all i see is naysaying from you. how can you say "never going to happen"? according to conventional wisdom, alot of people who "never could win" already have, and many more are on the way here right shortly.
you have a choice; be part of the solution or be part of the problem.
As I said,good luck with that,if you think it can be done,feel free to try. Thats how it works here. However,you might want to keep in mind that its alot easier to destroy a lobbying group,no matter how powerful, than to convince everyone to change the entrenched political system. In other words,while I dont expect any radical changes,if you managed to get any traction at all with your "Get rid of the NRA and all the incumbent politicians" you would most likely manage the first part FIRST if the second part happened at all. Then where would we be. For that matter, there's an element on the far left that says exactly the same thing. They want to "Get rid of the NRA and their croneys in DC" just like you do. They are on your side in this for very different reasoning. There is a reason I'm a naysayer. I think getting rid of our most powerful ally would be a terrible mistake. Getting rid of them because you want them to be a mouthpiece for other conservative issues which many gun rights supporters do not support would be an even worse one.
Right now,they can present a united voice for us. It does not matter that I'm an atheist that worries about religion encroaching on government, supports abortion and thinks the government,in proper moderation, can take a positive role in the lives of Americans when it comes to various things such as protecting the rights and safety of workers or ensuring that industry does not pollute excessively,etc,and that another supporter of the NRA might be a devout Christian who believes "We are a Christian nation founded on Christian ideals and religious principles have a way in the way we run our country",that abortion is murder of the unborn, and as Reagan put it,"Government is not the solution,government is the problem". We can argue,probably quite angrily with each other for hours. Ill say his ideas are leading us down the road to fascism,he will say I'm a communist,and we will never agree and walk away thinking each other the biggest idiots we have ever seen. We do agree that the constitution provides us with the right to keep and bear arms and the NRA speaks for both of us in that regard. Thats important becuase politicians realize they dont just speak for him or I,they speak for us all. When the NRA lobbyist comes knocking hes going to tell the Democratic representative from Utah that its not about conservative vs liberal. Its about freedom and upholding the constitution and that while all the people he speaks for disagree on many things,they all,liberals and conservatives alike agree on that. Hes going to tell him that all the people,liberals and conservatives and moderates alike want to vote for politicians that support the 2nd amendment and that they listen to the opinion of the NRA on who is a candidate that supports that.
On the other hand,why would a Democrat listen to a lobbyist that came to them and said, "My supporters are almost exclusively republican. They want only votes on conservative issues. They want you to uphold the 2nd amendment. They are still going to vote for a republican no matter what and in fact,we wont try to change that. No matter what you do,we will never endorse you,unless perhaps you switch to the GOP,but still,we will probably call you a RINO and support someone more right of your views. We do however want you to vote against the gun control law,can we count on your vote?"
People need to get this strait. Without the NRA,as one poster put it,you would have to check your guns at the police station to go hunting,if you could go hunting at all. Forget about the majority of states having legal concealed carry. Forget about states instituting the castle doctrine and giving us the right to respond in kind with deadly force to someone trying to kill us in our own home. It would all be gone. There is a reason the far left fears and demonizes them. They are in fact the gun grabbers worst enemy.
Right now,we are winning the fight. Every year more states go "shall issue" and a few have even remove permit requirements altogether. Residents of DC and Chicago can have a gun in their home to defend themselves. I saw the supposedly liberal biased media did a very unbiased (even positive) report on a open carry rally. (they even made mention of how people when asked about their guns would twist around to show it,but never once did someone actually pull it out of the holster) If we stay the course,and keep up the pressure but dont look like a bunch of "armed lunatics" we will win more. In fact the NRA just filed a lawsuit against BATF challenging the federal prohibition against handgun sales by dealers to people between the ages of 18 and 21 (sounds good,and important to me. Why should an 19 year old girl,who just moved out on her own,not be able to buy a handgun to protect herself)
" Fairfax, Va. -- The NRA is challenging federal laws that prohibit law-abiding Americans eighteen through twenty years of age from legally purchasing a handgun through a federally licensed firearm dealer. The case was filed Tuesday evening in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Lubbock Division. James D'Cruz of Lubbock, TX is the plaintiff in this case.
"In Heller and McDonald, the U.S. Supreme Court clearly stated that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for all law-abiding Americans," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "That right is not limited only to Americans twenty-one years of age and older. Indeed, throughout our nation's history, adults beginning at age eighteen have served in the military and fought for this country with honor. But while the Supreme Court has consistently made clear that the federal government cannot ban or unduly restrict sales of items protected by the Constitution, the federal government continues to prohibit these adults from purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers, which represent the largest and most accessible means of purchasing handguns."
The suit asserts: "At eighteen years of age, law-abiding citizens in this country are considered adults for almost all purposes and certainly for the purposes of the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights. Indeed, at eighteen, citizens are eligible (and male citizens could be conscripted) to serve in the military-to fight and die by arms for the country. Yet, Section 922(b)(1) prohibits law-abiding adults in this age group from lawfully purchasing -- from the most prevalent and readily available source -- what the Supreme Court has called "the quintessential self-defense weapon" and "the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home."
The plaintiff, Mr. D'Cruz, is well-trained in the proper handling and use of firearms, including handguns. His initial training was with his grandfather, a World War II veteran, who wanted his grandchildren to understand the proper and safe techniques for use and storage of firearms. Mr. D'Cruz received further training from his father and as a member of the Navy Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps, where he achieved the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade. During his junior and senior years of high school, Mr. D'Cruz was a member of the JROTC's marksmanship team, and as member of that team has competed in regional and national marksmanship competitions. Mr. D'Cruz received numerous awards, including a first place medal for marksmanship, in a regional competition. Mr. D'Cruz also received a Foreign Legion unit award for marksmanship.
The case is D'Cruz v. BATFE. "
How is this not sticking up for our rights. The gun grabbers chipped away at our rights for years,now the shoes on the other foot. Its not going to happen overnight. The gun control types tell us that "The streets will run red" if we repeal ANY of these laws but as each falls and things get better,or at least stay the same, their message will ring more and more hollow. As more people carry guns around,and when its the right time where you live,even carry them openly, the public will come to accept as they once did that guns are not the problem,its violent people that are the problem. It took a long time to change public perception against guns so its going to take a while to change it back. Its getting there tough. California is going to have a harder and harder time telling its citizens that "shall issue" permits will cause anarchy in the streets when most other states have it and life goes on as normal. THAT is what the Brady Bunch fears the most. They are losing their credibility day by day.
Unless we start losing again and again,rather than winning again and again as we have been,Im actually happy with the state of 2nd amendmnet rights activism as it is. There are alot of other things that I think are pretty screwed up in politics,but that's going rather well.
