View Full Version : Contact the NRA
Bailey Guns
10-05-2017, 18:05
I am a huge supporter of the NRA (Benefactor Life Member) and I think most people on this forum know that. I've assisted numerous individuals here and elsewhere with joining and/or purchasing life memberships at reduced rates.
However...
I'm not happy with the latest statement by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox re: the Las Vegas Shooting and their call to the ATFE to "review the legality" of the bump-fire stocks.
If the NRA doesn't change their tune on this I'll be the first to tell them to pack sand and cancel my membership.
If any of you feel the same way here's the number to call:
877-672-2000
The nice lady I spoke with told me to press "0" several times until you're removed from the automated menu and a live person answers. Tell that person you want to speak to a supervisor in Fairfax.
If you think I'm missing something here, please...let me know. I'm open to reasonable discussion.
In my opinion we're (NRA members) being betrayed not only by our organization but by our elected leaders as well. I'm sick and tired of not having a voice.
I am not sure that I know their end game. I am not sure I have a problem with a review of a regulation on top of a regulation on top of a violation of the 2nd Amendment in the first place. I am not sure I know if there is not some backdoor deal/plan/methodology. I am not happy with some things my wife does, but I ain't setting her out on the curb for them.
I could more easily get behind that momentum HBAR...
Without gun control, the NRA would have no reason in 2017 to exist. It's like trying to sell the concept of heaven without the existence of hell.
The NRA loves gun control, the existence thereof pays their salaries. No boogeyman = no membership fee's.
Bailey Guns
10-05-2017, 18:29
Exactly. The next time a shooter uses a scope or red-dot are we gonna have the ATF "review the legalities" of those things, too? Where does it end.
And I'm OK with LaPierre and Cox being tossed, too. But I don't see that happening.
Now I will admit that I don't know what their strategy is with this. If anything. It's hard to say. But why throw all your cards on the table at once? Why not approach it from the standpoint of we'll give you this but we want this and it's not negotiable. Our side NEVER does that.
And we all know what's coming next. Say goodbye to the Hearing Protection Act. Ryan has already said it's not going to the floor now.
I'm not going to abandon the NRA.
Yes, they've had their missteps in the past. Yes, LaPierre is overpaid and not as sophisticated a leader as we need.
However, it's the best thing we have going to defend our constitutional rights from the tyranny of progressive forces.
With Scalia gone, it's only going to be more difficult moving forward.
IF you have someone in mind who could better represent the NRA, by all means start a campaign to get them into the right position.
Scanker19
10-05-2017, 18:41
Well Nancy "I was a body double for the second half of Death Becomes Her" Pelosi, has already said she hopes that this turns into a slippery slope of more gun control.
Limited GM
10-05-2017, 18:47
I'm not going to abandon the NRA.
Yes, they've had their missteps in the past. Yes, LaPierre is overpaid and not as sophisticated a leader as we need.
However, it's the best thing we have going to defend our constitutional rights from the tyranny of progressive forces.
With Scalia gone, it's only going to be more difficult moving forward.
IF you have someone in mind who could better represent the NRA, by all means start a campaign to get them into the right position.
Wholeheartedly agree.
OtterbatHellcat
10-05-2017, 18:57
I'm not going to abandon the NRA.
Yes, they've had their missteps in the past. Yes, LaPierre is overpaid and not as sophisticated a leader as we need.
However, it's the best thing we have going to defend our constitutional rights from the tyranny of progressive forces.
With Scalia gone, it's only going to be more difficult moving forward.
IF you have someone in mind who could better represent the NRA, by all means start a campaign to get them into the right position.
+1
I'm sure I'm not to the point of calling for anyone's head yet. First, it doesn't involve giving up any firearm or right. Second, it's a suggestion for a "review" of a firearm accessory. This will take some time which means that cooler heads may prevail when it actually happens.
Rep. Steve Scalia, who was shot at a Congressional baseball practice, has urged legislators to not rush any legislation on this. He points out that most people had never even heard of a bump stock before this incident. I also think we shouldn't rush into judgment with the NRA's approach.
Bailey Guns
10-05-2017, 19:01
The NRA caves on this before the debate even gets started. "Strength" isn't the first term that comes to mind. It's not gonna take a lot of close inspection for the leftists in this country to find a crack in the NRA wall. And when they do... With the NRA crying "uncle" before the fight even starts you can bet the next time something comes up the left will be even harder to beat.
Here's their statement:
"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."
The only positive I see in that is calling for congress to pass concealed carry reciprocity. The rest of it's just flowery prose and platitudes.
Bailey Guns
10-05-2017, 19:04
I'm sure I'm not to the point of calling for anyone's head yet. First, it doesn't involve giving up any firearm or right. Second, it's a suggestion for a "review" of a firearm accessory. This will take some time which means that cooler heads may prevail when it actually happens.
The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
That doesn't sound like they just looking for a "review".
BushMasterBoy
10-05-2017, 19:07
72199[ROFL1]
That doesn't sound like they just looking for a "review".
A bump stock does not allow a semi-automatic rifle to function like a fully-automatic rifle (finger pulls the trigger, one pull per shot). A semi-automatic rifle can also be bump fired without the accessory.
The only accessory that will allow a semi-auto to function like a fully-automatic is an auto sear.
I am hearing theories they are looking to get it listed as another NFA item like a DD or AOW. Not made completely illegal and unavailable to the public.
The one possible upside to this might be the promised second grandfathering that we were promised when the initial NFA laws were passsed. Everything could be added to the registry.
No more compromise.
Kill the nfa.
Kill the Brady bill.
Kill all restrictions on gun ownership.
Kill the ability of locals to impose restriction.
Recognize Constitutional carry.
Stop caving to make others feel good. There end goal is to ban guns. The NRA's end game needs to be to end any and all restrictions on the 2nd.
No gun law has ever worked, nor will any new gun *law work.
*edited
It was a tactical move on their part. Get the ATF to review the legality instead of politicians.
68Charger
10-05-2017, 20:05
It was a tactical move on their part. Get the ATF to review the legality instead of politicians.
So where do ATF administrators stand on the scale, between politicians and pond scum?
The very idea feeds the leftist agenda that inanimate objects can be evil, as opposed to only the Democrats that wield them.
wctriumph
10-05-2017, 20:05
I'll stick with the NRA for the time being, they have done a pretty good job up to now. I am sure that new leadership will be forthcoming in the next few years that can take the reins and keep protecting the 2nd amendment.
TEA
III
bellavite1
10-05-2017, 20:37
I sent them an email with a piece of my mind...in short SHAME ON THE NRA!
I am a Benefactor member, and have done the Golden Eagles and other things. I called today and after getting ahold of someone told them plainly that I would be seeking the resignation of any board member that supports the statement made.
Their response: We don't give a fuck.... Just not in so many words.
GilpinGuy
10-06-2017, 01:14
I sent them an email with a piece of my mind...in short SHAME ON THE NRA!
Unless you included your credit card number, my guess is your email went directly to the recycle bin.
It was a tactical move on their part. Get the ATF to review the legality instead of politicians.
Advocacy groups should not make suggestions of even remotely removing or degrading their position of their constituents.
They should have said, NO!!, there is nothing that can be done. Stop crying over spilt milk.
Jeffrey Lebowski
10-06-2017, 05:55
When any of you guys contacted them, any discussion of how these parts are not necessary to achieve the intended effect? In other words, the belt loop vid?
I have zero interest in these parts personally, but the whole thing is ridiculous.
Bailey Guns
10-06-2017, 06:42
Their response: We don't give a fuck.... Just not in so many words.
That's what I'm expecting.
DireWolf
10-06-2017, 08:51
I am sure that new leadership will be forthcoming in the next few years that can take the reins and keep protecting the 2nd amendment.
Been telling myself that for a while now, but at this point am starting to see the NRA leadership operating in a similar vein as our illustrious political masters - operating purely in their own interests, entrenched, and if not oblivious to the concerns of their members (e.g. constituents), then clearly demonstrating their priorities while maintaining the Minimum Possible Veneer of Support to our concerns. (in this case, enough to encourage new membership/donations).
Make no mistake, they can either age out or be kicked out, but will not likely be going anywhere soon otherwise..And until then, they likely just don't give a shit what we want as long as the money keeps flowing (assuming no more nefarious intent).
Also, the projection of weakness at a critical moment is an undermining force, one which we would be far better off without.
NRA life member, but not sure if that really means squat these days, and if it's time to just bow out and place my support elsewhere...
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Well, there's one firearms advocacy group that declares "no compromise", and from where I sit, they have achieved far less in advancing gun rights than the NRA. Hell, I wish we didn't have lobbies, but since that's how the game is being played in DC, you either choose to play or watch what happens from the stands.
Personally, I can see what appears to be a tactical approach by the NRA. They appear concerned, yet aren't saying anything specific. They're also trying to keep this out of being legislated. The same folks doing the 'review' are the same ones that approved things like AR pistol braces and bump-stocks in the first place. I think the end game is that nothing changes, yet the NRA does not come off as being indifferent or unreasoning.
...at least that's my hope.
DireWolf
10-06-2017, 09:37
Well, there's one firearms advocacy group that declares "no compromise", and from where I sit, they have achieved far less in advancing gun rights than the NRA. Hell, I wish we didn't have lobbies, but since that's how the game is being played in DC, you either choose to play or watch what happens from the stands.
I can totally see where you're coming from on this, but I also see a false dichotomy here...
The NRA is a potentially powerful force for advancement of both 2A and the shooting sports in general (the two go hand in hand), but whos interests have been compromised by the ego's in the head office.
That other group (which shall not be named), is much smaller and run by a more singular level of douchbaggery (with money being even more overtly part of the game), and having finally managed to get the spamming to stop after some initially misplaced support a while back, can see why they fail before even beginning to fight.
An alternative option/LG, or even better, an NRA that gets an enema to flush out the leadership and allow for a return to mission, would see entirely different results over time. Of this I have no doubt.
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
We have a black guy at work who wears a MAGA hat, baggy jeans, and his stated goal is "to make enough money to afford land to live on and shoot his guns whenever he wants".
It's honestly people like him who would be the best ambassadors. That's why the NRA hired Colion Noir -- to bridge that gap.
The NRA needs new blood. The NRA isnt bad.
The NRA needs to embrace and reach out to all ethnicities, colors, sexualities. They need to show Americans that the Second Ammendment is for ALL legal, law abiding Americans, not just White Heterosexuals. I dont know how to do that exactly since all I know are white heterosexuals. We need to show people that 2A is important and belongs to us all.
Get rid of the old blood, bring in new fire, bring in people who wont get entrenched for a lifetime and compromise at every turn. (we need to keep people from getting entrenched in every level of government and organization, it breeds stagnation, compromise and bs)
I agree. I have not been impressed by LaPierre....ever.
The NRA has a history of supporting minority gun rights and that should be better communicated/emphasized. I ran across a video last week that did a good job of communicating this, but can't find it now that I'm trying to find it.
DireWolf
10-06-2017, 10:20
The NRA needs new blood. The NRA isnt bad.
The NRA needs to embrace and reach out to all ethnicities, colors, sexualities. They need to show Americans that the Second Ammendment is for ALL legal, law abiding Americans, not just White Heterosexuals. I dont know how to do that exactly since all I know are white heterosexuals. We need to show people that 2A is important and belongs to us all.
Get rid of the old blood, bring in new fire, bring in people who wont get entrenched for a lifetime and compromise at every turn. (we need to keep people from getting entrenched in every level of government and organization, it breeds stagnation, compromise and bs)
I say let's get these two guys in the top leadership spots at the NRA, and watch shit start happening...
https://youtu.be/mEemOMsz5Q8^(video recently posted in other thread)
https://youtu.be/6M92H8oTH64
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Zundfolge
10-06-2017, 10:22
It was a tactical move on their part. Get the ATF to review the legality instead of politicians.
This is what's happening.
We are going to get some form of "bump stock" ban. Period. It would be much better to have the ATF reclassify the things as NFA (honestly surprised that teh agency that declared a shoe lace to be a machine gun actually allowed these things which do basically the same thing in the first place).
If we allow Feinstien's bill to become law, there's a good chance that any sort of modification to any trigger on a semi-auto firearm will be verboten. No more drop in AR triggers, no more Apex triggers for Glocks/S&W/SIG, no more "trigger jobs" ... we'll all have to suffer with whatever crap trigger our guns come from the factory with because her law bans any trigger part or mod that "increases the rate of fire" without defining what the increase is (a good target trigger that shortens lock time will technically "increase rate of fire).
Aloha_Shooter
10-06-2017, 15:44
I think agreeing to a review was a tactical move and I'm not against that. The bump fire stocks did one thing for the shooter -- increased shot output -- but apparently at the expense of control and accuracy. As with the Aurora moron's fascination with a cheap drum magazine, it may be the Las Vegas shooter's obsession with bump-fire to increase his fire output may have decreased the effectiveness of his fire and the review could be an opportunity to bring that out (further deflating the gun control fantasies).
The NRA was the most effective opponent of the extremism in the Clinton and Obama presidencies, bar none. I'm not happy with Wayne LaPierre but I'm not throwing out the most effective protector of our gun rights over it.
Life member here also. I have been thinking about quitting too, but there is an effort going on over on ARFCOM to generate a petition to have LaPierre removed. So I am going to stick around to see how that turns out. Unfortunately with the new rules established last year it takes about 6500 signatures to accomplish anything, so a bit of an effort. And that is only to put it to a vote of the membership I believe.
I have no use for bumpstocks myself, but I believe on this that that NRA has shot themselves in the foot so to speak. If they are going to accept making rules based on need rather than on rights then the 2nd Amendment (indeed all the Bill of Rights) is gone. There is a whole lot that we as Americans have a right to, regardless of what any particular person or group thinks we 'need'.
.... false dichotomy...
.....singular level of douchbaggery
I had to laugh at this! It's perfect! Seriously, I wish I could write that well. It captures the insanity of a seemingly intractable situation.
Jeffrey Lebowski
10-06-2017, 20:34
We'd be better off almost without any organization at all - the independent voices coupled with the internet in many ways are far scarier. On the other hand, all a politician has to ignore is usually a single NRA lobbyist.
I'm going to say no.
Especially when "our type" tends to want to keep to themselves, peacefully - not create a bunch of protests.
The NRA should be arguing the only way they would agree to add Bump Stocks to the NFA regulated items is if we get something in return. The NRA should push to combine Bump Stock regs with the Safe Hearing Act. If we get suppressors they can regulate bump stocks. Otherwise we are going to give the Demonrats ground without getting anything. I would like to see how much the D’s really want these stocks off the street.
One thing I learned from the LV shooting is everybody at the concert thought the gunfire was fireworks. Sounds like a great time to mention that hearing gunfire without a suppressor does not save lives.
NRA is playing the best game they can after being dealt a terrible hand.
Asking ATF for a review of the regs is probably the smartest move they can make at this point.
1.) It will take time for the ATF to conduct a review, which will hopefully give all involved parties time to cool down.
2.) For once, the fact that federal regulators aren't beholden to voters is probably a good thing. The politicians are going to do whatever their constituents/lobbyists/the media demand, meanwhile the ATF is beholden to their own regulatory requirements.
3.) What the ATF can potentially do is much more limited than what congress can do. Congress can pass a law mandating nearly anything, and even if it's a straight up constitutional violation getting it changed or repealed would take millions of dollars and decades of lawsuits.
4.) Since ATF is limited, the best they can probably do is to reclassify bump stocks as an NFA item so anyone who wants one will have to pay a $200 transfer tax. A $200 tax on a niche item no one really wants is a small price to pay after this particular cluster of a situation.
DireWolf
10-07-2017, 14:02
NRA is playing the best game they can after being dealt a terrible hand.
Sorry, I just can't bring myself to agree with this perspective, unless we remember a line from a Sean Connery movie I saw a while back:
"Their best? Losers always whine about doing their best...Winners go home and fuck the prom queen"
Asking ATF for a review of the regs is probably the smartest move they can make at this point.
They didn't just ask for a review. They asked for a review while in the same breath indicating a shared view that MORE REGULATION WAS LIKELY NEEDED. They basically got down on their knees and asked for it to be gentle...
For all those claiming that the NRA was just "strategerizing" here, please recognize that taking the approach they did was the very essence of weakness, and the media/pols are having a field day with the NRA's preemptive capitulation (for which we can almost assuredly expect nothing positive in return).
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
theGinsue
10-07-2017, 14:07
I too see the NRA's move here as what the anti-gunners will see as a freebie to go along with everything else they're going to push to get. It's NOT going to be a single item getting pushed to be banned. For the anti-gunners it's always MORE that they're seeking. Giving them one thing is only helping them get down the road faster.
Bailey Guns
10-07-2017, 14:37
Exactly. The left is just giddy now that the NRA is on "their" side. "See? Even the NRA wants to ban these things."
Yeah. Great strategy.
Ok, so for you guys who think the nra is selling us out, lay out a strategy that will actually allow a win where bump stocks, etc aren't redefined as NFA.
They didn't just ask for a review. They asked for a review while in the same breath indicating a shared view that MORE REGULATION WAS LIKELY NEEDED. They basically got down on their knees and asked for it to be gentle...
For all those claiming that the NRA was just "strategerizing" here, please recognize that taking the approach they did was the very essence of weakness, and the media/pols are having a field day with the NRA's preemptive capitulation (for which we can almost assuredly expect nothing positive in return).
You're adding context to what the NRA's statement actually said. They didn't state that extra regulations may be needed for bump-stocks. They said that anything that can make a semi-auto a full-auto may need regulation. Bump-stocks were not regulated as making a weapon operate like a full-auto in the first place. Your finger pulls the trigger and a single pull of the trigger fires a single shot.
DireWolf
10-07-2017, 17:32
The actual (only relevant section included for brevity) statement from the NRA was:
"...The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations..."
Doesn't say "turn them into automatic rifles, just says "function like..." (I could care less about bump-stocks, but this is far larger than just that one specific type of accessory)
Ambiguous statement which gives the leftists a shit-ton of room to align with the "narrative du jour", concession of moral high ground perspective (e.g. - exactly why should there be additional regulation when all evidence seems to show the utter irrelevance/ineffectiveness of that approach?), and a clearly telegraphed lack of willingness to hold the line and fight to "Champion Second Amendment Rights" (part of their stated core mission).
Because of the NRA's (in both this instance and others) strategic shortcomings, they are destined to fail, and fail utterly, under the current approach - at least within the context of fighting to protect 2A rights. A review of progress over time is the best indicator of this trend towards failure & concession.
I believe a fundemental change of strategy is required for anything which even remotely resembles victory or a reversal of that trend - (one initial example out of many might be - work to fight the manipulation of language/narrative and avoid trying to work within a logical fallacy of the left's deliberate construction - I see zero chance of changing hearts & minds while operating within an artificial construct of lanuage designed specifically to preclude that.)
This type of strategic realignment doesn't always require a change in leaderhip personnel, but the fact that they don't seem to give a rats ass what we think is sure pointing in that direction...
ETA: lest there be any ambiguity - in 1 week we've gone from a high likelihood of an imminent deregulation of supressors, to a high likelihood of imminent RESTRICTION of currently legal over the counter accessories such as bump-stocks, binary FCGs, etc., (and likely criminalization of current owners who choose not to get rid of them).
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Does a semi-auto with a bump-fire stock "function like" an M-16? No. The definitions of how 'semi-auto' and 'full-auto' mechanisms function have been in-place for quite some time. Defining how fast a shooter can pull the trigger is a regulatory reach.
http://youtu.be/uFoM8S3JwZU
Bailey Guns
10-07-2017, 18:19
Ok, so for you guys who think the nra is selling us out, lay out a strategy that will actually allow a win where bump stocks, etc aren't redefined as NFA.
In this particular scenario, that's easy. My approach would be: Bump stocks are legal. They were approved under the Obama administration. Nothing has changed concerning bump stocks with the exception a madman used one in a murderous spree while already violating numerous laws. We are willing to discuss additional regulations on bump stocks once the Hearing Protection Act is passed (or pick a project).
As it is they are giving away the store while asking for nothing. I don't mind some compromise on occasion and I think this is a perfect time to get what we want while potentially giving up something that won't affect a lot of people.
If you want $18,000 for your car, ask for $20,000 knowing the offer will be $15,000. Compromise on the $18,000 you wanted.
NRA leadership must be learning their "strategy" from republican leadership in the house and senate. Which is basically asking the democrats exactly where they want their asses kissed.
pickenup
10-08-2017, 01:00
NRA [fail]
Now you [panic]
Now I [ROFL3]
hurley842002
10-08-2017, 06:36
NRA leadership must be learning their "strategy" from republican leadership in the house and senate. Which is basically asking the democrats exactly where they want their asses kissed.
Nailed it!
GunBroke(r) just reversed themselves yesterday.
I wonder if we'll see the NRA reverse after asking for a "review?"
I think part of the play here is to appear to be open to ideas to defuse "NRA kills children" screeching. On a personal level, I am open to ideas too, I just know after much research and life experience that banning pieces of plastic/metal will do jack shit to help and actually make things worse.
I have no desire to own a bump stock but I fully support the rights of others to own them.
DireWolf
10-08-2017, 09:28
Was thinking about it this morning and came up with an approach to the immediate issue at hand that I could support if the NRA would take, and is proportional enough to likely appear reasonable all around...
NRA (hypothetical) revised statement/position:
"After much reflection on this topic and input from our millions of constituents & law abiding gun owners, in the spirit of compromise we would be willing to entertain the idea of reclassifying bump-stock devices (explicitly) as NFA items as long as that change is simultaneously enacted alongside a full reversal of ATF 41p and immediate reinstatement of the Form-1 E-File system, with a review time not to exceed 90 days pending a 3 month "sunrise" period to allow for any required personnel/process updates."
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
NRA (hypothetical) revised statement/position:
"After much reflection on this topic and input from our millions of constituents & law abiding gun owners, in the spirit of compromise we would be willing to entertain the idea of reclassifying bump-stock devices (explicitly) as NFA items as long as that change is simultaneously enacted alongside a full reversal of ATF 41p and immediate reinstatement of the Form-1 E-File system, with a review time not to exceed 90 days pending a 3 month "sunrise" period to allow for any required personnel/process updates."
...and the public would say, "WTF does that mean?"
DireWolf
10-08-2017, 10:03
...and the public would say, "WTF does that mean?"
Yeah, probably still needs a bit of work...But I think the general concept is sound.
You may have hit on one huge problem with compromise in general - much easier to scream "ban everything! Bump-stocks evil!", than is to propose a real compromise involving actual details...
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Bailey Guns
10-08-2017, 11:56
NRA [fail]
Now you [panic]
Now I [ROFL3]
I don't see anyone in a panic. I see people concerned that, once again thru no fault of their own, they are likely to seeing another attack on a Constitutional right that has seen decades of attack by the stupid and uninformed. Attacks that do nothing to solve a problem that in all reality likely can't be solved.
Grant H.
10-08-2017, 12:43
It's been very enlightening seeing the "die-hard" believers come out of the woodwork. The NRA continues to erode our constitutional rights, slowly, and asks the people they claim to defend to pay for it.
The NRA is a multi-million dollar operation that ceases to have a purpose if gun control goes away... They aren't dumb, they are acutely aware that if they succeed, they get less money...
And many here want me to believe that they want to succeed???
Good luck.
Good luck.If the police were successful eliminating crime we wouldn't need police, so therefore the police want crime, right? After all, they want a paycheck.
I wish you luck with success on your one man campaign to keep our rights.
DireWolf
10-08-2017, 13:47
The NRA is an organization with the strength of numbers but a severe dearth of leadership.
Fix the one to properly leverage the other, and the result may be remarkable.
ETA: Without a complete replacement/overhaul in both leadership and strategy, I agree with the sentiment that the NRA is worse than useless and we're far better off without them (nature abhors a vacuum, and something else can take their place if unwilling/unable to undertake the necessary changes)
Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk
Your police department analogy is a very poor one. It is impossible to eliminate crime. Yet, it is possible to end the "gun control" fight.
A better analogy is the gov't. When a department of our gov't becomes redundant, too large, or unnecessary, surely all the people working within it will say "time to go guys" and join the unemployment line, right?
I disagree with your disagreement. It's also human nature to give up freedom for perceived safety. This is why we are where we are.
You can make the same arguments for anyone that gives to pretty much any 'non-profit' organization. Does Susan G. Komen want to eliminate the cause that profits so many? Does anyone really believe that we can eliminate poverty?
We are one man campaigns when we vote. Outside of that, our politicians don't listen to individuals. We don't like it, but that's how it is. If you can think of a better lobby for our interests, please share.
In this particular scenario, that's easy. My approach would be: Bump stocks are legal. They were approved under the Obama administration. Nothing has changed concerning bump stocks with the exception a madman used one in a murderous spree while already violating numerous laws. We are willing to discuss additional regulations on bump stocks once the Hearing Protection Act is passed (or pick a project).
As it is they are giving away the store while asking for nothing. I don't mind some compromise on occasion and I think this is a perfect time to get what we want while potentially giving up something that won't affect a lot of people.
If you want $18,000 for your car, ask for $20,000 knowing the offer will be $15,000. Compromise on the $18,000 you wanted.
NRA leadership must be learning their "strategy" from republican leadership in the house and senate. Which is basically asking the democrats exactly where they want their asses kissed.
Yeah, but that doesn't tell me how you plan to get to majority votes against a ban in either the House or Senate, which is what matters.
Zundfolge
10-08-2017, 15:42
I don't know who's worse. The "true believers" that refuse to criticize the NRA when they're wrong, or the knee-jerk NRA bashers that act like the NRA is as bad as Brady or something (no, I know the answer).
In this case, I think the NRA is trying to direct some sort of inevitable action against bump stocks into a less damaging direction ... I think they jumped on this bandwagon a bit too soon, but if it does ultimately come down to us having a choice only between legislation or an ATF ruling, the ATF ruling is far and away the better of two bad options. If there still exists a third option of doing nothing, that would of course be better but that may not be a possible choice (of course had the NRA remained silent that choice might be more viable).
Option 3 is to make bump stocks a hill to die on, claim you will make no concessions, and then get butt hurt later as legislation is passed that not only bans bump stocks, but also anything else that the graboids can shove into a hasty bill that gets pushed through before anyone with any influence can try to push for a more rational approach.
Please, don't hold back. Tell me how you really feel. You don't know enough about me to make the claims you just made, but please, if it makes you feel better, fire away.
I've contacted my Congress critters numerous times. I have yet to get a personal response. What I do get is added to their email list. If you think that they handle, see, read any personal contacts, you're living in a dream. This includes phone, mail, and email. When people show up to get in a Congressperson's face at a town-hall meeting, they just stop having them. It's nice to think that we the people have so much influence, but it just isn't the case. Lobbyists on all sides get more face-time with our politicians than any of us. It's unfortunate, but it's true. The NRA has had sit-down meetings with the President. How about you?
When people showed up to testify at the background check and magazine hearings, how well did that go for 'we the people'? On the other hand, Bloomberg seems to have had quite the influence.
If you're a member of the NRA, I find it perfectly responsible to contact them and let them know how you feel. To think that they have less influence than the people, that's just not the case. For now, we have the best government money can buy.
When millions of armed Americans show up in DC, then you'll see the power of the people. Until then, this is a game to the politicians.
OtterbatHellcat
10-08-2017, 19:48
Hell, at least you guys are still posting.
The media thinks the NRA are still influential...and still the bad guys;
Reuters: NRA opposes outright U.S. ban on bump stocks used by Las Vegas killer (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nra-opposes-outright-us-ban-on-bump-stocks-used-by-las-vegas-killer/ar-AAt5znr)
The powerful U.S. gun lobby, the National Rifle Association, said on Sunday it would oppose an outright ban on bump-stock devices that the killer in the Las Vegas massacre of 58 people used to turn rifles into automatic weapons and strafe a crowd with bursts of sustained gunfire.
The NRA, which has seldom embraced new firearms-control measures, stunned gun control advocates last week when it issued a statement voicing willingness to support a restriction on bump stocks.
On Sunday, the organization said it was open to regulation but opposed any legislation banning the devices.
"We don't believe that bans have ever worked on anything. What we have said has been very clear - that if something transfers a semiautomatic to function like a fully automatic, then it ought to be regulated differently," Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist, said on "Fox News Sunday."
I think this is a tactical move because "function" has a very specific definition. The guidance that BATFE operates under allowed bump-stocks under Obama, and they would be the ones performing the 'review'. Others disagree with me, and that's fine. I hope I'm right, but maybe I'm not. I don't have a crystal ball.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/johannes-paulsen/nras-position-bump-fire-stocks-genius/
Worth the read, and why I said what I did in post #2 on the thread.
I have to say, I agree with that author's take on the issue.
I have to say, I agree with that author's take on the issue.
Actually, you wrote it first. :)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.