Anyone else see the RMGO post on FB about the NRA being a sell out?

[trlcavscout]

So the nra has never hung us out to dry over back door deals before?

[Zundfolge]

So the nra has never hung us out to dry over back door deals before?

Did they "hang us out to dry over back door deals" or did they just not get everything they wanted in deals with recalcitrant Democrats?

If you always go around demanding "All or Nothing", you end up getting "Nothing" a lot. That's not an excuse for caving too easily (and maybe that's what the NRA did in the situations you're thinking about) but you can't expect the NRA to win 100% of the time.

[Ronin13]

So the nra has never hung us out to dry over back door deals before?

That was nearly 20 years ago... keep that in mind. It appears they're a little more steadfast this time around, and it would seem that they're a totally different organization now. I'll err on the side of caution, but their latest track record over the past couple months have led me to believe we can place more faith in them than 1994.

[Aloha_Shooter]

That was nearly 20 years ago... keep that in mind. It appears they're a little more steadfast this time around, and it would seem that they're a totally different organization now. I'll err on the side of caution, but their latest track record over the past couple months have led me to believe we can place more faith in them than 1994.

WTF are you talking about Ronin? The NRA fought the AWB pretty damned hard and used its passage to defeat a lot of the Democrats who were responsible for that POS.

[Ronin13]

WTF are you talking about Ronin? The NRA fought the AWB pretty damned hard and used its passage to defeat a lot of the Democrats who were responsible for that POS.

True- but they still allowed some "compromise." By comparison, today the NRA has stated that they will not support nor allow any new legislation. Compromise is done with. That's what I was getting at.

[Aloha_Shooter]

True- but they still allowed some "compromise." By comparison, today the NRA has stated that they will not support nor allow any new legislation. Compromise is done with. That's what I was getting at.

Ronin, you don't get it -- and you're not the only one. The Democrats were passing a ban in 1994 come hell or high water. I'm just happy the 10 year sunset clause got inserted or we'd still be under the damned thing. The NRA fought the bill as hard as they could and it still passed through so the NRA did the next best thing, they defeated a lot of the a-holes that voted for it. They're fighting Feinstein's latest POS as hard as they can and they have used the 1994 election results to try to keep Democrats in check (for the most part, successfully until this year).

Yeah, they didn't want weak cases to go to a SCOTUS they weren't sure about because a loss there is HUGE but they supported Heller and used that result to push other cases but they are not omnipotent and every loss isn't because they stabbed us in the back.

[MED]

I am going to be in the minority on this board, but we as gun owners really don't know how to pick our fights.

I do not have a problem with strengthening the background check system. Personally, I would really like to use a state background check on a private sale especially if no FFL was involved. I do a pretty thorough background check every time I lease my rental property.

Lets face it, there are nut jobs out there who should not own firearms among other things. There is a certain amount of due diligence we should exercise to keep our firearms out of their hands. Yes, they will get what they need, but it shouldn't come from us!

Our focus in this fight should be about the banning of firearms not the universal background check system. Actually, I am for strengthening it. I was absolutely pissed at Dudley and his antics toward Governor Owens and I get pretty agitated when he blasts people in the primary only to lose the general election. I will be really really pissed if he and others like him screw this up!

Anyhow, I said my peace.