains run on time, was asked by the press, "Will we ever have fascism in America?" "Yes," Long replied with a grin, "but we'll call it Anti-fascism." I can guarantee that someone will say all of this, because if nobody else does, I will. And to the advocates of licensed carry, I say now: don't you realize how pathetic you look, lying there with your OWN foot on your neck?
ELEVENTH, I'd want the NRA to make endorsements based on the candidate's respect for the Second Amendment, regardless of his affiliation or its estimate of his chances. It's suicidal -- if only because it denies us leverage we'd otherwise possess over the Republicans -- to say a third party candidate can't win, and on that self-fulfilling basis, withhold endorsement that could give him, and us, a victory. If "NRA" stands for "National Republican Association" let it be said plainly and stop what amounts to a consumer fraud. If not, then if a candidate's unwilling to be photographed for public consumption firing a machine gun, a semiautomatic rifle with a long, curved magazine, or a pistol with a fat, two-column grip, he can't be trusted whatever his affiliation, and shouldn't be endorsed.
TWELFTH, I'd want the NRA to reduce its Board of Directors to no more than 20, so they can lead instead of turning things over to a tiny, often misguided elite. One director I know told me the NRA is in trouble precisely because its huge, unwieldy board flounders helplessly, leaving policy in the hands of a "troika" with its own agenda. It's time for that to end.
In general, I'd give the NRA the same advice I give everybody else. Never let anybody keep you from enjoying your rights to the fullest, not for a day, not for a minute. Never let anybody stand in your way. Never accept even the most reasonable-sounding excuse for why you can't have everything you deserve. Never accept compromise.
Worse than thieves, murderers, or cannibals, those who offer compromise slow you and sap your vitality while pretending to be your friends. They are not your friends. Compromisers are the enemies of all humanity, the enemies of life itself. Compromisers are the enemies of everything important, sacred, and true.
So, would I join the NRA all over again, after 22 years, knowing everything I know today? I guess I'm still thinking about it.
Give me a reason, NRA. "0 -
NRA = Negotiated Rights Association 0 -
Oh no....bad-think and bad-speak.
"The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."
?NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968, P. 22"0 -
Gasp!
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/contact-nra-about-not-supporting-any-red-flag-laws/#axzz5jlcX6NAE
"Virginia ? -(AmmoLand.com)- The NRA has taken a public position supporting Red Flag laws. This happened last year."0 -
In defense of the NRA they infact helped me to be able to obtain a concealed carry permit by getting the power back to the county sheriffs office instead of the local chief of police who would not approve anyone he did not personally know, his time in office also was short lived. Without the help of the NRA I was fighting a losing battle but they got it reversed. 0 -
Say it isn't so....
"Las Vegas shooting: NRA urges new rules for gun 'bump-stocks'
5 October 2017
The National Rifle Association has called for "additional regulations" on bump-stocks, a rapid fire device used by the Las Vegas massacre gunman.
The group said: "Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
Republicans have said they would consider banning the tool, despite years of resisting any gun control.
Lawmakers plan to hold hearings and consider a bill to outlaw the device.
The NRA called on Thursday for regulators to "immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law".
President Donald Trump later told reporters his administration would be looking into whether to ban them "in the next short period of time"."0 -
Leave me see.. the NRA was created and then became a business. There is a huge difference of an organization and a business. So now their britches are so large politicians listen to them. Money.. Money is a funny thing.. folks like to be on the side of money. Play some AC/DC.. Money does talk. 0 -
This cannot be true.
Local gun groups flex muscle in state politics, sidestepping the NRA
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/08/local-gun-groups-flex-muscle-in-state-politics-sidestepping-the-nra.html
"....."It's always kind of interesting when you see a lot of people in the gun control community talk about how radical the NRA is," said Pruett, whose group organized an email and telephone campaign to pass a 2016 Idaho law allowing people to carry concealed handguns without a permit, also known as "constitutional carry."
"There's an entire movement on the other side of the NRA ... We're done compromising," he said.
Missouri Firearms Coalition political advisor Aaron Dorr says the NRA fought against constitutional carry for years, considering it too much of a longshot, and only came on board once passage was certain.....
....CJ Grisham, who founded Open Carry Texas in 2013, said organizations like his were established to fill a void left by the NRA. "I would not have formed Open Carry Texas if the NRA was doing its job," he said.
The most uncompromising among them say the NRA has become too timid and too willing to back measures such as removing firearms from people deemed dangerous.
"I call it pre-emptive concession," said Paul Valone, president of Grass Roots North Carolina, which has helped expand concealed carry rights and a "stand your ground" law....."0 -
Hmmm.
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/01/are-we-revising-nra-history/#axzz54sQLbOEv
Are We Revising NRA History?
Ammoland Inc. Posted on January 18, 2018 by Jeff Knox0 -
That will do as a primer, for now. 0 -
So It496 you joined 3 days ago and and evidently have a bone to pic with the NRA.
How do you feel about the win over the 10 round Magazine ban in California DOJ. Sponsored by the NRA lawsuit ?
Do you think the Cali DOJ reversed the ban on thier own?
Certainly the NRA like other old institutions has problems. What is your solution...0 -
Joined three days ago? 
0 -
wpageabc wrote:So It496 you joined 3 days ago and and evidently have a bone to pic with the NRA.
How do you feel about the win over the 10 round Magazine ban in California DOJ. Sponsored by the NRA lawsuit ?
Do you think the Cali DOJ reversed the ban on thier own?
Certainly the NRA like other old institutions has problems. What is your solution...
I appreciate your asking.
My desired solution as a long time NRA Life Member and also long time Life Member of the GOA is to see the NRA utterly and completely burned down and the ground upon which it stood, salted. This, for reasons that should be obvious to any thinking man and which are legion and go back near a hundred years.
Would that the former NRA members then migrate their support and their money to groups such as GOA and a plethora of state orgs who take a stand for actual liberty and for Amendment II. Nothing will change until and unless this happens.
As long as the NRA is seen as and advanced as 'the voice' and 'the face' of America's gun owners then we will continue to be victim of ever-accelerating infringements, bans and ultimately, confiscations.
Many will eventually die because of it when it gets to that point. Both non-compliant and rebellious brothers and sisters of mine, but also govt enforcers and apparatchiks.
The NRA sells gun-control. They are not for Amendment II as written, but for the govt's twisted version of it. They support gun privileges, not fundamental essential unalienable rights. The evidence proves this.
The NRA certainly does not want to see all firearms banned, just certain ones along with bans and restrictions on certain people and in certain circumstances and in certain places....all with govt over-watch and govt permission and with govt right-of-refusal.
The NRA works directly for govt controlled privileges to keep and bear arms.
Fact is, they always have, by their own admission.
If the NRA would back out of their advocacy and return, solely to firearms training and safety, which they do very well by and large, then I would once again support them. They will not do so however.
Sadly, there are millions of my fellow citizens who are 'all in' for this NRA/collectivist-govt version of 'new america' or as some term it, FUSA (Former United States of America). These people are afraid of and/or refuse to indulge the concept of freedom and individual liberty, particularly in the realm of firearms, but usually in a whole venue of other areas of individual liberty also.
Does that shoe fit? If so, check yourself.
I simply call things as I see and assess them. I am not worried about peoples hurt feelers and/or disagreements. We are all free to believe as we choose.0 -
Sad seeing mostly like minded people eating each others young. Why argue about the NRA when you have the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to target.
One thing I know for damn sure if the NRA folds competitive shooting as we know it is rudderless. It does not bother me one iota that NRA workers have to supply their own coffee, I do so it is a false flag in my view.
You guys need to stop the big peepee fight and see if you can't find common ground. I suggest at a starting point you read the Second Amendment then read the First Amendment to remind yourselves where the fight truly is; in the halls of CONgress.0 -
I believe it has been made clear that many of us would return to supporting the NRA if they would go back to what they were originally founded for,......firearms training. Competitive shooting would remain a part of that.bpost wrote:Sad seeing mostly like minded people eating each others young. Why argue about the NRA when you have the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to target.
One thing I know for damn sure if the NRA folds competitive shooting as we know it is rudderless. It does not bother me one iota that NRA workers have to supply their own coffee, I do so it is a false flag in my view.
You guys need to stop the big peepee fight and see if you can't find common ground. I suggest at a starting point you read the Second Amendment then read the First Amendment to remind yourselves where the fight truly is; in the halls of CONgress.
I don't want a group that has shown itself over and over to be in favor of 2nd. Amendment infringements to speak for me any longer.
I fell for their lies again, the last time the dreaded 'assault weapons ban' talk reared it's ugly head, and they acted as if they were going all 'no-compromise.' You see how long that lasted don't you?
My membership expired, this month, and I am officially done. That leaves more to support the GOA, SAF, etc.0 -
wpageabc wrote:So It496 you joined 3 days ago and and evidently have a bone to pic with the NRA.
How do you feel about the win over the 10 round Magazine ban in California DOJ. Sponsored by the NRA lawsuit ?
Do you think the Cali DOJ reversed the ban on thier own?
Certainly the NRA like other old institutions has problems. What is your solution...
@wpageabc ElTee Four Hundred and 96 has been around LONG before you ever shared a contribution to GB. LONG. Calm down, read, listen, and learn. If you open your mind (reference to the Matrix) you might learn some things that are completely against the programming you have been fed for the last 50 years.0 -
bpost wrote:Sad seeing mostly like minded people eating each others young. Why argue about the NRA when you have the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to target.
One thing I know for damn sure if the NRA folds competitive shooting as we know it is rudderless. It does not bother me one iota that NRA workers have to supply their own coffee, I do so it is a false flag in my view.
You guys need to stop the big peepee fight and see if you can't find common ground. I suggest at a starting point you read the Second Amendment then read the First Amendment to remind yourselves where the fight truly is; in the halls of CONgress.
Spot on.
First sentence says it all
F O with the personal agendas. Get to work stopping the RICO demoncraps.
They're your stone cold enemy. Wise up.0 -
Gun rights supporters don't need anti gunners we shoot ourselves in the foot daily LOL 0 -
I like to start by targeting the ones stabbing me in the back, so I can then focus on the targets out further afield. YMMV.bpost wrote:Sad seeing mostly like minded people eating each others young. Why argue about the NRA when you have the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to target.
One thing I know for damn sure if the NRA folds competitive shooting as we know it is rudderless. It does not bother me one iota that NRA workers have to supply their own coffee, I do so it is a false flag in my view.
You guys need to stop the big peepee fight and see if you can't find common ground. I suggest at a starting point you read the Second Amendment then read the First Amendment to remind yourselves where the fight truly is; in the halls of CONgress.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
49 comments