The NRA Good or Bad?

[jimiw]

Hello everyone! This is my first post but I have been lurking awhile. I have a question and I am really in need of some answers. First Id like to begin by stating that this post is not meant to upset anyone or cause a problem. I am 58 years old and have supported the NRA most of my adult life until just recently when I read on The Gun Zone about how the NRA is selling us out and I have noticed on some other gun sites that some of the members have derogatory statements about the NRA in their signatures. I was surprised to see there are a bunch of NRA supporters here. The NRA supporters here have you read the article on the Gun Zone about the NRA? If so would you please explain to me so I will have a better understanding of why you still support the NRA? Please again I ask that this not be a bashing or a major problem for this was not intended to stir up anything. I am at a loss of what to believe about the NRA anymore and the second amendment is my reason for asking. I do not want to lose the right to keep and bear arms and I did not vote for Obama I chose the lesser of two evils. I am torn because as I said earlier I have always supported the NRA and now that Charlton Heston is gone the problems have started to arise. Thank you very much for any answers that you choose to provide. Jimi

[alsaqr]

Been an NRA member for over 50 years.   The NRA does not have really deep pockets.  Only about 10 percent of us NRA members ever contribute to the ILA and PVF.  The NRA must pick its fights very carefully.  Most  of the crap stirrers are not members of the NRA:  Rather they are troublemakers who expect the NRA to crusade for the removal of the the 1934 auto weapons ban and the 1968 gun control act.  No amount of money is ever going to eliminate or change either of these laws. 

The NRA carrys on its backs all of the waffling non-member gun owners in the USA. 

So you read something critical of the NRA on something called the "gun zone."   What in hades is the 'gun zone?" 
Tell the folks at the "gun zone" for me that none of them could own a gun in the USA right now were it not for the NRA. 

I have always supported the NRA and now that Charlton Heston is gone the problems have started to arise.

Show me the problems. 

[Questor]

I hear you. Still, they are better than anything else we've got and we should keep supporting them. After all, can you imagine how bad it would be without the NRA? By the way, have you heard or read anything about whether NRA memberships are increasing since the greater of two evils was elected?

[Swampman]

Good

[Brett]

I am an Endowment member of the NRA myself. No other pro gun org. has the political clout that the NRA has.  As another member pointed out their resources are not limitless and they have to pick their fights.  It would do no one any good to through money into battles that can't be one.  Every year members have the opportunity to elect new officers. If those folks are unhappy with what the NRA is doing they need to take the time to do a little research and vote for the people they think will take the NRA in the direction they want instead of trashing them on chat rooms and gun forums.

I guarantee you that a very small percentage of gun owners do anything to help support our 2nd amendment rights other than piss and moan on web sites like this one.  We should all be contributing what we can, when we can to the ILA and PVF and we all need to keep up with proposed bills and laws both on the Federal and local level that would affect our rights as gun owners and make our voices heard.

Don't fall into the 'well I don't hunt or shoot with semi-automatic weapons or handguns' or whatever so I don't care category.  All gun owners need to stick together or the antis will chip away at us like the have in the UK and Australia.  Remember a house divided will not stand.

okay I'll step down from my soap box now.

 

[Syncerus]

Is this even a real question?

You're kidding right?

[PartsMan]

I joined yesterday so I guess I think there good.

I figure thay are like the Marines.
Not the nicest bunch of guys but perfect for what they do.

[Graybeard]

I don't know what this gun zone is so have no clue what you've read. Do you have links to it to share?

As to the question there is some good and some bad in the NRA just like all organizations. Is it more of either than the other? Dunno but personally I distrust the NRA greatly mostly due to LaPierre who I have zero use for and wouldn't trust him as far as I can one hand toss an elephant. I personally see him as the single biggest problem the NRA has today and if they'd dump him I think most of the problems would go away.

I do believe they are selling us out more than helping and they are draining away shooter/hunter dollars that otherwise might be better spent elsewhere. Still at times they will do just enough good to keep folks hooked into thinking they are on our side. Perhaps the organization as a whole is but I fear LaPierre is not.

[Brett]

Just curious, not looking to start a fight or anything GB, could you be more specific about why you distrust/dislike LaPierre?   

 

[oldandslow]

Everone is entitled to their opinion. Mine is that the NRA has been the only reason that we have the relative freedom to own guns that we do today. Without them I sincerely believe that we would be in the same position that the British are in. Anti-gunners fear them but you never hear them mention any of the other gun right groups. That's clout.

No one organization can completely satisify all it's members all the time. I believe they do much more good than harm. I'll be an NRA member as long as I'm alive.

[45-70.gov]

being  a  member   of a pro-gun group  is not  like  voting
you can  belong  to more  than  one  group

the  NRA  is  the  biggest  and longest  lived but are not  as  hard core as  i would  like
we  should  all  contribute  to making    it even  bigger
bill  Clinton  was  the first  nonmember  to serve  as president in  this   century  i  think

i  like  the  50 caliber shooters association......they  are  on  the front lines
i  want  to find  a  real  aggressive  group  to join  IN  ADDITION  TO


BUT  YES  THE  NRA  IS  GOOD..............is  it the  best..don't  know/don't  matter

[jimiw]

I want to thank everyone for their reply as it was very important to me. I have a better feeling now about the NRA and I will continue to support them. I needed to hear the pro side since all I was getting was the negative and I understand that they do more good than bad and they are the biggest.

GB here is the link to the article I mentioned http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-40.html Again a big thank you to everyone you have helped me to understand the situation better. Jimi

[Troyboy]

The article is probably about right. I wil continue to support as much as i can because that is what needs to be done

[TribReady]

The article is probably about right. I wil continue to support as much as i can because that is what needs to be done

Agree with Troyboy (and not just because my name is Troy  ), but the NRA is far from perfect but far better than nothing.
I'll continue to support and hope it gets even better.

[Redhawk1]

I read the article, and that is just one mans opinion. I will support the NRA like I have for over 25 years now. Not one other pro-gun group has done what the NRA has done with our gun rights, and actually getting stuff done.

I have yet to have anyone show me any other pro-gun group that has accomplished what the NRA has do for us gun owners.

Yes the NRA is not perfect, and they don't do every thing that makes some of us happy, but as long as they are there for me, I will be there for them.

[LaOtto222]

I am not a life time member of the NRA, but I have paid annual dues for over 30 years and contribute a little on the side when I can. No, the NRA is not perfect, few organizations are, if any. They are one of the strongest lobbyists in Washington, very influential. But that is what they are influential, not demanding and getting. If you push too hard, congressman are going to shut down and you will have no influence at all. That is the way some of the other gun rights groups are. Very militant so in the end they have little influence. They are written off as militant. The NRA have to pick the fights too, you can not win them all. Nope the NRA is not perfect, they do not line up the same as me, but they have done more for gun owners than any other organization, so they will continue to get my membership and small donations on a continuing basis, until the fight is over. Good Luck to all and I hope Good Shooting.

[Guy Pike]

I am a charter member of JPFO. We need more members and you don't have to be Jewish.

[JBlk]

I have the same feeling as greybeard about W La Pierre.There is just something about that guy that just doesn't ring true.I don't have that feeling about the other NRA Representatives.I think that the organisation has worked in the best instrest of the 2ND amendment.I have donated to the NRA on several occasions, probably because I've seen what politicans have done here in Ill.I feel that in the very near future we are going to be faced with the greatest attempt by the government to restrict the ownership of our weapons and ammunition in the history of our country.Support your NRA, and we will at least have a voice to speak in our behalf. 

[Cement Man]

I think that the organisation has worked in the best instrest of the 2ND amendment.I have donated to the NRA on several occasions, probably because I've seen what politicans have done here in Ill.I feel that in the very near future we are going to be faced with the greatest attempt by the government to restrict the ownership of our weapons and ammunition in the history of our country.Support your NRA, and we will at least have a voice to speak in our behalf. 

+1.  Also an Illinoisan.  Been an NRA member since 1962.  ISRA is also a very good affiliate to keep up on things here in Illinois.  The number of people in this country who do not really care about guns or the 2nd Amendment is growing, while those of us who value and cherish these freedoms is shrinking.  The "growing" segment, along with a significant number of naive gun-owners who just do not understand how gun rights are in jeopardy, have just elected a very smooth, sharp politician AND a machine/organization/constituency that does not like guns, period. 

I agree.  I think we are in for a lot of huge, tough political battles and the NRA and similar organizations are very important.

[nw_hunter]

I don't know what this gun zone is so have no clue what you've read. Do you have links to it to share?

As to the question there is some good and some bad in the NRA just like all organizations. Is it more of either than the other? Dunno but personally I distrust the NRA greatly mostly due to LaPierre who I have zero use for and wouldn't trust him as far as I can one hand toss an elephant. I personally see him as the single biggest problem the NRA has today and if they'd dump him I think most of the problems would go away.

I do believe they are selling us out more than helping and they are draining away shooter/hunter dollars that otherwise might be better spent elsewhere. Still at times they will do just enough good to keep folks hooked into thinking they are on our side. Perhaps the organization as a whole is but I fear LaPierre is not.

My thoughts also Greybeard!

[williamlayton]

There are a number of agenda's and all cannot be given top priority.
Everybody thinks their agenda is the most important.
I can't really agree with GB about LaPierre--though I don't know where GB is coming from.
I would be interested too learn of his distrust.
The NRA is a good solid organization with good credentials and a history of solid leadership---IMO.
Blessings

[Guy Pike]

If the Nuge was President{of the US} I would rejoin the NRA.

[Cement Man]

If the Nuge was President{of the US} I would rejoin the NRA.

If the Nuge were president, the need for you to join the NRA would be far less crucial.  That would mean that he had been elected by a majority which supported gun ownership as it is one of the Nuge's foremost values.

That's the point - the current president-elect and his constituency, powered by their political machine, global influence, someday a loaded SCOTUS, are gonna come after the law-abiding gun owner.  Inch by inch, foot by foot, and so on.  They do not like guns.  Period. 

[six_gunz]

Sounds like you're easily manipulated by one man's opinion. I too would like to see you post these so called problems since Heston died. Facts, not hearsay.
I'm an NRA supporter and member. They might not be perfect, but neither am I nor is anyone else here.

If the Nuge was President{of the US} I would rejoin the NRA.

Huh???

[nw_hunter]

being  a  member   of a pro-gun group  is not  like  voting
you can  belong  to more  than  one  group

the  NRA  is  the  biggest  and longest  lived but are not  as  hard core as  i would  like
we  should  all  contribute  to making    it even  bigger
bill  Clinton  was  the first  nonmember  to serve  as president in  this   century  i  think

i  like  the  50 caliber shooters association......they  are  on  the front lines
i  want  to find  a  real  aggressive  group  to join  IN  ADDITION  TO


BUT  YES  THE  NRA  IS  GOOD..............is  it the  best..don't  know/don't  matter

*****************************

If you remember!.......G. Bush the 1st revoked his membership with the NRA, after he left office.
He might have been the first Liberal Republican President also
 
The NRA like the Republican party is crawling with Liberals posing as friends of the gun owner.
There is still some good members at the top, in the NRA, but the Lefties are gaining ground rapidly there.

Like Graybeard, I believe Wayne L. needs to go.

Do you remember HR2640? This is just one of many reasons I have bailed from the NRA, and Joined with Orgs. like the GOA. On a fixed income, I can't belong to every group in the country, and I want what little I add to the fight, to go to an Organization that will not compromise with these Liberal A_ _H _ _ _S

This is just my opinion, and I respect your rights to yours.

 HR 2640, The NRA's Latest "Victory."
“We commend the United States Congress for its action today to strengthen the Brady background check system.”

Those were the words of Paul Helmke the President of the Brady gun ban group. The action to which he was referring, as you no doubt know, was the passage of HR 2640, in lighting moves with no debate and no recorded votes.

Both the US Senate and the US House passed this bill on December 19th under "unanimous consent" agreements. That means it was not even discussed. In order for this to happen, the leadership of both parties had to agree to allow it.

We are not surprised politicians would push more gun control with no accountability. But what is greatly troubling is that the National Rifle Association was the primary force behind this latest attack on gun rights.

The NRA's spin machine is operating at full capacity praising the passage of a bill written by the most anti-gun members of Congress.

The bill expands and extends the failed Brady background check system, a gun registration scheme which has cost thousands of qualified people the ability to purchase a firearm.

It is amazing the NRA would revive a bill that was going nowhere just to give more power to the people who are denying legitimate purchases now.

You will recall the NRA supported the original Brady Bill because they approved of background checks for gun buys. That a "pro-gun" organization could support prior restraint of a right is bad enough, but now, years after this system has been in place, the NRA joins forces with an organization that has raised millions to strip Americans of their Second Amendment right in order to expand this dangerous law.

The NRA has insisted that this bill, rammed though when they hoped no one was watching, is going to benefit gun owners. On their website, the NRA uses the following quote to prove what a great deal this is for gun owners:
"Provides that if a person applies for relief from disabilities and the agency fails to act on the application within a year—for any reason, including lack of funds—the applicant can seek immediate review of his application in federal court."

A year? A person who applies for relief has to wait a year before they can demand that some action be taken? That's a mighty long time to wait for the right to have a firearm ...especially if you need one. Oh, and then they get to go to court, to "seek" review. At their own expense of course.

Aside from the fact that the enemies of gun rights are crowing about this "victory" the biggest problem,(lost in NRA's extensive justification for what CBS News called the first major new gun control bill in more than a decade,) is a simple reality the NRA refuses to acknowledge.

This bill turns over more power and more information to the very agencies which have used existing law to deny the rights of Americans or make it impossibly expensive to exercise those rights.

In Oregon, countless qualified buyers are denied purchases because of the intentional obstruction of government agencies who maintain these records. But it is even worse than that.

The original Brady Bill allowed for an end to the mandatory waiting periods when the availability of records allowed for an "instant" background check. We have long since passed that point, but for far too many people the background check is anything but "instant" stretching to weeks and months for many. How can the NRA and its apologists believe that the abysmal record keeping (or the outright obstruction of some agencies) is going to improve by handing these bureaucracies more power and personal information?

The NRA, in an article entitled "Clearing The Air On The Instant Check Bill " said the following:

"In the late 1990s, gun buyers often experienced ridiculous delays while NICS sorted through cases of mistaken identity or incomplete police records. Many purchasers were wrongly denied and forced to go through a cumbersome appeals process. At the same time, state officials testified before Congress about woefully incomplete records they provide to NICS--a problem confirmed in recent reports by the U.S. Department of Justice"

Well someone needs to alert these guardians of our gun rights, that nothing's changed. And now we are well passed the 1990's. Gun owners are still being delayed and denied and still face cumbersome appeals processes. If you are delayed without cause, it's your tough luck. The so called "safeguards" built into the law are meaningless and ignored. Sure, the law says if you don't get an approval within three days, a firearms transfer may take place, but just try it.

Now NRA wants to solve the problems they created with Brady by giving us more of the same. They are telling us that the government bureaucrats will now be using accurate records, we should all be thankful and this is a great step forward.

In the world of gun rights, "good intentions" don't cut it . As poorly kept and abused as the records of criminal behavior are, at least crimes are generally easy to quantify. "Mental illness" is far less black and white. You will recall the Bush efforts to screen the entire US population for "mental illness."

The NRA has joined forces with politicians and organizations who have declared their intention to end gun ownership in this country. They have rammed through legislation that requires that more records be handed over to people who have proven they cannot be trusted with them. They have asked that gun owners believe that the same people who defunded the process to allow people to get their gun rights back under the current law won't defund the lengthy process to get your rights back under this new law.

If you believe that more records in the hands of more government operators is a good idea, you may want to think about the first act of the Clintons when they took over the White House. The FBI record scandal proved beyond any doubt how unscrupulous and criminal political operatives can bypass the law to ruin people's lives.

In an alert title "Outrage of the Week" the NRA has invited readers to share their "weekly outrage."
They say "If you see something that you feel would be a good candidate for the “Outrage of the Week!” section, please send it to: freedomsvoice@nrahq.org."

We think the sneaky passage of NRA/Schumer/McCarthy bill more than qualifies.
800-392-8683 - Grassroots Hotline

 

   
Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Oregon Firearms Federation. All Rights Reserved.
   

[Cement Man]

Last year there was quite a firestorm here over HB2640.  Like most political campaigns these days, those on both sides of that issue picked the best points to support their arguments (and omitted the points that wouldn't) and went at it. 

Unfortunately, a clear, complete picture of the issues do not result when folks do that.  And every issue needs to be looked at both ways - carefully scrutinized in detail, and also in the broader perspective.  Some folks in this country think the constitution allows for everyone with no conditions, to own a howitzer.  Others think you should be a minimum of 75 years old, pass a rigorous background investigation, and have a 10 year waiting period to acquire and possess a slingshot.  Most of us here fall between those extremes.  The majority opinion (the voting mass) does too.

After the bruhaha last year over 2640, I read the bill in its entirety and researched points where I needed further explanation.  I didn't find that the anti-NRA talking points were accurately presented.

I don't think the NRA is perfect and I support most all pro-gun causes, as long as they support safety and responsibility.

I am still a proud NRA member and intend to continue to urge others to join.  (And don't forget your local and state organizations - just as important, if not more so.)

[torpedoman]

in addition to the NRA i belong to the saf (second amendment foundation) and gun owners of America both are less apt to compromise than the NRA and it never hurts to support all the groups that are involved in the fight for YOUR rights