PDA

View Full Version : Reasons I don't like the NRA............


Squid
05-18-2012, 3:27 PM
1)they accept ads from scams like LifeLock, and push their own lame life ins.

2)they have Ted Nugent as a spokesperson (not gonna call someone who is pro-war but gets out of draft by extreme soiling of their underwear a 'spokesman')

3)they suck up to US govt when it comes to Drug War, which could easily be used to Grab Guns.

4)they generally promote the "Two Party System" hoax.

5)they wont do a 'pure' 2A legal challenge.

jaymz
05-18-2012, 3:47 PM
Don't feed the troll.

Barbarossa
05-18-2012, 3:53 PM
I'm a bit tired of the anti-Obama vehemence.

We are members NRA... Stop spending 10 pages of your magazine telling us how bad Obama is...

Tell people who are outside of your core group, and spend more times on guns!

GOEX FFF
05-18-2012, 3:56 PM
Here we go again.... :rolleyes:

IBTL

DVSmith
05-18-2012, 3:58 PM
Don't feed the troll.

Just out of curiosity, if you were to feed a troll, what would you feed it? Are they meat eaters? Vegetarians? If you feed them chocolate is it bad for them like dogs?

SilverTauron
05-18-2012, 4:14 PM
The OP has the right to their opinion of the NRA.

That said I must nevertheless remind him that without the NRA we would be applying for permits to own a baseball bat.This is not personal opinion, so much as historical fact.

mdimeo
05-18-2012, 5:07 PM
Just out of curiosity, if you were to feed a troll, what would you feed it? Are they meat eaters? Vegetarians? If you feed them chocolate is it bad for them like dogs?

billy goats.

eighteenninetytwo
05-18-2012, 5:14 PM
I agree, all empirical, anecdotal and statistical data points to billy goats of the gruff variety as being a primary food group for trolls. That being said, and given the nature of this thread I will point out that the NRA. Was at the forefront of the Gruff 'right to carry' discussions which took place at a time late enough to be of no use to the first two goats, but early enough for the third goat, of said gruff variety to protect himself.

DVSmith
05-18-2012, 5:17 PM
billy goats.

Good to know.

I agree, all empirical, anecdotal and statistical data points to billy goats of the gruff variety as being a primary food group for trolls. That being said, and given the nature of this thread I will point out that the NRA. Was at the forefront of the Gruff 'right to carry' discussions which took place at a time late enough to be of no use to the first two goats, but early enough for the third goat, of said gruff variety to protect himself.

Good on the NRA for taking the lead in the Bill E. Goat LTC battle! It is a thankless job but someone had to do it.

Atlantaboi2012
05-18-2012, 5:22 PM
If it was me saying this I would have 3 pages of hate threads in 24 hours

DVSmith
05-18-2012, 5:25 PM
If it was me saying this I would have 3 pages of hate threads in 24 hours

Well maybe after you have worked your way to over 380 posts like the OP has, you will have earned a bit more respect! :43:

Kerplow
05-18-2012, 5:34 PM
I like how because people don't like what he has to say they accuse him of being a troll and then troll him by jacking the thread and talking about troll food.

Or is he a verified troll?

DVSmith
05-18-2012, 5:38 PM
I like how because people don't like what he has to say so they accuse him of being a troll and then troll him by jacking the thread and talking about troll food.

Or is he a verified troll?

You are right. I am sorry. I should have taken the 3,422nd "why the NRA sucks" post on CG more seriously. My apologies OP.

gunsmith
05-18-2012, 5:53 PM
whats not to like about the national reconstruction act?

gunsmith
05-18-2012, 5:55 PM
You are right. I am sorry. I should have taken the 3,422nd "why the NRA sucks" post on CG more seriously. My apologies OP.
& I apologize for his apology

winxp_man
05-18-2012, 5:56 PM
:popcorn: :43:

SkyMag68
05-18-2012, 6:08 PM
:beatdeadhorse5:

Paladin
05-18-2012, 6:11 PM
Just out of curiosity, if you were to feed a troll, what would you feed it? Are they meat eaters? Vegetarians? If you feed them chocolate is it bad for them like dogs?
Attention, in the form of views of their threads or replies to their posts ... Oh, snap! :mad:

;)

Re. the NRA: wasn't there a thread just a day or two ago dealing w/this where BillW and Oaklander posted? Not sure if it was here or in OT or LTC Discussion forum.

If nothing else, there's always my quote of Gene in my sig line....

ETA: Not saying this necessarily applies to the OP, but I LOVE (sarcasm) how folks will say, "The NRA is all messed up because ..." (and then they pontificate on how the NRA should be run), and then I ask them: Have you ever lead a 4 member organization? 40 member? 400? 4,000? 40,000? 400,000? 4,000,000? Was it a non-profit? Where it focused w/a politically controversial matter? that the MSM has historically be hostile towards? where most of your clout comes from volunteer activists? where, despite all of the above, your org is considered one of the most powerful in DC and state houses around the nation? and yet has a remarkably good reputation w/average Americans? And have you led and been successful at all of the above for DECADES???

Too many people don't realize how "beyond their pay grade" is the job they think they can do better than Wayne.

nicki
05-18-2012, 6:35 PM
I am sure that the NRA has done and continues to do things that some of us see as counter productive for gun rights.

Now, we can get on our keyboards and bash the NRA or what we can do is take our concerns about the NRA and get involved to make the NRA a better organization.

Yes we will get resistance from many and that is to be expected because most people don't like change, it is human nature.

But until we get a more effective organization, let's continue working with the NRA.

Nicki

bwiese
05-18-2012, 6:40 PM
1)they accept ads from scams like LifeLock, and push their own lame life ins.

That vendor is a paying advertiser that advertises in many publications like TIME, Newsweek, Road&Track, major network TV ads, etc.

Whether the service is of maximum benefit to the buyer is up to the buyer. Poor people buy expensive cars on high-interest credit from GM, Ford and Toyota and yet you're not criticizing them. The business of an org funded by a money rasing business is in part getting revenue. That revenue pays for a lot.


2)they have Ted Nugent as a spokesperson (not gonna call someone who is pro-war but gets out of draft by extreme soiling of their underwear a 'spokesman')
Ted Nugent has raised a ton of money and interest for NRA from existing member base.

The old sales adage is that you always get your max. funds, purchases, etc. from your existing customer base.

To not rally your existing base at the cost of a few outliers getting butthurt fails Sales 101 - esp at a time when one of the most (if not THE most) critical gunrights-affecting elections in US history is upon us.

You must not have much experience selling product...


3)they suck up to US govt when it comes to Drug War, which could easily be used to Grab Guns.Get real, sonny. Can you show me a public opinion by the organization that supports the WoSD? You're putting words in their mouth.

Sure, they may have made statements in relation to drug crimes and gang violence which does require armed defense.

Even though I am against the drug war, I realize a meth head still may want to come into my house.


4)they generally promote the "Two Party System" hoax.
Ah, libertarian FAIL. Call me when somebody can squeak in edgewise. The last time somebody tried, he was a billionaire (Ross Perot) and failed miserably in terms of gunrights [i.e., got Clinton elected.]

The NRA is about winning elections because all power/relevance comes from winning.



5)they wont do a 'pure' 2A legal challenge.

Absolute pure 2A challenges are not winning and must be done in context.
We leave the pure 2A challenges to Charles Nichols.

While Gene and I and others have argued about certain matters in Heller and Heller II, the fact is NRA does do a ton of legal work. (Their supporting work in Heller acquiring supplement support briefs from DAs and AGs around the US was hugely important.)

southernsnowshoe
05-18-2012, 6:40 PM
1)they accept ads from scams like LifeLock, and push their own lame life ins.

2)they have Ted Nugent as a spokesperson (not gonna call someone who is pro-war but gets out of draft by extreme soiling of their underwear a 'spokesman')

3)they suck up to US govt when it comes to Drug War, which could easily be used to Grab Guns.

4)they generally promote the "Two Party System" hoax.

5)they wont do a 'pure' 2A legal challenge.

What do you think is the percentage of people posting on here that bill the time they spend on this forum to Brady?

Wrangler John
05-18-2012, 7:13 PM
Squid, great bait for surf casting when properly cut, or occasional off-shore trolling when the anchovies won't hold a hook. Just dangle it in the water and see what bites.

SWalt
05-18-2012, 7:25 PM
My reason is.......

I HAVEN'T WON A GUN GIVEAWAY YET!!

Talk about frustrating!

gunsmith
05-18-2012, 7:27 PM
.40 S&W is far superior to both 9mm and 45acp

SWalt
05-18-2012, 7:32 PM
.40 S&W is far superior to both 9mm and 45acp

I wanted a Kahr in 40 S&W, but apparently CA doesn't allow it.

tankarian
05-18-2012, 7:32 PM
1)they accept ads from scams like LifeLock, and push their own lame life ins.

2)they have Ted Nugent as a spokesperson (not gonna call someone who is pro-war but gets out of draft by extreme soiling of their underwear a 'spokesman')

3)they suck up to US govt when it comes to Drug War, which could easily be used to Grab Guns.

4)they generally promote the "Two Party System" hoax.

5)they wont do a 'pure' 2A legal challenge.

That's allright, the feeling is mutual. We don't like you either.

Squid
05-18-2012, 7:39 PM
"The NRA is about winning elections because all power/relevance comes from winning."

My theory is 'both' sides of the Party(lower divisions) will adjust their positions AFTER the election to try to recapture straying votes.

Thus, the ONLY rational way to vote is for 'extremes', even thought that 'takes away votes' from the main stream side you support.

Votes for 'two' major parties don't matter.

But what they will look at is how many votes Green Party or Constitution Party get, and adjust according when in office to position for next election.

Example: If a Dem wins with typical 51%, against a Repub with 40% and Constitution Party at 9% and Greens at 1% they will think about moving to the "Right" on certain Constitution Party issues.

Likewise, if Dem wins with 51% and it is Repub at 40%, and GREENS at 9% they will address Green Party issues when in office.


It isn't like any politicians actually care about any issues, they just play the system. Like picking playoff winners.

RMorenoUSA
05-18-2012, 7:46 PM
Proud NRA Life Member here. Dont worry i'll donate a little extra on your behalf. I'll stand and be counted.

ja308
05-18-2012, 7:52 PM
Squid ,time to pack up your tent and head back to HCI and the VPC and a host of other anti rights groups who have put you up to this .
Bwiese answered your statments and made you look Stupid .
In reality you make yourself out the fool and other's exposed you.
Back to the attic in Moms garage .

bwiese
05-18-2012, 9:09 PM
(quote=bwiese)
"The NRA is about winning elections because all power/relevance comes from winning."

My theory is 'both' sides of the Party(lower divisions) will adjust their positions AFTER the election to try to recapture straying votes.

Thus, the ONLY rational way to vote is for 'extremes', even thought that 'takes away votes' from the main stream side you support.

Votes for 'two' major parties don't matter.

But what they will look at is how many votes Green Party or Constitution Party get, and adjust according when in office to position for next election.

Example: If a Dem wins with typical 51%, against a Repub with 40% and Constitution Party at 9% and Greens at 1% they will think about moving to the "Right" on certain Constitution Party issues.

Likewise, if Dem wins with 51% and it is Repub at 40%, and GREENS at 9% they will address Green Party issues when in office.

It isn't like any politicians actually care about any issues, they just play the system. Like picking playoff winners.


So you're *****ing about party politics instead of gunrights and the NRA.

The NRA is gonna adapt itself to whatever situation it finds itself to promote its issue.

It sounds like you have other issues than gun rights.

Sorry, I'm a single-issue person.

dfletcher
05-18-2012, 9:59 PM
If all the people who hated the NRA got together and formed their own progun group, well that would be quite an accomplishment, yes? And so much more interesting and positive.

ElvenSoul
05-18-2012, 10:04 PM
With 4 years of record gun sales and all the new gun owners I just wish they would flex their muscles a little more. It ain't the early 90's and we need to sniffle and hide anymore.

jdoane9724
05-18-2012, 10:21 PM
With 4 years of record gun sales and all the new gun owners I just wish they would flex their muscles a little more. It ain't the early 90's and we need to sniffle and hide anymore.

Did you mean "....and we DON'T need to...." in the above sentence?

Just askin'.....

CBlacksheep
05-18-2012, 10:37 PM
Ah, libertarian FAIL. Call me when somebody can squeak in edgewise. The last time somebody tried, he was a billionaire (Ross Perot) and failed miserably in terms of gunrights [i.e., got Clinton elected.]

The NRA is about winning elections because all power/relevance comes from winning.

Typical party line nonsense. I like how you try to use gun rights and power in the same stream of thought, though. For the record, single-issue voting is exactly how this country ended up with an entrenched political system. One that plays on the sentimental aspects of what Americans (especially the ignorant ones) 'truly value'.

How embarrassing.

rogervzv
05-19-2012, 12:31 AM
.40 S&W is far superior to both 9mm and 45acp

Interesting. I am a fan of 45acp myself. When my Ruger SR40c is done with DROS I'll see how I feel about 40 S&W.

Without the NRA I would not have the right to possess any of my guns in either caliber. So I am a member. And I contribute an extra buck to the NRA every time I buy something at Turner's, which is often. :chris:

GOEX FFF
05-19-2012, 12:48 AM
Absolute pure 2A challenges are not winning and must be done in context.
We leave the pure 2A challenges to Charles Nichols.



Oh, that's rich! :rofl2:

CapS
05-19-2012, 1:10 AM
It sounds like you have other issues than gun rights.

Sorry, I'm a single-issue person.

:rockon:

Reason #38 I <3 bwiese.

:oji:


Cap

kimber_ss
05-19-2012, 1:11 AM
NRA, has pushed for so much pro-RKBA legislation over the years, it's hard to keep track of it all. Without the NRA we are doomed to disarmed surfdom/socialism.

It's true that the NRA vigorously pursues donations from it's members, but that is an inevitable by product of it's proactive approach to take politicians to task and get them on board with the 2nd amendment.

Lone.45
05-19-2012, 5:36 AM
Cali alone seems to be like England... they can't own guns over there and they rob banks with bats, and fire extinguishers.... not 100% sure where the NRA is on the fight with gun rights in cali, but i gotta feeling without them we'd be shooting airsoft guns at the range.

geeknow
05-19-2012, 5:42 AM
The only thing that I dont like is the onslaught of junk mail that comes with membership.

Thats it.

Everything else they've done has benefited me.

In all, the 'likes' far outweigh the 'dont likes'.

DarkSoul
05-19-2012, 5:59 AM
I myself do not agree with several things that the NRA does, most of the "disagreements" are petty and realistically, pretty minor, such as, I also think Ted Nugent is a douchebag, BUT, the NRA ultimately is there to fight for our 2a rights, and they are hard at work at it every day, so that alone gets my support and contributions.

fiddletown
05-19-2012, 8:32 AM
"The NRA is about winning elections because all power/relevance comes from winning."

My theory is 'both' sides of the Party(lower divisions) will adjust their positions AFTER the election to try to recapture straying votes.

Thus, the ONLY rational way to vote is for 'extremes', even thought that 'takes away votes' from the main stream side you support.....Have you got any actual evidence to support your theory? It's only rational if you can prove it with evidence.

ja308
05-19-2012, 9:21 AM
Have you got any actual evidence to support your theory? It's only rational if you can prove it with evidence.

evidence is of no value to a 3rd party chump or anti rights voter.
Single issue voter here !
Excelent comments Bwiese ^5

gunsmith
05-19-2012, 9:31 AM
evidence is of no value to a 3rd party chump or anti rights voter.
Single issue voter here !
Excelent comments Bwiese ^5


I apologize that you had to state the obvious

SWalt
05-19-2012, 10:27 AM
Without the NRA, RKBA rights and gun ownership would have fallen by the way side a long time ago.

You have to understand how the game is played. The game is what it is and changes with the culture and political climate. When the NRA flexes its muscles during elections, politicians do know the NRA DOES effect elections today. In the past NRA members were only seen as whiny rednecks out of touch with popular culture complaining about not being able to kill people and guns were something out of the old barbaric west. That was the picture painted in popular culture. The NRA worked/is working very hard to change that image and politicians today know the NRA can and does change elections.

And 1 thing most people don't seem to understand, Heller changed everything! RKBA is now a RIGHT! Before it was only a concept of the founders with little case law supporting it. With Heller, and other cases, RKBA rights now can be expanded given proper cases are brought forth. Its how law functions and law IS the only thing you can stand on when you defend your rights. Before that ruling, it was completely up to the states and the Feds to regulate firearms any way they saw fit without worrying about them being over turned. You can say that SAF and others won those cases, but without the NRA keeping the touch lit, the idea of RKBA would have been a relic of the past (England is a perfect example). NRA is a huge resource in this fight, akin to a battleship bristling with guns of every imaginable size showing up off the coast. You can't ignore it and it would be prudent to send someone out to find out its intentions and talk terms before they open fire on you. Politicians know this. Why do you think the Schumers of the world try to vilify the NRA every chance they get? Because the NRA is a force to be reckoned with.

SilverTauron
05-19-2012, 11:05 AM
Interesting that SWalt mentioned England. One of the videos on (Formerly Great) Britain's disarmament scheme ended with a plea by a former English gun owner .His words were for us in America to back the NRA no matter what our personal disagreements are ,because in England gun owners were not a united political force as the NRA is here. That was the case due to hunters not agreeing with target shooters, who in turn didn't agree with the sport shooters,resulting in everyone having a different take on what to do about the advancing onslaught of Disarmament Lobby policy.

As the English shooters squabbled and bickered, the Ministers marched on with disarming the nation by force. We see the legacy of that infighting today, with Britain becoming more Orwellian by the annum.

We all here won't agree on everything. But I implore those who dislike the NRA to still become a member. At the end of the day, the only force which checks our politicians are votes and numbers. With no numbers, there is no voting power. Without voting power, we the armed have no say in our government. Without a say in our government, in "two weeks" the Feds will be asking us to sign on the bottom of Form 66, Firearm Surrender Voucher.

Root66
05-19-2012, 7:01 PM
The only thing that I dont like is the onslaught of junk mail that comes with membership.

And the phone calls. NRA has now solicited 800 SERVICE (one of the most prolific phone spammers) to ask for more money.

Mateba
05-19-2012, 7:30 PM
The NRA has gone nuts in the last few years, that's my opinion...I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

Wayne LaPierre may be a true believer and whatnot but he's also a slimeball hypocrite who makes millions of dollars as a spokeshole for the NRA, he typifies why people are turned off by the NRA and pro gun people in general. I hate the fact that he represents the NRA.

The GOA is even more insane. I'm sorry people, but gun ownership isn't an absolute right and sometimes you'll have to consent to that fact. I just love hearing NRA execs muttering about Brady buying off congressman and conspiring to take our guns while the NRA buys off just as many congressmen with their money. It's not a great way to have a republic, I don't care what side you're on.

Squid
05-19-2012, 7:37 PM
"Is this what they fought Hitler for???"

It is pretty much illegal to even mention any problems caused by the flood of "immigrants" and when you stumble across any "Guns for sale" site in UK all the guns have been 'disabled' or whatever they call it.

UK seems like CA, only worse.

Mateba
05-19-2012, 7:40 PM
It's worse, but once you get your shotgun certificate there is no waiting period haha.

rysmithjr
05-20-2012, 1:27 PM
NRA comes across as a GOP electioneering arm, and not just focused on gun rights. Until they fix the message and find a way to be more inclusive of non-Republicans who also support the 2nd Amendment, they will get no more money of mine.

bwiese
05-20-2012, 1:40 PM
NRA comes across as a GOP electioneering arm, and not just focused on gun rights. Until they fix the message and find a way to be more inclusive of non-Republicans who also support the 2nd Amendment, they will get no more money of mine.

Fail

NRA has vigorously supported Dems when necessary, useful and they are deserving.

Old school Democrat Sen. John Dingell, (D-MI) in fact sat on the NRA board for a long time. He was the one that in fact coined the phrase "jackbooted thugs" in reference to BATF.

But some Dems vote progun on gun bills but then voit anti-gun on equally impoertant gun matters like Supreme Ct. nominations. That's why we held Harry Reid's seat to the fire: his likely Dem replacement would be pretty anti, he is useful on pure gun matters, but he voted for bad Supreme Ct justices and he needed to feel the pain.

bwiese
05-20-2012, 1:45 PM
The NRA has gone nuts in the last few years, that's my opinion...I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

I have a name for the group you seek to join.

Losers.

Politics is war continued by other means. There's no half-measures.


Wayne LaPierre may be a true believer and whatnot but he's also a slimeball hypocrite who makes millions of dollars as a spokeshole for the NRA,

We need a bright capable leader that can talk to Congress and whip them into shape to stop further RKBA depredations.

So what gun laws do you like? Fed or CA AWB? The Roster? 922r affecting which replacement parts you can put in your rifle?

You must be a SASS member.


I'm sorry people, but gun ownership isn't an absolute right and sometimes you'll have to consent to that fact.

Bullcrap - it's near-absolute and courts are shaping it. If you're not a felon or mentally disturbed, you have a right to own a variety of operational guns and ammo. We still have to clarify 'bear', but I note that it would be profoundly odd from a judicial standpoint to have 'bear' at reduced force or significance over the already-affirmed 'keep'.

You must have toally isolated yourself from observing recent 2A litigation

hawk1
05-20-2012, 2:05 PM
The NRA has gone nuts in the last few years, that's my opinion...I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

Wayne LaPierre may be a true believer and whatnot but he's also a slimeball hypocrite who makes millions of dollars as a spokeshole for the NRA, he typifies why people are turned off by the NRA and pro gun people in general. I hate the fact that he represents the NRA.

The GOA is even more insane. I'm sorry people, but gun ownership isn't an absolute right and sometimes you'll have to consent to that fact. I just love hearing NRA execs muttering about Brady buying off congressman and conspiring to take our guns while the NRA buys off just as many congressmen with their money. It's not a great way to have a republic, I don't care what side you're on.

Maybe with this kind of opinion you'd be better off at a different forum.
Or maybe that's the reason you are here...

jonzer77
05-20-2012, 3:04 PM
The NRA has gone nuts in the last few years, that's my opinion...I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

Wayne LaPierre may be a true believer and whatnot but he's also a slimeball hypocrite who makes millions of dollars as a spokeshole for the NRA, he typifies why people are turned off by the NRA and pro gun people in general. I hate the fact that he represents the NRA.

The GOA is even more insane. I'm sorry people, but gun ownership isn't an absolute right and sometimes you'll have to consent to that fact. I just love hearing NRA execs muttering about Brady buying off congressman and conspiring to take our guns while the NRA buys off just as many congressmen with their money. It's not a great way to have a republic, I don't care what side you're on.

:ban:

IVC
05-20-2012, 3:45 PM
I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

We need a meaningful force to defend against the attacks on the gun ownership, not a voice to justify it. Antis are trying to pass actual laws that would affect us in profound ways. Image is important, but it's a distant second goal.

It's not a great way to have a republic, I don't care what side you're on.

There is the game and there are the rules. The game is played according to the current rules. Give your opponent a break and you lose. When you lose, claiming a high moral ground makes you a sore loser. I'd rather be a winner.

And yes, the rules are ugly and need changing, but you can't do it in the middle of the battle.

451040
05-20-2012, 3:55 PM
I don't care what side you're on.


I do care what side you're on. It ain't ours. :rolleyes:

mrdd
05-20-2012, 4:57 PM
Politics is war continued by other means. There's no half-measures.

This is so true. Rather than killing people on the other side, we are killing their ideals. The courtroom is the main battleground.

rysmithjr
05-20-2012, 5:06 PM
Fail

NRA has vigorously supported Dems when necessary, useful and they are deserving.

Old school Democrat Sen. John Dingell, (D-MI) in fact sat on the NRA board for a long time. He was the one that in fact coined the phrase "jackbooted thugs" in reference to BATF.

But some Dems vote progun on gun bills but then voit anti-gun on equally impoertant gun matters like Supreme Ct. nominations. That's why we held Harry Reid's seat to the fire: his likely Dem replacement would be pretty anti, he is useful on pure gun matters, but he voted for bad Supreme Ct justices and he needed to feel the pain.



The fail portion is the NRA's inability to get that message across then. Notice I did not say they didn't support Democrats, what I said was exactly what opinions have been formed by me, before/during/after my memberships times. Appearances matter, and in politics, maybe even more so.

BTW, I do know Congressman Dingell, I lived in his district for several years before I moved to CA. I do have respect for his work.

bwiese
05-20-2012, 7:00 PM
The fail portion is the NRA's inability to get that message across then. Notice I did not say they didn't support Democrats, what I said was exactly what opinions have been formed by me, before/during/after my memberships times. Appearances matter, and in politics, maybe even more so.

BTW, I do know Congressman Dingell, I lived in his district for several years before I moved to CA. I do have respect for his work.

So to placate the outsiders you're willing to assail the insiders, for trivial gains?

I'm really not willing to parley with 'moderates' on gun issues or let situational ethics modify civil rights.

Last time the 'moderates' got involved to protect their precious cowboy guns with a 'moderate' (turncoat NRA staffer Feldman) we got the handgun Roster.

Last time the 'moderates' spoke on TV about not needing black rifles - to protect their Garands and M1A - we got the 1st AW ban that was foundational for the 2nd AWB (SB23) in CA. [There is a small chance we would not have had SB23 if we had not had Roberti-Roos baseline.]

In fact there's some scuttlebutt that one of the Thirty Caliber Idiots (i.e., wood guns vs black rifles guys that sold us out) that appeared on TV interviews may have been popped for an SB23 flash hider violation.

rysmithjr
05-20-2012, 7:19 PM
Bill, that's just more of the same hubris that validates my opinion on the NRA and serves to answer the question to anyone who asks why more people are not supportive of todays NRA.

taperxz
05-20-2012, 7:31 PM
Any gun owner in this country that feels the NRA doesn't help them, is a gun owner lined up to sell their gun at a buy back program because they feel they don't need a gun. Anyone not lined up at a buy back program that owns a gun and feels a need for it, and doesn't appreciate the NRA, is a freaking Idiot.

sig line material!!

Josh3239
05-20-2012, 7:33 PM
Bottom line you are looking for reasons to hate the NRA and you are grasping at straws. Stay on point, defending the 2A. A spokesman's actions from over 40 years ago, really? If you can't get past a 40 year old event from a spokesperson's life to support the largest and oldest 2A defending group you might as well just turn in your guns to the local PD, because that is where they'd likely be if it weren't for the NRA.

1)they accept ads from scams like LifeLock, and push their own lame life ins.

Waaaa, boo frickity hoo. How does that affect their fight for the 2A? It doesn't.

2)they have Ted Nugent as a spokesperson (not gonna call someone who is pro-war but gets out of draft by extreme soiling of their underwear a 'spokesman')

Ted Nugent is an avid outdoorsmen, lifelong hunter and a huge 2A rights guy. Did you know he is a successful musician too? NRA is a 2A organization, not a veterans group. What he did 40 years ago matters how?

3)they suck up to US govt when it comes to Drug War, which could easily be used to Grab Guns.

Drugs is an entirely separate issue. And the NRA gains a large amount of support from law enforcement as well as the people living on the border. And the point of lobbying is getting on policiticans good side, not bad side.

4)they generally promote the "Two Party System" hoax.

NRA voted Ron Paul A+. Regardless, their priority is defending the 2A not changing "the system". Supporting a pro-gun candidate with the best chance to win is just plain smart. They prefer incumbents because they tend to win.

5)they wont do a 'pure' 2A legal challenge.

Because the decision would be huge and they need to be sure to have the right justices on the bench. The Heller decision was already reached. NRA filed a lawsuit against Chicago and San Francisco's handgun ban citing the Heller decision. They also sued Ray Nagin for firearms confiscations which directly led to the Bush signing the bill banning confiscations.

Squid
05-25-2012, 1:10 PM
How can labor Unions be pro-illegal alien????

When a "Labor Union" supports the politicians who are greasing the importation of illegal foreign strike breakers something is very, very wrong with the Union.

bwiese
05-25-2012, 2:24 PM
How can labor Unions be pro-illegal alien????

When a "Labor Union" supports the politicians who are greasing the importation of illegal foreign strike breakers something is very, very wrong with the Union.


1. WTF does this have to do with NRA?

2. Some labor unions have as many foreign-born vs native born (SEIU)
and even many of the native born have families in the 'old country', so
that reduces their anti-immigrant bias.

nicki
05-26-2012, 11:20 AM
The NRA has gone nuts in the last few years, that's my opinion...I'm a life member but I really wish there was a more moderate, more down to earth voice for gun owners.

Wayne LaPierre may be a true believer and whatnot but he's also a slimeball hypocrite who makes millions of dollars as a spokeshole for the NRA, he typifies why people are turned off by the NRA and pro gun people in general. I hate the fact that he represents the NRA.

The GOA is even more insane. I'm sorry people, but gun ownership isn't an absolute right and sometimes you'll have to consent to that fact. I just love hearing NRA execs muttering about Brady buying off congressman and conspiring to take our guns while the NRA buys off just as many congressmen with their money. It's not a great way to have a republic, I don't care what side you're on.

I appreciate that you became a lifetime member, but lets take a look att your concerns.

Moderation and civil discussion is something you can do with reasonable people. The other side doesn't have honest disagreements with us, what they do is lie and create facts to promote an agenda to strip us of our rights.

For example, the claim that 10 children per day die from guns is done to give the impression that many young innocent children are getting killed. The truth is 9 of those children are inner city gang members who get killed by their peers.

I don't consider a harded 19 year old gang member an innocent child. In all honesty IMHO I wish the NRA could be bolder, but that is me.

Perhaps another gun organization will come along with a leader that can be
bold because they have a certain amount of media Teflon.

Wayne LaPierre could make alot more money elsewhere, we are lucky to have him as an articulate spokesperson.

Gun Owners of America means well, but their effectiveness is limited.

The core individual right of the second amendment is self defense, so exactly how burdened should our right to protect ourselves be?

Then there is the matter which hasn't yet made it to the courts regarding our collective duties under the second amendment, you know that part about militias. One purpose of the militia was to secure our system of ordered liberty from a rogue government should our government be in rebellion against the people.

To me if we don't have the ability to remove a rogue government by force, then our system of self government is gone.

pTa
05-26-2012, 1:09 PM
Anti NRA gun owners just say they'ret hat way for whatever reason/ In truth theyr'e just too cheap to join//

Wrangler John
05-26-2012, 10:11 PM
I joined for the really cool window decals!

Not only that, Harlan Carter reminded me of Mr. Clean - old bald guys are bold appearing. Carter took over during the Cincinnati revolt of 1977, proving he was bold with the statement: "Beginning in this place and at this hour, this period in NRA history is finished," Thus began the fight for gun rights in earnest. Met Harlan Carter at the Reno Convention back in the day, he was impressive.

Then there was Neil Knox, the first Executive Director of the NRA/ILA, about as bold and uncompromising a leader as you could want. Even was instrumental in having Congress pass the Firearms owner's Protection Act in 1986.

So, I guess I just stuck around long enough to see boldness become political savvy, not as boisterous, but maybe effective in its own way. When a person is as removed from the trenches as I am, it's difficult to judge how much is going on in the front lines or behind the curtain.

I'll keep sending the dough, and enjoying those cool decals and stickers.

SilverBulletZ06
05-27-2012, 6:34 AM
Without the NRA, RKBA rights and gun ownership would have fallen by the way side a long time ago.

You have to understand how the game is played. The game is what it is and changes with the culture and political climate. When the NRA flexes its muscles during elections, politicians do know the NRA DOES effect elections today. In the past NRA members were only seen as whiny rednecks out of touch with popular culture complaining about not being able to kill people and guns were something out of the old barbaric west. That was the picture painted in popular culture. The NRA worked/is working very hard to change that image and politicians today know the NRA can and does change elections.

And 1 thing most people don't seem to understand, Heller changed everything! RKBA is now a RIGHT! Before it was only a concept of the founders with little case law supporting it. With Heller, and other cases, RKBA rights now can be expanded given proper cases are brought forth. Its how law functions and law IS the only thing you can stand on when you defend your rights. Before that ruling, it was completely up to the states and the Feds to regulate firearms any way they saw fit without worrying about them being over turned. You can say that SAF and others won those cases, but without the NRA keeping the touch lit, the idea of RKBA would have been a relic of the past (England is a perfect example). NRA is a huge resource in this fight, akin to a battleship bristling with guns of every imaginable size showing up off the coast. You can't ignore it and it would be prudent to send someone out to find out its intentions and talk terms before they open fire on you. Politicians know this. Why do you think the Schumers of the world try to vilify the NRA every chance they get? Because the NRA is a force to be reckoned with.

Only Heller was the SAF, not the NRA. NRA has dropped the ball on the major political points IMHO: Hughes, AWB, etc.

Lets face it, as a force it is a pretty weak one. It gives money to politicians to help keep/promote pro-gun agenda, but as an actual fighting force it leaves much to be desired. With its resources the NRA could have run a huge ad campaign in the main stream commercial cycles, including the Superbowl (a la Mayors Against Firearms In America), but it seems to be content using itself as a pro-hunting alias. When any board member (Joaquin Jackson) ignores a majority of the new rifles being sold in exchange for keeping his hunting rifle, there is a major problem within the organization.


To end: The NRA hasn't impressed me as much with their cases, nor have they impressed me with their spending. As an advocacy group they are still trying to sway the votes through the peoples representatives meanwhile any number of ignorant comments are allowed to stand (heat seaking bullets/barrel thing that goes up/"assault weapons"/ etc) which could easily have been made into very beneficial pro-gun PSA's.

SWalt
05-29-2012, 11:23 AM
Only Heller was the SAF, not the NRA. NRA has dropped the ball on the major political points IMHO: Hughes, AWB, etc.

Lets face it, as a force it is a pretty weak one. It gives money to politicians to help keep/promote pro-gun agenda, but as an actual fighting force it leaves much to be desired. With its resources the NRA could have run a huge ad campaign in the main stream commercial cycles, including the Superbowl (a la Mayors Against Firearms In America), but it seems to be content using itself as a pro-hunting alias. When any board member (Joaquin Jackson) ignores a majority of the new rifles being sold in exchange for keeping his hunting rifle, there is a major problem within the organization.


To end: The NRA hasn't impressed me as much with their cases, nor have they impressed me with their spending. As an advocacy group they are still trying to sway the votes through the peoples representatives meanwhile any number of ignorant comments are allowed to stand (heat seaking bullets/barrel thing that goes up/"assault weapons"/ etc) which could easily have been made into very beneficial pro-gun PSA's.

You can say that SAF and others won those cases...

I could have been clearer and said "SAF and others won those cases...". Heller was a very ballsy move by SAF with very high stakes.

But Heller and subsequent rulings completely changed the game and before the 2nd was "incorporated" into the Constitution, trying to keep bad legislation from becoming law you had to beg, plead, conjole, find common ground or threaten. Even now you still have to use the power of persuasion to keep bad law from becoming law since 2A rights are in their infancy. What happened with the AWB? A lot of politicians got voted out after. Can the NRA improve? Become even a louder voice (PSA's as you mentioned) in promoting 2 A rights to the general public? Sure it can, almost goes without saying, any org can use improvement.

In IMVHO, it takes time to change the course of a big ship and you have to still cover all areas of gun owners. People join the NRA for various reasons and expect their voices to be heard also. I understand your point, the NRA could/should have been always balls out from long ago but IMHO there is a lot of time/place/circumstance involved. The right kind of people sitting on the bench as an example. Also politics of 20 yrs ago are different than today. A generational shift in views comes to mind in how to proceed. It is still the NRA that kept the torch lit which allowed others to come along. SAF, CGF, etc might not have come along without the NRA holding the antis at bay. Europe comes to mind. Actually Europe vs American self defense rights would make a great contrast in a PSA. A duty to retreat/unarmed self defense as your only options? What do you think, next Super Bowl?

Solidux
05-29-2012, 12:05 PM
There will always be groups for everything. Leave NRA the way they want to be the same way we should leave the Brady guys the way they are. The second you have a tyranny of ideals it's impossible for human nature to stop its course.

Checks and balances occur when 2 minds argue and compromise. For example, this bullet button ordeal has been blown out of proportion because of misinformed people. The same way Zimmerman has been judged and executed by the media. We need people on the other side to raise their hand and say "hey! you dont know our side of the story! listen to us before you affect us!"

Im as moderate as they come. I dont vehemently support one side over the other. I do take action against stupidity and tyranny from the majority. For example: I am 100000% fine with the 10 day waiting period to pick up a handgun. I believe this should be here. HOWEVER (let me finish before im burned at the stake), this process could be done a lot better with a couple well aimed tweaks:

1. 10 day wait applies to new firearms purchaser
2. 10 day wait goes away if citizen already owns a firearm (THIS THIS THIS THIS)
3. Take away 1 handgun a month law if citizen owned a firearm for 2 years without incident.


Be moderate in your ideals before taking an action towards an extreme. If Susan B Komen, NRA, NAACP, etc used more of their budget towards their mission statement vs an extravagant salary, you wouldnt need to swim through junk mail or hang up on solicitors. (Dont quote me on this, but the spending from salaries to mission statement is 4:1).

I stopped giving money to the NRA when they pulled the "California is a lost cause" on me. I tried to explain that, for that reason, we needed more help... but the lady on the phone said most likely not due to wasting of resources.

Im not saying I support Squid or anyone for that matter. I AM saying that we need people like squid to make these posts without us treating him like scum that some of you grown ups should be ashamed of. He is a fellow gun owner and is part of the family. Just because his opinion differs doesnt mean anything, if not something more. It shows us what the moderate/fence sitters are thinking and saying.

Instead of being burned, if one of you guys took the time to explain to him articulately and nicely, he might no longer be on the fence and part of the big movement. The biggest thing turning people off YOUR ideas or YOUR opinions is that the way YOU approach people with them. Ive gotten MANY, MANY "liberals, democrats, moderates" in FAVOR of our movement through courtesy and not "UR A TAAAAAAARD" type of comments.



Side note:

Ted Nugent is an avid outdoorsmen, lifelong hunter and a huge 2A rights guy. Did you know he is a successful musician too? NRA is a 2A organization, not a veterans group. What he did 40 years ago matters how?

We cant say things like this. We cant say "the past doesnt matter" do a 180 degree turn and yell at obama for hanging out with bill ayers 20 years ago. A better way would to approach it neutrally would be: Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone does something they cant look back on. But now hes an avid outdoorsmen, lifelong hunter and a huge 2A rights guy. A shouting match will only show whos louder and nothing more.

SilverBulletZ06
06-10-2012, 7:17 PM
There will always be groups for everything. Leave NRA the way they want to be the same way we should leave the Brady guys the way they are. The second you have a tyranny of ideals it's impossible for human nature to stop its course.

Checks and balances occur when 2 minds argue and compromise. For example, this bullet button ordeal has been blown out of proportion because of misinformed people. The same way Zimmerman has been judged and executed by the media. We need people on the other side to raise their hand and say "hey! you dont know our side of the story! listen to us before you affect us!"

Im as moderate as they come. I dont vehemently support one side over the other. I do take action against stupidity and tyranny from the majority. For example: I am 100000% fine with the 10 day waiting period to pick up a handgun. I believe this should be here. HOWEVER (let me finish before im burned at the stake), this process could be done a lot better with a couple well aimed tweaks:

1. 10 day wait applies to new firearms purchaser
2. 10 day wait goes away if citizen already owns a firearm (THIS THIS THIS THIS)
3. Take away 1 handgun a month law if citizen owned a firearm for 2 years without incident.


Be moderate in your ideals before taking an action towards an extreme. If Susan B Komen, NRA, NAACP, etc used more of their budget towards their mission statement vs an extravagant salary, you wouldnt need to swim through junk mail or hang up on solicitors. (Dont quote me on this, but the spending from salaries to mission statement is 4:1).

I stopped giving money to the NRA when they pulled the "California is a lost cause" on me. I tried to explain that, for that reason, we needed more help... but the lady on the phone said most likely not due to wasting of resources.

Im not saying I support Squid or anyone for that matter. I AM saying that we need people like squid to make these posts without us treating him like scum that some of you grown ups should be ashamed of. He is a fellow gun owner and is part of the family. Just because his opinion differs doesnt mean anything, if not something more. It shows us what the moderate/fence sitters are thinking and saying.

Instead of being burned, if one of you guys took the time to explain to him articulately and nicely, he might no longer be on the fence and part of the big movement. The biggest thing turning people off YOUR ideas or YOUR opinions is that the way YOU approach people with them. Ive gotten MANY, MANY "liberals, democrats, moderates" in FAVOR of our movement through courtesy and not "UR A TAAAAAAARD" type of comments.



Side note:



We cant say things like this. We cant say "the past doesnt matter" do a 180 degree turn and yell at obama for hanging out with bill ayers 20 years ago. A better way would to approach it neutrally would be: Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone does something they cant look back on. But now hes an avid outdoorsmen, lifelong hunter and a huge 2A rights guy. A shouting match will only show whos louder and nothing more.

Your firearms ideals are downright scary. 10 day waiting periods? 1 gun a month for 2 years? Would you similarly agree that you could only have a dial up modem and needed to keep it for 2 years before upgrading to high speed cable/FO as well as a 10 day waiting period on all emails in order to reduce child porn?

Being "moderate" and having people spew nonsense like the NRA board members "you only need 1 bullet, you don't need 30" is what got us here in the first place. We need to defend the 2A are ardently as we need to defend the 1A.

Dreaded Claymore
06-10-2012, 8:16 PM
Without the NRA, the 2nd Amendment would probably have been repealed in the '80s. The NRA is the reason we can still enjoy the human right of (effective) self-defense.

If you want to argue that the NRA is doing something wrong, you need more evidence than fundraising campaign mail and Ted Nugent.

stix213
06-11-2012, 4:55 AM
I stopped giving money to the NRA when they pulled the "California is a lost cause" on me. I tried to explain that, for that reason, we needed more help... but the lady on the phone said most likely not due to wasting of resources.


Funny, seeing that the NRA puts in considerable time, money, and effort into CA causes. Probably enough money so that NRA members in other states are subsidizing us. NRA has a full time California lobbyist, which they don't for most if not any other states. NRA has been a part of many of the legal actions over the last few years here too. From suing San Francisco to overturn their handgun ban, to supporting the Peruta case on CCW's here.

If they really thought CA was a lost cause, why are they expending so many resources in this state?

SanPedroShooter
06-11-2012, 5:06 AM
California has the only NRA field office of any state in country right?

Oh thats right, full time lobbyist, who I understand along with the CRPA lobbyist are doing a very good job with what they are up against. Can you imagine being a gun lobbyist in California...? Its like the lions den. You gotta have balls and determination to a do a job like that.

SWalt
06-11-2012, 6:48 AM
Without the NRA, the 2nd Amendment would probably have been repealed in the '80s. The NRA is the reason we can still enjoy the human right of (effective) self-defense.

If you want to argue that the NRA is doing something wrong, you need more evidence than fundraising campaign mail and Ted Nugent.

^^^
+1