The Case for Continued Support of the NRA

[Whisper]

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/01/pro-2a-nra-haters-fyi-for-you/#axzz5cPDspQQk

This is an interesting article with some valuable background info on the current situation between the NRA and Trump:

"And…love Trump or hate him, regardless of anything else he has done, if it were Hillary putting 2, possibly 3 judges on the USSC bench, the 2A would be dead in 10 years. That’s why NRA went all in with him. Not because he was a philosophically pure candidate on all of 2A, but because he was willing to put pro 2A judges on the bench, and because he could win. No one else on our side could, and the alternative—a Hillary presidency—would have been disastrous."

The author of the article also offers some useful elaboration in the comments  section.  Yes, there are some idiotic remarks in the comments section...because it's the comments section.

His most valuable point:  RKBA organizations and supporters needs to find ways to work together instead of fighting among themselves.  The anti-freedom groups are totally willing to collaborate with each other.

Worthwhile reading.

Cheers,

Whisper

[Omega]

That will be the downfall of the 2A, too many gun owners willing to give away their rights piece by piece.  Whether you agree or not with a piece of legislation, ban of certain products, or if you will not be personally affected by it, if it's anti-2A you need to fight it.  There is no room for those that want to work for "sensible" gun laws in our ranks.  Laws only affect the law abiding, period.  Criminals will be able to commit their crimes no matter what laws they break because they are criminals.  Laws should be aimed at those who break them, mandatory sentencing, no mental health waivers for those using firearms to commit crimes.

[chances R]

The NRA deserves our support.  As a matter of fact, if they fail, we don't have a chance.  You will never agree with all of their moves and stances.  Heck, I never agree with myself a 100% of the time.

[btq96r]

15 hours ago, Whisper said:

That’s why NRA went all in with him. Not because he was a philosophically pure candidate on all of 2A, but because he was willing to put pro 2A judges on the bench, and because he could win.

That's a nice spin, but realistically, the NRA has all but embedded itself as a subset of the Republican party.  There was no way they would ever support a Democrat, let alone Hillary, and they made the calculation that the faster they put themselves in Trump's orbit once was the presumptive nominee, the bigger influence they might have in a potential Trump administration.

[owejia]

6 hours ago, btq96r said:

That's a nice spin, but realistically, the NRA has all but embedded itself as a subset of the Republican party.  There was no way they would ever support a Democrat, let alone Hillary, and they made the calculation that the faster they put themselves in Trump's orbit once was the presumptive nominee, the bigger influence they might have in a potential Trump administration.

The democrats completely abandoned the 2nd amendment and most of the Constitution back in the 70's and 80's, so the NRA went with the party that mostly supported the Constitution, Being as we have only two major parties they really had little choice. 

[Whisper]

6 hours ago, btq96r said:

That's a nice spin, but realistically, the NRA has all but embedded itself as a subset of the Republican party.  There was no way they would ever support a Democrat, let alone Hillary....

Since all of the Democratic presidential candidates made clear that they wanted more gun control, and since their party platform condemns candidates who accept support from the NRA, exactly which Democratic presidential candidate did you want the NRA to endorse? Seriously -- name the candidate.

[E4 No More]

16 minutes ago, Whisper said:

Since all of the Democratic presidential candidates made clear that they wanted more gun control, and since their party platform condemns candidates who accept support from the NRA, exactly which Democratic presidential candidate did you want the NRA to endorse? Seriously -- name the candidate.

Don't confuse him with facts. You'll burst his bubble.

[btq96r]

2 hours ago, Whisper said:

Since all of the Democratic presidential candidates made clear that they wanted more gun control, and since their party platform condemns candidates who accept support from the NRA, exactly which Democratic presidential candidate did you want the NRA to endorse? Seriously -- name the candidate.

I didn't want the NRA to endorse a democratic candidate, so try not to construe such intent from my words.  Bernie might have been the only palatable option, but that was before he had to tack all positions left, not just his economic theme.  Once he crossed that Rubicon, he didn't deserve any endorsement.

What I do want, is for the RKBA organizations to not tie themselves to a single party.  When they do that, they run the risk of becoming effectively complacent as the politicians they stuck themselves with by default.  Republicans have zero incentive to actually do anything on guns, because they know for a single issue voter on the topic, their lack of action is better than the Democrats want of action in the wrong direction...so nothing actually gets better, we just become falsely satisfied with "it could have been worse."

Seriously, we had two years of express lane open for whatever could have been passed, with the presumption that a pro-gun court is in place for about a generation, but all we got was agency level work to take away bump stocks.  That's like having a savings account with 0.25% interest when inflation is running 3%.

[Omega]

6 minutes ago, btq96r said:

I didn't want the NRA to endorse a democratic candidate, so try not to construe such intent from my words.  Bernie might have been the only palatable option, but that was before he had to tack all positions left, not just his economic theme.  Once he crossed that Rubicon, he didn't deserve any endorsement.

What I do want, is for the RKBA organizations to not tie themselves to a single party.  When they do that, they run the risk of becoming effectively complacent as the politicians they stuck themselves with by default.  Republicans have zero incentive to actually do anything on guns, because they know for a single issue voter on the topic, their lack of action is better than the Democrats want of action in the wrong direction...so nothing actually gets better, we just become falsely satisfied with "it could have been worse."

Seriously, we had two years of express lane open for whatever could have been passed, with the presumption that a pro-gun court is in place for about a generation, but all we got was agency level work to take away bump stocks.  That's like having a savings account with 0.25% interest when inflation is running 3%.

While I too wish the R's would have at least tried to pass some pro-gun legislation, I think it would have been a hard sell to the general public.  With all the mass shootings in the news (don-tinfoil now), which many feel is why the news keeps it there, there was no way these politicos would have sent anything pro-gun up for a vote.  The best way IMO, is to tack it on to a bill the Dems want, and make them swallow. 

[Capbyrd]

10 minutes ago, btq96r said:

That's like having a savings account with 0.0% interest and a 1% annual fee when inflation is running 3%.

Fixed. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Capbyrd

[Whisper]

52 minutes ago, btq96r said:

What I do want, is for the RKBA organizations to not tie themselves to a single party.  When they do that, they run the risk of becoming effectively complacent as the politicians they stuck themselves with by default. 

I agree with this.  Unfortunately, most Demos have decided to ally themselves with the disarm-America movement, which makes it difficult for the NRA or any pro-freedom organization to endorse any of them.  The NRA does seem willing to give high ratings (A-minus and above) to those Demos like Manchin and Heitkamp who have the courage to oppose the rest of their party on the gun issue.  But they are few in number.

[Grayfox54]

I've been a member of the NRA for close to 40 years and will continue to be one until the day I die. They are the "big boys" on 2nd Amendment rights and likely always will be. 

However, I'm not at all happy with the current state of the NRA. They have become too tied up in the political game and they actually want to play it. The 2nd is NOT negotiable and never will be. Political games be damned, fight to win!

[TripleGGG]

6 hours ago, Grayfox54 said:

I've been a member of the NRA for close to 40 years and will continue to be one until the day I die. They are the "big boys" on 2nd Amendment rights and likely always will be. 

However, I'm not at all happy with the current state of the NRA. They have become too tied up in the political game and they actually want to play it. The 2nd is NOT negotiable and never will be. Political games be damned, fight to win!

This. Lifetime member and will continue my support. However, my support comes with a lot of emails and letters stating my positions and also for reasons for some of the decisions that have been made. I always get responses. I may not like the answers but at least I have a feel for why decisions were made and have voiced my own opinions as well. 

[Raoul]

17 hours ago, btq96r said:

That's a nice spin, but realistically, the NRA has all but embedded itself as a subset of the Republican party.  There was no way they would ever support a Democrat, let alone Hillary, and they made the calculation that the faster they put themselves in Trump's orbit once was the presumptive nominee, the bigger influence they might have in a potential Trump administration.

So they made a calculated bet that paid off? Sounds like a reasonably smart move.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Raoul

[hipower]

 

The big players in this game...NRA, GOA, NAGR as far as I know on the national scene.

State groups like ours( dang it, having a memory lapse. Can't come up with the name.) and a few others need support too. They can have an impact on the local level.

Thanks to Jeb and my slow start in memory, the name is Tennessee Firearms Association. Not hard to think of, unless you are me.

Edited January 16, 2019 by hipower

[Jeb48]

22 hours ago, hipower said:

 

The big players in this game...NRA, GOA, NAGR as far as I know on the national scene.

State groups ours( dang it, having a memory lapse. Can't come up with the name.) and a few others need support too. They can have an impact on the local level.

Tennessee Firearms Association Inc

[hipower]

3 minutes ago, Jeb48 said:

Tennessee Firearms Association Inc

Thanks. I just sat down here a few minutes ago and was going to correct it. Getting old Sucks!

[Grunt67]

I've been a member, for .....I don't know how long. I don't always agree with their policies/actions, BUT, they do some good work as well. They've been pretty much our only voice in TN & DC. Love 'em or hate 'em, still need to support 'em. Money talks, they have more than I do.

[mikegideon]

12 hours ago, Jeb48 said:

Tennessee Firearms Association Inc

I'm a member. They ain't fond of Democrats either, including the Haslams and Harwells of the world.