I'm Dissappointed in the NRA

[ssf467]

You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will joim RMGO You will join RMGO RMGO You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will join RMGO You will join You will join RMGO RMYou will join RMGOYou wYou will join RMGO ill join RMGO GO NOW

[Sucka]

Is RMGO still going strong? I noticed parts of their site aren't updated very frequently. I have a nifty RMGO sticker, and i would have no problem sending them $25 bucks if i knew they were still very active and won't use to it to print more stickers.

I've donated to the NRA in the past, never joined though.

[ssf467]

Dudley stays on top of it

[ssf467]

http://www.nrawol.net/

[-Wolverine-]

You know, every right is restricted to some extent.

I don't see why people are like "OMG, the NRA wants background checks!!!1111 thats an infrgingmentz!!1111".

[banks74]

The NRA spends way to much energy trying to be PC, instead of standing strong and not caving to compromise. Background checks are totally stupid and worthless. If somebody wants a gun, they can get one alot of other places besides a gun shop. If someone really wants a firearm and they get rejected by background check, do they stop there? No they go buy stolen gun from "joe" on the corner. So no access is restricted there. Even if they pass a background check there is no assurance. The VT shooter passed a background check if I recall, so what good did it do??? Absolutely none.

[Gman]

The NRA has done more than any other group to get 'shall issue' concealed carry in most states. They also are strong advocates for 'castle doctrine' in the states so people wouldn't have some stupid requirement to flee when confronted in their own homes. They're also working toward national CCW and have been strong advocates of CCW in national parks.

If you want to find something the NRA didn't do to your satisfaction, you can. They're still doing a lot more positive than the negatives you may find. It's counter-productive to be fighting the NRA who is doing more for us than those in government that are actively working to disarm us and force us into submission, IMHO.

If you're surprised by all of the mail you get from the NRA looking for more contributions, I'm guessing you've never contributed to political campaign funds in an effort to get someone that represents your ideas into elected office. It's amazing how much mail you can get for a $10 donation you made 4 years ago.

If you believe the NRA was complicit in disarming veterans, or actively working with the Brady Bunch, you've been drinking the GOA Kool-Aid and have never actually read the bill. Over at NRAwol, I even read one headline that stated that Ted Nugent was contradicting the NRA on HR 2640. If HR 2640 actually was such a problem for him, he should have resigned from the NRA board. If you click on their link to read his full comments, they take you over to nationalgunrights.org and have another emotional commentary with a link to the full statement at tednugent.com. Over at the Nudge's website you can't find a single thing about 2640 there. I did a Google search and "nationalgunrights.org" seems to be the only source of that accusation.

I see Horasio Miller in Pennsylvania being raised up as a poster child for what can happen to you with HR 2640. When you look into that further, he was adjudicated under his states current laws, without 2640 having even been passed at the time. When I look into many of these organizations that are railing against the NRA, they seem to be a lot more suspect than the NRA. It makes one wonder what their motivations are.

Please avoid regurgitating someone else's emotional "analysis". Use the resources available to you to form your own opinion instead of borrowing one.

Your medical records cannot be used and there has to have been an adjudication of mental illness. These same provisions apply today and make you ineligible to buy a firearm in your state (the Feds aren't expanding the reasons you can be denied firearm ownership). They are expanding notification of that status to the NICS so you can't buy a firearm in another state. If you are no longer on active treatment or have been rehabilitated, your right to own firearms is reinstated. There is also relief where you can appeal the NICS data and if the state can't back it up, it is deemed to have been a denial without cause and the data is removed from NICS.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...mp/~c110cP4bqs::

• (c) Standard for Adjudications and Commitments Related to Mental Health-

• • (1) IN GENERAL- No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--

• • • (A) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, has been set aside or expunged, or the person has otherwise been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring;

• • • (B) the person has been found by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that was the basis of the adjudication or commitment, respectively, or has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated through any procedure available under law; or

• • • (C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, except that nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall prevent a Federal department or agency from providing to the Attorney General any record demonstrating that a person was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

• • (2) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN ADJUDICATIONS AND COMMITMENTS-

• • • (A) PROGRAM FOR RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES-

• • • • (i) IN GENERAL- Each department or agency of the United States that makes any adjudication related to the mental health of a person or imposes any commitment to a mental institution, as described in subsection (d)(4) and (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, shall establish, not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a program that permits such a person to apply for relief from the disabilities imposed by such subsections.

• • • • (ii) PROCESS- Each application for relief submitted under the program required by this subparagraph shall be processed not later than 365 days after the receipt of the application. If a Federal department or agency fails to resolve an application for relief within 365 days for any reason, including a lack of appropriated funds, the department or agency shall be deemed for all purposes to have denied such request for relief without cause. Judicial review of any petitions brought under this clause shall be de novo.

• • • • (iii) JUDICIAL REVIEW- Relief and judicial review with respect to the program required by this subparagraph shall be available according to the standards prescribed in section 925(c) of title 18, United States Code. If the denial of a petition for relief has been reversed after such judicial review, the court shall award the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee for any and all proceedings in relation to attaining such relief, and the United States shall be liable for such fee. Such fee shall be based upon the prevailing rates awarded to public interest legal aid organizations in the relevant community.

• • • (B) RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES- In the case of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or a commitment of a person to a mental institution, a record of which may not be provided to the Attorney General under paragraph (1), including because of the absence of a finding described in subparagraph (C) of such paragraph, or from which a person has been granted relief under a program established under subparagraph (A) or (B), or because of a removal of a record under section 103(e)(1)(D) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, the adjudication or commitment, respectively, shall be deemed not to have occurred for purposes of subsections (d)(4) and (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code. Any Federal agency that grants a person relief from disabilities under this subparagraph shall notify such person that the person is no longer prohibited under 922(d)(4) or 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, on account of the relieved disability for which relief was granted pursuant to a proceeding conducted under this subparagraph, with respect to the acquisition, receipt, transfer, shipment, transportation, or possession of firearms.

• • (3) NOTICE REQUIREMENT- Effective 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, any Federal department or agency that conducts proceedings to adjudicate a person as a mental defective under 922(d)(4) or 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, shall provide both oral and written notice to the individual at the commencement of the adjudication process including--

• • • (A) notice that should the agency adjudicate the person as a mental defective, or should the person be committed to a mental institution, such adjudication, when final, or such commitment, will prohibit the individual from purchasing, possessing, receiving, shipping or transporting a firearm or ammunition under section 922(d)(4) or section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code;

• • • (B) information about the penalties imposed for unlawful possession, receipt, shipment or transportation of a firearm under section 924(a)(2) of title 18, United States Code; and

• • • (C) information about the availability of relief from the disabilities imposed by Federal laws with respect to the acquisition, receipt, transfer, shipment, transportation, or possession of firearms.

• • (4) EFFECTIVE DATE- Except for paragraph (3), this subsection shall apply to names and other information provided before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act. Any name or information provided in violation of this subsection (other than in violation of paragraph (3)) before, on, or after such date shall be removed from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

[-Wolverine-]

The NRA spends way to much energy trying to be PC, instead of standing strong and not caving to compromise. Background checks are totally stupid and worthless. If somebody wants a gun, they can get one alot of other places besides a gun shop. If someone really wants a firearm and they get rejected by background check, do they stop there? No they go buy stolen gun from "joe" on the corner. So no access is restricted there. Even if they pass a background check there is no assurance. The VT shooter passed a background check if I recall, so what good did it do??? Absolutely none.

They get them from illegal sources. Background checks are the one and only effective means of preventing the wrong people from purchasing guns legally.

The VT Tech shooter passed the NICS check because prior to the VT Tech shooting the NICS checks did not include voluntary admittances into the loony bin as a valid reason for the denial of the firearm transfer. Now it does. The NRA supported that, which is a good thing.

I doubt you will find any group who as done as much for gun owners as the NRA. They compromise because they need to, they can atleast water down legislation that will pass.
Thats something the no compromise groups won;t do. They would much rather have a bill that restricts the 2nd Amendment to a greater degree than a watered down version that was a compromise.

I also doubt anyone will find any other right in the Bill of Rights that has not been restricted. I don't see why the 2nd should be free from some restrictions.

[Sucka]

Dudley stays on top of it

I just like to know my money is actually being used to protect my rights. I'll throw them some money since i just got paid

[car-15]

I have to be a member, the local indoor range requires it, because that is where they get their insurance. and the nra makes everyone who is a member belong to them, or I would put my money to a group more in line with my thinking.