Contact the NRA

[DireWolf]

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]

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]

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.

[mjzman]

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'.

[Duman]

.... 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]

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.

[Big E3]

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.

[Justin]

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]

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]

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.