NRA Asked Me to Join Again, Should I ?
I know this topic comes up alot. I joined the NRA about 6 months before the last Presidential election because I thought it might help with gun rights and so forth. I didnt renew after that. Now I am considering renewing but I cant honestly say I am totally satisfied with the NRA. I know they are better than nothing but I dont know. I did like the free magazines though, lol. What do you think ?
0
-
One thing you can do is spend a few bucks and see if you think it is worth it, then you can decide for yourself. Myself, I have not missed the money I've spent on dues for the past forty-five years, nor any donations I've made. 0 -
Yes 0 -
NO
They care nothing about machineguns so I don't give them any money
Mine goes to GOA0 -
I used to be a big believer in the NRA. Not so much anymore.
I get tired of them CONSTANTLY begging for more money while IMO largely catering to the affluent society gun owners. But I suppose you go to where the most money can be obtained.
At any rate, I think the (yearly) membership fee is, as long as I can afford it, a small price for what good they do. As said before, despite their shortcomings, they still are the gun-owners and the 2nd Amendments best voice in Washington.0 -
If you can afford a machinegun; why whine about a measly $35 a year?
If I use the same (il)logic you guys do; then GOA has done nothing but compromise away your rights to own machineguns made after 1989, and doesn't have enough clout to reverse the ban, so I'm not sending them any money.
Waah!0 -
A common misconception;
CCW's are a GOOD thing.
Actually..what you have done is admitted to the world, your masters,and YOURSELF..that people are not entitled to exercise their Rights as free citizens without PERMISSION from the government.
You have destroyed the Second Amendment..and every time you brag about how CCW people commit few crimes..add to the myth that ONLY people 'passed' by government are 'fit' to own guns.
Actually, many tens of thousands..I bet MANY more people carry every day without 'permission'..and never misuse a weapon.
You have aided and abetted the enemies of freedom...
The evidence about the NRA has been posted several times on this forum..it generally gets poofed.
Bluntly, the NRA's position is sorta like the bully down the street coming to your house to rape your ten year old daughter.
Daddy (NRA) strikes a deal."Take my wife, instead".then congratulates himself on his `victory'.
Then the bully comes back next week..and daddy gives him his 16 year old daughter.then congratulates himself yet AGAIN for protecting his ten year old.
There is no shame in being defeated when you have stood on the high ground throughout.
Defending the Second Amendment IS the high ground..and just as there is no getting back the virginity of that 10 or 15 year-old..there is no use pretending that those striking deals with the Beast over a basic Right are still defending the high ground.
...0 -
What can it hurt? It's a gun rights organization for the preservation and acknowledgement of the second admendment. Sometimes I think that the only people that poopah it are the ones that can't afford to part with the money or are actually anti-gun. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
I wouldn't join the NRA if the membership was free
In my case, its not about "compromise", its about the NRA's deliberate acts of political sabotage against folks to truly are "Pro Gun"
Rack Ops, you have just indicted every American gunmaker. The 1968 Gun Control bill was passed with the quiet blessing of Colt, Winchester, S&W, Remington, Ithica, Charter Arms, Savage, Ruger, and all the rest. No more could you buy imported firearms at outragiously low prices. War surplus rifles that could be sporterized were banned.
The obvious beneficiaries were domestic gunmakers since the market was now restricted.0 -
I was a member of NRA for several years, butI got so tired of receiving there mail asking for more money, I wouldn,t have minded if I got one once in a while but it seemed I would get one every week and got tired of it. Now they get nothing, I to suppose I am a little thin skined but I get enough junk mail without asking for it. I may rejoin in the future when I stop getting junk mail from AARP. If they both invested the money they spend on postage they would have plenty of money. Don't everyone jump my butt at the same time:-)
"Of course this is just my opinion I could be wrong"
Tom, Stockton, Calif.
Ride it like you stole it.0 -
Used to be a member. Opened my eyes. Not a member any Longer. 0 -
Join Gun Owners of America,
then buy the NRA $10/year associate membership.0 -
To help make your decision, please refer to the below link:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?whichpage=1&TOPIC_ID=264831#2004183
Former anti-gun politician Rudy G. (probably stilll anti-gun) is at least trying to cozy up to the pro-gun people. Even if Rudy is being a hypocrite, at least that shows us he has some fear of organized pro-gun people in regards to his career advancement. You don't see Rudy G. trying to cozy up to any of the other pro-gun organizations do you?
If so please tell us which ones!
If it wasn't for the NRA, people like Rudy G. would not give us pro-gun people a second thought. You can get a reduced NRA rate of $25.00 per year, not much more cost than a box of quality ammo. So don't be cheap and/or worry so much about joining the NRA. Just join and if the NRA is ineffective like so many people here like to tell us, surely at some point you will notice that and then you can make up your own mind about joining or not.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
To help make your decision, please refer to the below link:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?whichpage=1&TOPIC_ID=264831#2004183
Former anti-gun politician Rudy G. (probably stilll anti-gun) is at least trying to cozy up to the pro-gun people. Even if Rudy is being a hypocrite, at least that shows us he has some fear of organized pro-gun people in regards to his career advancement. You don't see Rudy G. trying to cozy up to any of the other pro-gun organizations do you?
If so please tell us which ones!
If it wasn't for the NRA, people like Rudy G. would not give us pro-gun people a second thought. You can get a reduced NRA rate of $25.00 per year, not much more cost than a box of quality ammo. So don't be cheap and/or worry so much about joining the NRA. Just join and if the NRA is ineffective like so many people here like to tell us, surely at some point you will notice that and then you can make up your own mind about joining or not.
+10 -
quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
What can it hurt?
What can it hurt?
First,
I am an NRA member, and a gun owner. I firmly believe in the 2nd Amendment,
AS IT WAS WRITTEN.
What part of,
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
or
The right to keep and BEAR arms,
is hard to understand???
Second,
THE WHOLE TRUTH,
If an organization claims to SPEAK FOR ME, then I WANT TO KNOW what they are doing / saying. If they make the claim that they champion MY RIGHTS, then I want them to DO IT, NOT compromise MY RIGHTS away.
Or are some so "afraid" of the "WHOLE" truth? Only wanting to hear ONE SIDE of the story. Is the NRA supposed to be placed on a pedestal, given FREE REIGN, where NO ONE is supposed to question their actions? Are they NOT to be held accountable for their actions? Why not?
It is SO much easier to attack any person who has the unmitigated gall to say ANYTHING negative about the NRA. Calling them a backstabber, an anti-gunner, an advocate for the "other side" than it is to admit that your precious organization advocates laws that are UNconstitutional, and NEEDS to have members WORKING TO CHANGE which laws they support. Ya, lets KILL the messenger.
Third,
Am I advocating withdrawing your membership from the NRA......NO.
Work within the system to CHANGE it, if you don't agree with what they are doing. I DO. LET THEM KNOW if you don't agree with their actions. They CAN'T FIX IT, IF THEY DON'T KNOW IT'S BROKEN. (which by the way, neither can the members) VOTE the bad guys OUT. VOTE the good guys IN.
Only problem is "as with politicians" if the bad guys are in there for any length of time, the damage they do, may be irreversible. Example, take a look at past and current gun laws. The NRA has played a large part in getting "MANY" of them passed.
Fourth,
Have they done some good? OF COURSE. They have to win "some" if they didn't, that 3-4 million membership number would fade away quickly. We have had almost 2 terms of a republican president. How many gun laws has the NRA even TRIED to have repealed? How many states have they fought for a "Vermont/Alaska style" CCW law in? How many states have they turned a CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHT (to bear arms) into a REVOCABLE PRIVILEGE (CCW) with the government deciding on who is ALLOWED to bear arms. (once the - fee - is paid, of course)
I for one, will NOT put them on a pedestal. I will NOT turn a blind eye to their actions. I WILL be watching. It's YOUR rights as well, shouldn't you be watching TOO?
*****
Compromise = A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.
What concessions has the other side made? Our side has to agree to incremental infringements of our constitutional rights now, rather than loosing them one all at once??? Where is the "compromise" in this?
*****
What HARM can they do / have they done?
Let us first consider the "Uniform Machinegun Act of 1932" which provided for the registration of machine guns, that was adopted in a few states (Conn., Va., Md., Ark., and Montana and possibly others) which was developed with the support of the NRA, BEFORE the feds ultimately adopted the "National Firearms Act" in 1934.
The reason this stands out, is that MANY people believe that the "National Firearms Act of 1934 was the pivotal law, the first of the UNconstitutional laws. Thereby "starting" an ever widening path, allowing for further infringements. Not so, the NRA was first.
"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate
and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol, revolver ammunition.
The NRA supported legislation to amend the "Federal Firearms Act" in regard to handguns when it was introduced in August, 1963.
In 1965, the NRA continued its support of an expansion of the above legislation to include rifles and shotguns, as well as handguns.
Additionally the NRA supported the regulation of the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
1. Requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;
2. Providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;
3. Requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;
4. Prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;
5. Providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce, and;
6. Increasing penalties for violation.
NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards.
*****
The NRA has been hard at work, over the last few years, turning a RIGHT (guaranteed by our constitution) into a revocable PRIVILEGE. Many pro-gun people commend them for this. Others see it for what it really is.
The second amendment states. "The right of the people to keep and BEAR arms" It doesn't say "to keep and display arms" or "to keep and hide arms" or "to keep and lock up your arms" or "to keep and use arms" it says "to keep and BEAR arms" Look it up in the dictionary. To "bear something" means to CARRY it. Any attempt at "interpreting" the meaning of this, is clearly an anti-gun tactic.
*****
"Project EXILE" IS the NRA's very own project.
NRA'S project (EXILE) supports ALL UNconstitutional gun laws. Handgun Control Inc. supports it TOO. NRA-ILA Executive Director James Jay Baker commented, "I'm glad that the president has finally agreed with the NRA that enforcing federal firearms laws makes sense. We've been pushing for more enforcement of existing laws. Did anyone tell them that ALL of the 20,000 gun laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL??? OF COURSE Handgun Control Inc. supports this NRA project.
*****
Schools
Then NRA Executive Vice President Wayne R. LaPierre, Jr., made these damaging statements during his nationally televised speech at the Denver NRA Members Meeting May 1, 1999. "First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel."
All across the country, school boards and state legislators started doing precisely what LaPierre suggested: shutting down school riflery programs, prohibiting historical firearms displays, forbidding hunter safety training with unloaded guns, and banning gun possession by teachers and other adults with carry licenses. A good example of the long range implications of what LaPierre endorsed back then, is the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech.
Making schools a "gun free zone" where lunatics can murder with impunity, was his response to the Columbine shootings? What happened to advocating responsible carry, by responsible citizens???
*****
LaPierre also blessed gun show background checks by saying: "We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops (charging for NICS
checks) and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers."
The next day President Charlton Heston flatly said on ABC "This Week" that he was "in favor of" gun show background checks. Within weeks, bills for gun show background checks - and "youth gun access" bans - had been submitted in both houses of Congress!
*****
First amendment rights?
Was it the National Rifle Association that had ONE OF IT'S OWN MEMBERS, a pro-gun activist, ARRESTED at its national convention on, April 27, 2003 in Orlando, Florida for handing out PRO-gun freedom literature from an organization known as the Free State Project, Inc. The unlucky NRA member was Timothy Condon, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and Director of Member Services for the rapidly growing Free State Project.
*****
It was NRA PRESIDENT Dr. C.R. (Pink) Gutermuth, who saw "no problem with gun registration," and was head of the Wildlife Management Institute, who became NRA President in 1973.
Part of the problem began during the unlamented regime of former Executive Vice President Warren Cassidy. NRA lobbyists under Cassidy stopped opposing gun control bills and started offering NRA-approved versions of the same legislation. The NRA started WRITING ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION.
Politicians were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called "instant check?" These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting.
Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 as saying: "We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is WHAT WE WANT."
NRA spokesman Bill McIntrye said that the instant background check also in the bill "will be a victory for gun owners.
From NRA Board member Tanya Metaksa.
I think this agreement was a victory for those who see flaws in the current bill. This is a much different Brady bill. This bill sunsets into what we've been supporting for several years [the instant check]. If you look at it in the long range, IT`S OUR BILL in five years.
*****
Recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. The "Parker v. District of Columbia" case. First by trying to have the case consolidated with NRA controlled litigation, which would have drug this case out for YEARS. When that failed, the NRA got behind, and was pushing for the "DC Personal Protection Act" bill, which would, in effect, remove the law that the "Parker v. District of Columbia" case was based upon. Thereby preventing the "Parker v. District of Columbia" case from going before the supreme court.
Why would they try to derail a case that ultimately DID overturned a gun ban, and potentially settle the long disputed "individual right v. the right of the militia" to keep and bear arms? Because they said it was "too good" and might actually make it before the supreme court? A supreme court (considering the make up of it at present) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN?
And when was the NRA fighting for our rights in this way? Oh ya...2007.
*****
Lets look at ANOTHER bill backed by the NRA. H.R. 2640, the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act" Admittedly, as always, there are some "supposedly" pro-gun people that are in favor of this. For me, to see the first red flags thrown up, are to look at who is sponsoring/co-sponsoring this bill. Carolyn McCarthy along with Barbara Boxer. Nevermind the far reaching implications, with the potential of opening a Pandora's box, concerning the mental health issue regarding veterans, as well as anyone else that has seen some kind of mental issue. (children diagnosed with ADD? etc). The UNconstitutional NICS check should not be EXPANDED upon, in the first place.
Oh, and this again IS happening in 2007
*****
Lets not forget the NRA BOARD MEMBER (Joaquin Jackson) who "indicated" that "assault rifles" should only be in the hands of the military and/or law enforcement. But since they ARE legal for civilians to own, then civilians should be limited to 5 round magazines.
quote:I think these assault weapons basically need to be in the hands of the military and they need to be in the hands of the police, but uh, as far as assault weapons to a civilian, if you. if you. it's alright if you got that magazine capacity down to five.
*****
While reading the following, keep in mind that former NRA board member Russ Howard, RESIGNED from the board. His words, "In the past 5 years I've become increasingly concerned over NRA's penchant for giving UNDESERVED grades to politicians who TRAMPLE on the 2nd Amendment."
In California JOAN MILKE FLORES VS JANE HARMAN. 36TH CONGRESSIONAL
Flores is an anti-gun Republican who voted FOR the Los Angeles Assault Rifle Ban. Harman is an anti- gun Democrat who got an "A" rating from the NRA. Why an "A" rating? She was ANTI-GUN!!! Who later said that she supports the assault weapon ban.
CHRISTINE REED VS TERRY FREIDMAN (State Assembly)
Reed was an anti-gun C-rated Republican Handgun Control Inc. member who had been mayor of Santa Monica. Reed who should have been an "F". Freidman was an F-rated incumbent Democrat who authored many anti-gun bills
TRICIA HUNTER: Hunter was state senator whose bid to retain office was based on high-profile attacks on "killer assault rifles". She was rated "A-" by the NRA.
Howard Dean got an A+ from the NRA while governor, he supported the assault weapons ban and Brady bill.
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA). Did not vote when needed, but was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) voted FOR the brady bill (3 times) then was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Congressman Elton Gallegly -- voted FOR the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban and got an A-, and an endorsement. NRA's Terry O'Grady said, 'Gallegly voted against us on Brady and the Crime Bill, but he's always been with us before. We've decided to forgive him, give him an A- and endorse him. SAY WHAT?
In Virginia, 15 legislators were given A ratings after they voted FOR both the one-gun-a-month ban AND the shotgun ban. 41 legislators who voted for either or both bans got A ratings. 7 got exceptional, "above the call of duty" ratings.
In North Carolina, some districts have two senators. In the '94 elections, District 20 was represented by Ted Kaplan and Marvin Ward. Both favored assault weapon bans, handgun registration, and a one-gun-a-month ban. Their challengers were solid pro-gunners Ham Horton and Mark McDaniels (who fought tooth and nail for CCW). Nevertheless, ILA upgraded both anti-gun incumbents to "A" (one was initially a C), endorsed them, and supported them by mailing orange alert cards to NRA members in their district. Kaplan and Ward lost anyway, as incensed local groups like Grass Roots NC broke ranks with ILA and helped elect the pro-gun challengers.
In NC in 1995, Senator Fountain Odom betrayed the 2nd Amendment by gutting the CCW bill in his subcommittee. The bill had come over in more or less tolerable format from the house. Odom fixed it so that only a few police instructors could give the mandatory training. NRA instructors were prohibited. He also worked to move un-permitted CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, prohibit CCW with any alcohol "remaining" in the body, prohibit CCW in financial institutions, mandate that all training be fully repeated for each renewal, and gut statewide preemption. Limited preemption was restored in the full judiciary committee, but Odom betrayed us again, fixing it so CCW could be prohibited in any "park". Later on the floor, to give ILA cover, Odom amended the training section to allow NRA instructors to do the training. In 1996, Tanya Metaksa gave Odom an A, an endorsement, and an orange ALERT postcard mailing telling NRA members, "Senator Odom has demonstrated his commitment to our right to self-defense...Here's how you can help re-elect Fountain Odom -- a dedicated supporter of your Second Amendment rights. Help the campaign...make a contribution...spread the word to family, friends, and fellow gun owners... Sincerely, Tanya K. Metaksa." Odom's still trampling on our rights. Now he's pushing for a CCW liability law.
In Virginia in 1996, extreme "F" rated gun grabber Congressman Jim Moran faced "A" rated, NRA life member John Otey. The American Rifleman carried the following message: "THIS IS YOUR OFFICIAL PRO-GUN BALLOT FOR THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT: VIRGINIA 8, US CONGRESS...NO ENDORSEMENT"
NO endorsement for an A rated NRA life member challenging an F- rated gun grabber???
In Virginia, 3 congressmen who voted many times against gun rights and supported the Lautenberg ban, kept their A+ ratings (part of a large club of turncoat A and A+ politicians). Tom Davis got an A after voicing support for Brady and the assault weapon ban and orchestrating a unanimous vote of support for the one-gun-a-month ban as a Fairfax County Supervisor. ?
In Pennsylvania (1993), then Republican Minority Whip Matt Ryan INTRODUCED an assault rifle ban. In 1994, he kept his A+ rating.
In 2006, the NRA rated Ron Paul (arguably the MOST constitutional representative we have in office) with a "B" because he did not follow along in lock step, when the NRA endorsed (what Ron Paul saw) as an UNconstitutional bill. One that the NRA supported. Instead, they endorsed his UNproved, UNtested, DEMOCRATIC opponent.
*******
John Dingell?
The NRA's Golden Boy? The former NRA Director? The same guy who voted in favor of the 1994 "Assault" weapons ban and then resigned from the Board of Directors the day after the vote? The same Dingell who received the NRA's Harlon B. Carter Award, despite voting FOR an outright gun BAN? The same Dingell that coined the term"jack-booted thugs" when referring to the BATF? THAT Dingell?
NRA Board of Directors member Larry Craig, was one of the co-sponsors of this bill, "Our Lady of Peace Act" Which was introduced by Caroline McCarthy, and supported by Chuck Schumer along with the usual band of anti Second Amendment slime like, Ted Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln and Richard Durbin.
Don't know what it is/was? Look it up.
Can't forget the "help" we got from the NRA. In the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." Not debating, if setting this kind of precedent with legislation, protecting industries, is right. Not debating whether the industry needed this protection. The point here is, that there was a CLEAN bill (800) on the floor, AT THE SAME TIME. Everyone agrees that either bill (397 or 800) would pass through the senate, with no problem. So it depended on the house. There are always more votes than there are co-sponsors of a bill. S. Bill 800 had over 250 signed on as co-sponsors. MORE than enough to pass it, CLEAN. Why did the NRA CHOOSE to back the anti-gun laden bill, when there was a CLEAN alternative? For a true PRO-gun advocate, this was a no brainer.
The NRA awarded Assemblyman Rod Wright its "Defender of Freedom" Award. This is the same Rod Wright who supported UNconstitutional limits on firearms purchases and background checks. This is the same Rod Wright who authored a bill to increase licensing fees from $3 to up to $100. Never mind the absurdity of bilking peaceable citizens of hundreds of dollars for making a constitutionally protected purchase. This champion of "freedom" apparently thinks it's perfectly acceptable to license and charge Americans for exercising their rights. The NRA's "Defender of Freedom" in 2001 voted against gun owners 62 percent of the time
Deborah Danuski, a Democrat from Lisbon, was endorsed by the anti-handgun group, while also receiving an "A-" from the NRA on its report card of candidates. As a matter of fact, in Maine, both the NRA and Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence supported 18 of the same candidates!
In Colorado, where the NRA supported Senator Wayne Allard for office, and even boosted his pro-gun lobby contributions to $37,000 since 1990, Allard stated flatly that he would support federal legislation requiring gun registration for private gun sales at gun shows. Is a legislator who wants to expand gun registration someone who stands up for the rights of gun owners?
From Virginia, where the NRA Political Victory Fund touted the pro-gun "accomplishments" of Delegate Jack Rollison. This is the same Rollison who in a press release had the unmitigated gall to paint Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, who have endorsed his opponent Jeff Frederick, as extremists and "milita-esque" organizations. This is the same Jack Rollison who wants to ban your right to self-defense in any restaurant that happens to sell liquor. And this is the same Jack Rollison who voted correctly on only two out of eight issues important to Virginia gun owners.
The NRA also gave their "Defender of Freedom Award" to one Kevin Mannix, who ran for governor here in 2002. In 1999 Mannix was the architect of the worst piece of gun control legislation in 10 years, in the Oregon House.
Admittedly, some of this information is "historical" in nature. The present administration had nothing to do with it. On the same note, some of this information is CURRENT. (as in 2007) Does this information show a distinct pattern? An agenda? If so, it's one that I'm not happy with at all.
Is this the kind of "representation" that YOU want/expect? There are more anti 2nd amendment bills that the NRA HELPED WRITE, or WROTE themselves. Other ANTI_GUN candidates that they endorsed. But why, if this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will.
Why is it, that some NRA supporters will not accept the truth (even when presented with facts) about how the NRA has been selling our gun rights down the river for a VERY long time.
I believe that everyone would agree, that the NRA is recognized as the 800 lb. Gorilla, in the fight for our gun rights. This is the very same organization that the NRA supporters have been paying money to for YEARS. Paying big bucks to be a "Life Member" Signing up their children/grand-children, almost as soon as they are born. Everyone KNOWS who the NRA is.
They are relying on the NRA to be supportive in the fight for our gun rights. They consider the NRA to be the last bastion of hope. If they find that the NRA is NOT actually on our side, then is there really.any hope?0 -
It sickens me to see gun owners who are not NRA members. Do you really feel we'd have ANY gun rights if not for the NRA??? Imagine the country if Handgun Control had no opposition.
Some of you don't join because they ask for too many donations? SO DON'T DONATE! No-ones forcing you to. (Think of it as SPAM. Delete it)
Join today. We need you. America needs you.
PaulF - NRA LIFE MEMBER0 -
Each of us has the right to our opinions and mine is "yes" you should support the NRA. They do more for gun rights today than anyone!
They do need to pick up a lot more than the 4 million members that they have to be a serious thorn in the side of Congress. There are 80 million gun owners in this country, be one who supports the NRA, and the second amendment!
Support GOA also, they are less than 600,000 members but their position is more unyielding. I back them both.0 -
quote:Originally posted by mcaso
They talk good. They compromise good. They tell us they were victorious good. And that's about all folks.
Short, sweet and direct to the truth. X-ring.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by gunnut505
Fortunately, opinions are like sphincters; everybody's is a little different.
If you can't afford a DIME A DAY to do something (ANYTHING) to help keep guns in the hands of their owners; do as all the NRA haters say they are doing-namely NOTHING.
If you don't trust the NRA to do anything for your guns, then feel free to denigrate them, dredge up pre-history to make your point, and catcall those that try to point out that all that happened EIGHTY years ago.
BTW, I like the magazines too!
Do some research sir. Your ass is showing.[:I]0 -
quote:Originally posted by collector14
I've been a Life Member since they stood up for peoples rights down in New Orleans after Katrina.
I will even give them credit for that issue. It is the other stuff that defines the organization, e.g. the rule, not the exception.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Highball
A common misconception;
CCW's are a GOOD thing.
Actually..what you have done is admitted to the world, your masters,and YOURSELF..that people are not entitled to exercise their Rights as free citizens without PERMISSION from the government.
You have destroyed the Second Amendment..and every time you brag about how CCW people commit few crimes..add to the myth that ONLY people 'passed' by government are 'fit' to own guns.
Actually, many tens of thousands..I bet MANY more people carry every day without 'permission'..and never misuse a weapon.
You have aided and abetted the enemies of freedom...
The evidence about the NRA has been posted several times on this forum..it generally gets poofed.
Bluntly, the NRA's position is sorta like the bully down the street coming to your house to rape your ten year old daughter.
Daddy (NRA) strikes a deal."Take my wife, instead".then congratulates himself on his `victory'.
Then the bully comes back next week..and daddy gives him his 16 year old daughter.then congratulates himself yet AGAIN for protecting his ten year old.
There is no shame in being defeated when you have stood on the high ground throughout.
Defending the Second Amendment IS the high ground..and just as there is no getting back the virginity of that 10 or 15 year-old..there is no use pretending that those striking deals with the Beast over a basic Right are still defending the high ground.
...
Amen brother Highball. Well said and a good analogy.0 -
quote:Originally posted by PaulF
It sickens me to see gun owners who are not NRA members. Do you really feel we'd have ANY gun rights if not for the NRA??? Imagine the country if Handgun Control had no opposition.
PaulF - NRA LIFE MEMBER
Yeah, your right. We the people NEVER had RIGHTS BEFORE the NRA told us what they were right? I seem to remember the FOUNDERS pen-ing those unalienable RIGHTS which were GRANTED by GOD, NOT the NRA, the government, ect.
As I have stated before, it IS the fault of every NRA member that cares not about what their organization is doing, that we are LOSING rights. Yep, the fault of members who refuse to research their OWN organization that sells away OUR God given rights.
How the founders would spit in the face of EVERY BLIND NRA supporter.
There ARE better organization that defend our god given rights, just too many people are comfortable with the NRA lies. Maybe some of those members also join the Brady campain too.0 -
Why don't you gather up some of those founders to help us out?
Oh yeah, they're all dead.
Gotta work with the tools you have, brother. The NRA is all that stands between owning guns.... and USED to own guns.
Join us. We need you.0 -
No, Paulf;
Free men will never again 'join with' people like you.
People like you have brought us 20 odd thousand gun laws already.
You just keep right on degrading the freedoms the Founders gave their blood for..and the Founders also.
"Contempt" is a term I used to reserve for democrats. Today, I can state that most gun owners today are richly deserving of that term, also....
Actually..you are partially right about the "NRA standing between owning guns and not"...
Because the NRA is perfectly aware that beyond a certain point, there would be open rebellion in this country..and they make damn sure that the gun laws go slow enough to ensure that there will be no rebellion. Just easing the compliant, stupid gun-owners a little at a time into a total gun ban..10,15, 20 years down the road...0 -
Do what you think is best. It doesn't matter what we think. I will re-up next year, I just wish the NRA wouldn't waste so much money asking me to extend my membership months before it expires. 0 -
. 0 -
honestly am shocked that anybody would post a pro NRA argument after pickenup's post. Apparently they just skipped to the end of the thread to post their completely un-intelligible opinion. Disgusting! Pathetic, UN-AMERICAN!!
quote:They do need to pick up a lot more than the 4 million members that they have to be a serious thorn in the side of Congress. There are 80 million gun owners in this country, be one who supports the NRA, and the second amendment!
If they did the job they claim to, they would have 76 million members. Why not all 80 million? Because the 4 million they have now would resign and join the Brady camp. They should be glad that there are just enough idiots out there to pay their outrageous salaries. It is nothing but a business. To accomplish what they "say", would mean none of them would have a job anymore. Think about it.
GOA, RMGO, JPFO, and many other morelocal groups DESERVE your money. The NRA, absolutely does NOT! They are wolve's among the sheep, which serves their sheep right, but it hurts the other 76 million of us in the process! Backstabbing traitors they are, and no different than the politicians and buraucracies they "claim" to fight-NO DIFFERENT!!!0 -
Pickenup, OUTSTANDING POST !, JUST OUTSTANDING ! I am saving it for later use. THANK YOU!!!!! 0 -
quote:Originally posted by PaulF
Why don't you gather up some of those founders to help us out?
Oh yeah, they're all dead.
Gotta work with the tools you have, brother. The NRA is all that stands between owning guns.... and USED to own guns.
Join us. We need you.
#1 . Don't call me "brother". You and I are not related in blood or MORALS.
#2 . The NRA does NOT need me, they want my hard earned MONEY, to use as they see fit, for THEIR purpose. That they will NOT receive.
#3 . All the tools we NEED are in the CONSTITUTION AND THE BOR'S. You might want to read it closely sometime, you COULD learn something. The ONLY two things other than previously mentioned REQUIRED are:
Ambition to get off the couch.
Stones big enough to stand for something and willing to take action.
A PERSON who has neither lets someone else protect THEIR OWN FREEDOM.0 -
You, sir, are an idiot. 0 -
If I drop out of the NRA, do you think they'll change their ways? 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
65 comments