Another reason to stop supporting the NRA

[gjones77]

This is one of many reasons they'll never get another cent from me.

The NRA isn't interested in defending the rights of gun owners, or at least they'll only go so far, they have to make sure that the boogey man is always at the door, otherwise they would cease to have the funding they currently do, and they can't have that, so they'll never try to eliminate all onerous gun laws and work for legislation that would protect gun owners because they would go broke.

You would think that the National Rifle Association, the NRA, would naturally back the Rand Paul amendment on exempting firearms records searches under the Patriot Act. But you would be wrong. The NRA criticized Senator Paul's amendment to exempt gun purchases from search provisions of the Patriot Act in e-mails to Congress while apparently sitting on important information showing the need for Paul's amendment. And it continues to defend its opposition to the Paul Amendment after The New American published information about that betrayal of Second Amendment principles. The information the NRA was apparently sitting on shows that the FBI and the federal government's Joint Terrorism Task Force have already begun trolling the records of law-abiding gun owners, using the excuse of terrorism surveillance.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/8018-does-the-nra-support-gun-owners

(I apologize if this is a dupe, I did a search and didn't find an thread about this)

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

I know I'm being naive here to think that these records are destroyed after a proceed or deny are stated, but I was under the idea that after that info was used on a 4473, the records are purged and destroyed by the Dept. of Justice. I was also under the assumption that the only records of gun sales ( in "free" states, that is....ones that don't require gun registrations) are at the initial point of sale ( the gun shop or FFL holder, etc). If what is being said is true, this is a SERIOUS violation of all sorts of rights!

 

[ChargingCharlie]

This is one of many reasons they'll never get another cent from me.

The NRA isn't interested in defending the rights of gun owners, or at least they'll only go so far, they have to make sure that the boogey man is always at the door, otherwise they would cease to have the funding they currently do, and they can't have that, so they'll never try to eliminate all onerous gun laws and work for legislation that would protect gun owners because they would go broke.



http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/8018-does-the-nra-support-gun-owners

(I apologize if this is a dupe, I did a search and didn't find an thread about this)

I'm curious....Did you happen to go to the link provided in the article that leads to NRA-ILA's website where they explain why they didn't support it? If you did, then I'm surprised you still feel the same way. Who you give your money to is none of my business, but you're naive if you think the NRA does us more harm than good.

 

[gjones77]

I'm curious....Did you happen to go to the link provided in the article that leads to NRA-ILA's website where they explain why they didn't support it? If you did, then I'm surprised you still feel the same way. Who you give your money to is none of my business, but you're naive if you think the NRA does us more harm than good.

I read their explanation, they felt that a grand jury would be a lesser threshold than a judge issuing a warrant, which as you can see by the fact the fed is already digging, isn't true.

To require a grand jury subpoenas to get the data, that requires a far higher threshold of proof than a simple bench warrant.

Their excuse is weak.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

I'm curious....Did you happen to go to the link provided in the article that leads to NRA-ILA's website where they explain why they didn't support it? If you did, then I'm surprised you still feel the same way. Who you give your money to is none of my business, but you're naive if you think the NRA does us more harm than good.

I did and stated that they could not support the Paul amendment. Their facts supporting their decision are very strange, to say the least. They state that because the PATRIOT Act has never been used to get the info (as far as they could tell) and that if we don't allow the info to them through the PATRIOT Act, they could get that info through other means, as their reason for not supporting the Paul amendment.
This to me is a problem. Just because the PATRIOT Act has not been used to abuse people's rights in regards to gun records, does not mean it will not be in the future. Also, the NRA stated that it could not support the Paul amendment because the info could be retrieved through other means. Again, this is a problem. There should be NO other means to get this info then through the right channels...basically, a warrant signed by a judge with a proper reason.
So, in my eyes, the NRA should have supported that amendment to protect the rights of the gun owners and shops from the overreaching of the PATRIOT Act.

 

[Hikes]

Unfortunately, without the support and lobbying of the NRA we would have far less (if any) gun rights. Could they do better? Probably. But that's true of nearly any organization.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[EC1]

I read their explanation, they felt that a grand jury would be a lesser threshold than a judge issuing a warrant, which as you can see by the fact the fed is already digging, isn't true.

To require a grand jury subpoenas to get the data, that requires a far higher threshold of proof than a simple bench warrant.

Their excuse is weak.

Are you a lawyer? If not, I hope one of the lawyers on the board would chime in with a response to your claim.

 

[bubbaj]

It all comes down to a few things. Either you feel the NRA doesn't do enough and you will always criticize them regardless of what they do, or you are a supporter and deal with the fact that the NRA had become a big bloated enitity that drops the ball sometimes.

I know many memebers are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the NRA. I myself am tired of the waste from all these mailings they send out constantly. But the good that they do out weighs everything else. It would be a scary world without them. I just hope that the leadership can fix the mess they have become.

And if you don't want to give them any money, then don't. Pretty simple. I don't spend my free time dwelling on organizations I don't like or support.

 

[gjones77]

Pretty simple. I don't spend my free time dwelling on organizations I don't like or support.

I do when they use their clout to shoot down bills protecting our rights.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

I do when they use their clout to shoot down bills protecting our rights.

I agree. Unfortunately, this has not been the case recently. From Florida to Pennsylvania to New Hampshire, the NRA has used that clout you speak of to hinder more then help in these instances. To me, the NRA has gotten away from the core belief that the right to bear arms is a natural right not needing permission. They, with help some state level organizations, have undermined some bills that would take gun rights to the next level, so to speak.

 

[z0mbi]

I agree. Unfortunately, this has not been the case recently. From Florida to Pennsylvania to New Hampshire, the NRA has used that clout you speak of to hinder more then help in these instances. To me, the NRA has gotten away from the core belief that the right to bear arms is a natural right not needing permission. They, with help some state level organizations, have undermined some bills that would take gun rights to the next level, so to speak.

I don't understand this position at all. Every day the ILA feed is continuously updated with pro-gun laws they are supporting or anti-gun laws they are fighting. For every one instance where something like this happens there's 100 different good bills and laws that the NRA does put their weight behind to support.

I would be more apt to criticize them on this instance if I knew exactly what the heck the pros and cons are. Its confusing to me and I have yet to see anyone sum up in layman's terms why this amendment was good or bad in a way that I can wrap my brain around.

 

[z0mbi]

I know I'm being naive here to think that these records are destroyed after a proceed or deny are stated, but I was under the idea that after that info was used on a 4473, the records are purged and destroyed by the Dept. of Justice. I was also under the assumption that the only records of gun sales ( in "free" states, that is....ones that don't require gun registrations) are at the initial point of sale ( the gun shop or FFL holder, etc). If what is being said is true, this is a SERIOUS violation of all sorts of rights!

I was under the impression that the 86 FOPA made federal level 'gun registration' illegal.

 

[TomH]

Between their recent actions and screwups in NH and other states, and things like this I'm done with them. They want to play the political game. The Patriot Act is popular among those elected, so it doesn't matter if it's wrong or not. They will support it and pat the gov on the back for doing the "right thing" in the post-911 world. Simply following the Constitution was just fine for over 200 years, we don't need to change it.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

I was under the impression that the 86 FOPA made federal level 'gun registration' illegal.

While the registration of guns are illegal at the fed level, what stops them from keeping the " records" of gun sales? This would be a workaround of this if they can access the 4473's that are filed out and called into them for suitability of owning firearms. I do not know what info is given to the Feds when the 4473 is called in. If your name, address, SSN, and the serial number of the firearm is given to the Feds when it is called in for suitability, and this record is not destroyed, then this info can ( and probably will) be used against the individual purchasing the firearm.

 

[Sibb]

This is one of many reasons they'll never get another cent from me.

The NRA isn't interested in defending the rights of gun owners, or at least they'll only go so far, they have to make sure that the boogey man is always at the door, otherwise they would cease to have the funding they currently do, and they can't have that, so they'll never try to eliminate all onerous gun laws and work for legislation that would protect gun owners because they would go broke.



http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/8018-does-the-nra-support-gun-owners

(I apologize if this is a dupe, I did a search and didn't find an thread about this)

Oh the largest pro 2A organization in the country isn't doing everything you think they should be doing, so your upset. Really! Chicago vs MacDonald, DC vs Heller, and how about the injunction during Katrina to stop the confiscations. Not to mention all the lobbying they do. I'm not a huge fan of the NRA but I believe in giving credit where credit is due, and they are due. We'd all be in a lot worse shape if it wasn't for you.

Thanks to them some of the pending cases, may actually have a chance here in the PRM. That is also due in large part to GOAL and other groups. Don't want to leave them out.

 

[drgrant]

I'm curious....Did you happen to go to the link provided in the article that leads to NRA-ILA's website where they explain why they didn't support it? If you did, then I'm surprised you still feel the same way. Who you give your money to is none of my business, but you're naive if you think the NRA does us more harm than good.

Did you actually bother to read it?

The NRA attitude is "we like the government way because if you get a subpeona it's more serious than the feds just being able to take the info without having to engage in any kind of due process "

This isn't the first time they've been caught throwing us under the bus and I'm sure it won't be the last, either.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Oh the largest pro 2A organization in the country isn't doing everything you think they should be doing, so your upset. Really! Chicago vs MacDonald, DC vs Heller, and how about the injunction during Katrina to stop the confiscations. Not to mention all the lobbying they do. I'm not a huge fan of the NRA but I believe in giving credit where credit is due, and they are due. We'd all be in a lot worse shape if it wasn't for you.

You need to do some serious reading/homework. The NRA had NOTHING to do with Heller, as a matter of fact, they tried to f**k it up on purpose before Alan Gura basically punched them in the face in court. (they wanted to make it something other than a 2nd amendment case)

The NRA didn't stop the confiscations either, they only persused remedy after it had happened. Big difference.

In the recent past up in NH they've been f**king up by inter-meddling in legislative efforts there. confusing the piss out of legislators and causing bills to come out less than perfect, all in some kind of attempt to make every state's laws align to their little "NRA approved" template.

For once I would like to see them butt the f**k out and sit in a corner for a decade or so. They're quickly becoming a thorn in the side of progress. (maintaining the status quo is NOT progress!)

-Mike

 

[rwl1955]

The NRA drives liberals crazy just like Palin does. I love the liberal columns demonizing the NRA every time some mass shooting is committed. That`s good enough for me.

 

[jadek]

Last time I bought a gun and the dealer called in there was nothing about the weapon other than handgun or longgun.. Don't think my ss # was given either..Just sayin. I also quit the NRA because of all the stuff they sent and then demanded $$ for. Gonna reup though cause basically the do a heck of a job for us,IMHO.

 

[neEEGuru]

... [the NRA] For once I would like to see them butt the f**k out and sit in a corner for a decade or so. They're quickly becoming a thorn in the side of progress. (maintaining the status quo is NOT progress!)

Yup.

They fuxed up constitutional concealed carry pretty bad in NH just this month alone, it was withing reach and by a super majority also, WITHOUT ANY OF THEIR MEDDLING WHATSOEVER! They had nothing to do with it getting that far, then they came in and screwed it all up literally at the last moment when basically set to pass.

Now NH didn't get constitutional carry this session.

 

[MisterHappy]

Granted, the NRA is not perfect - but as I've said before, "Politics is the art of the possible" ( OK....it didn't say it first) and they ARE the 800-pound gorilla WRT guns in this country.

None of the other pro-2A groups are considered to be the "opposition" by the Antis, at least on the national stage.

They're like any other large entity - they go about their business in a way that they think benefits them, and their members, best, overall. This large view does casue problems when a smaller, more agile organization is needed. That's whem GOAL comes in (for example)....but I've seen posts complaining about GOAL doing the same thing.....

On this forum, the general consesus is that guns are a natural right....for a good portion of the people nationwide guns are a natural wrong.....and even the [what some say are] ineffectual efforts by NRA are frightening to the Antis....if for no other reason than they provide a different point of view, and a source for a pro-2A soundbite from a group who's name is recognised.

 

[Sibb]

You need to do some serious reading/homework. The NRA had NOTHING to do with Heller, as a matter of fact, they tried to f**k it up on purpose before Alan Gura basically punched them in the face in court. (they wanted to make it something other than a 2nd amendment case)

The NRA didn't stop the confiscations either, they only persused remedy after it had happened. Big difference.

In the recent past up in NH they've been f**king up by inter-meddling in legislative efforts there. confusing the piss out of legislators and causing bills to come out less than perfect, all in some kind of attempt to make every state's laws align to their little "NRA approved" template.

For once I would like to see them butt the f**k out and sit in a corner for a decade or so. They're quickly becoming a thorn in the side of progress. (maintaining the status quo is NOT progress!)

-Mike

Maybe I do, because I've never heard of any of that.

 

[neEEGuru]

Maybe I do, because I've never heard of any of that.

Yes, FYI everything he said is TRUE. See my post #20.

 

[Fsorrent]

If I stop supporting the NRA, are you going to take up the mantle and support gun rights on the federal level?

 

[Spanz]

I struggled with supporting the NRA for some time, and finally rejoined this year. I figure at least half of what they do does stop barry from grabbing our guns. The other half...lets just hope we can vote in better leadership in the future.

 

[Sibb]

I struggled with supporting the NRA for some time, and finally rejoined this year. I figure at least half of what they do does stop barry from grabbing our guns. The other half...lets just hope we can vote in better leadership in the future.

Lets hope Jim gets on the council and things start moving in a better direction.

 

[gjones77]

If I stop supporting the NRA, are you going to take up the mantle and support gun rights on the federal level?

I don't need to, we have The Second Amendment Foundation, they've done far more to help restore our rights than the NRA has.

SAF helped to fund McDonald vs Chicago and Heller vs DC.

We also have Gun Owners Of America.

NRA is the 800lbs gorilla because they want to be, they're the ones that advertise all over the place and try and sell that cheap crap to generate more money, if the government stops going after our gun rights the NRA would cease to exists, and they would never let that happen.

 

[jaypap]

Anyone not happy about their mailings can call and opt out. I did so ten years ago and the mail stopped.

 

[Terminator03]

You need to do some serious reading/homework. The NRA had NOTHING to do with Heller, as a matter of fact, they tried to f**k it up on purpose before Alan Gura basically punched them in the face in court. (they wanted to make it something other than a 2nd amendment case)

The NRA didn't stop the confiscations either, they only persused remedy after it had happened. Big difference.

In the recent past up in NH they've been f**king up by inter-meddling in legislative efforts there. confusing the piss out of legislators and causing bills to come out less than perfect, all in some kind of attempt to make every state's laws align to their little "NRA approved" template.

For once I would like to see them butt the f**k out and sit in a corner for a decade or so. They're quickly becoming a thorn in the side of progress. (maintaining the status quo is NOT progress!)

-Mike

I'm on the same page as you, Mike, based on the reading I've done. The only reason they get any money from me is because it is a requirement of my local range for the insurance. If they insure you via an "associate membership" it costs about the same as an annual full membership, but without any of the extras, like the magazine, hat, and whatever other goodies they throw in. If I didn't need to belong for that purpose, I would cease supporting them all together based on what I have seen them do (or not do) over the past few years.

 

[Terminator03]

I don't need to, we have The Second Amendment Foundation, they've done far more to help restore our rights than the NRA has.

SAF helped to fund McDonald vs Chicago and Heller vs DC.

We also have Gun Owners Of America.

NRA is the 800lbs gorilla because they want to be, they're the ones that advertise all over the place and try and sell that cheap crap to generate more money, if the government stops going after our gun rights the NRA would cease to exists, and they would never let that happen.

I see this as being the biggest problem. They have become a big political machine, and if there wasn't an "enemy" they would cease to exist, so it behooves them to keep the wheels of progress wrt our rights moving as slow as possible. They do it under the guise of being for the "greater good", but in reality it is for the greater good of their organization, and it's continued funding.