Are you a member of the NRA?

[NSP64]

If you are not, you need to be. It is the only thing THEY are afraid of.

http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJhbmYwbmQ2BF9TAzM5ODMwMzA0MQRnc3RhdGUDM QRwb3MDNQRzZWMDbndfdG9wc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGF yA25ld3MueWFob28uY29t/SIG=12ur32m2q/EXP=1367777969/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/gun-control-forces-seek-path-big-loss-152516059.html

[TXGunNut]

Being an NRA member felt like giving the anti-gunners, Obama included, a much needed swift kick in the butt. They didn't learn anything but it felt good anyway.

[wch]

Y'know, I've been a Life Member of the NRA since I was 14, and my Dad gave the membership to me for my birthday. Sometimes I wondered if my membership really mattered-now I can see that it certainly does!
(My Dad just gets smarter as I grow older.)

[psychicrhino]

Joined cause I always figured it was like the old saying.... "If it is to be, it's up to me".

[lup]

If not me than who?

[contender1]

A lifer here. Gonna always be a thorn in any anti-American who wants to destroy the Second Amendment.

[country gent]

A mameber since the late 70s and life member since mid 80s when I started shhoting NRA High power rifle matches. If I remeber right my life mebership was 300.00 then. What a bargain that was for all the NRA has done for us. I try every year to make a donation to the NRA also.

[nvbirdman]

Joined in 1971, went for life membership in 1974, and became endowment member a few years ago.

[VintageRifle]

As of yesterday the $300 life membership is still available. I called to check for a fellow who was asking about it at a local gun shop.

[Coonazz]

Upgraded membership status to Life in 91.
John

[Love Life]

Interesting...

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?193909-So-the-NRA-is-a-buch-of-wusses&highlight=nra+are+wusses

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”

-Thomas Paine

[FLINTNFIRE]

Life member for a dozen years , range required NRA membership , had belonged for a few years here and there , made the decision to make it for life , great idea , all should , better to have some representation , support the NRA , but also write your reps , call them , email them , support those who stand up for what we believe in .

[abunaitoo]

Been a life mamber since the 70's.
Best money I've ever spent.

[Bad Water Bill]

Well a LIFE MEMBERSHIP cost $100.00 when I joined in 71.

That sounds cheap in todays dollars but that was about a week and 1/2 paycheck at that time.

At $300.00 today you have 0 excuses not to join.

Time to stand up and be counted while you still can.

[rfp357]

I'm not trying to get anyone's panties in a twist but give this a read. What do you think? Here is the website it is from: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/xcibviewitem.asp?id=3247[/URL]. Try looking into Gun Owners of America (GOA) too. At this point we can use all the help we can get...





"The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."

—NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968, P. 22

INTRODUCTION

When I recently used the term "NRA-supported" in reference to the National Firearms Act of 1934, some readers asked why I would assert such a thing. They believed NRA had no involvement in gun control politics back then. Because they and others didn't believe me, I prepared this historical record — to prove my claim and inform others.

I agree that blaming today's NRA management for transgressions of their predecessors is wrong. But confronting NRA management's longstanding support of gun control is a first step toward understanding that "My NRA" of today views the Second Amendment differently than America's Founders did — and they have for a very long time.

Don't take my word for it.



KeepAndBearArms.com — The National Rifle Association has been called "the largest and oldest gun control organization in America" by more than a few gun owners. A fair amount of evidence supports their claim.

As the Gun Control Act of 1968 was nearing the President's desk, NRA was being accused by Senator Robert Kennedy (D-NY) of not supporting "any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country." Naturally, NRA needed to respond to the allegation, and they responded with great detail and unusual candor.

To deflect Senator Kennedy's assertion, NRA published an article by their magazine's Associate Editor entitled "WHERE THE NRA STANDS ON GUN LEGISLATION" — elaborating at length about NRA's longstanding support for a wide variety of gun controls that included gun and gunowner registration, waiting periods, age restrictions, licenses for carrying a firearm or having a firearm in your vehicle, increased penalties for violating gun laws, regulating ammunition and more.

Following are several telling quotes from the March 1968 American Rifleman — NRA's premier magazine, then and now — and brief analysis of a few of them. The complete article from which these quotes were taken can be found further below. Scanned images of this article are also linked below.

First, let's clear up the matter of NRA's support of NFA'34:

"The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns. ... NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts." —American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

Unless someone has evidence to prove that the NRA lied to its membership in its premier magazine, let the record show that the NRA got behind the first unconstitutional federal gun law in America and then bragged about having done so, many years later — decades after the law had been continually used to violate the rights of untold numbers of American citizens, including, surely, their own members.

The "Dodd" to which the above quote refers is the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd. Senator Dodd mimicked the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938, applied the underlying principles to the Gun Control Act of 1968, and took a leading role in getting the bill signed into federal law.

"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition..." (P. 22)

The term "interstate commerce" is the BATF's fundamental justification for its firearms branch — a "color of law" excuse for the many assaults of innocent people they've conducted.

"The NRA supported the original 'Dodd Bill' to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that a purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun." (P. 22)

That's one form of registration.

"In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns." (P. 22)

That's an extension of one form of registration to all types of guns not already under registration schemes at the time.

In order to "put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts," NRA management also pressed the federal government, in 1968, to:

"Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:

"a. requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;"

That's a registration list.

"b. providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;"

That's another registration mechanism.

"c. requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;"

Wait a week to exercise your inalienable rights.

"d. prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;"

That is called Age Discrimination. In essence, in 1968, the NRA was saying "You can go die over in Vietnam for your country at age 18, but you can't sell a constitutionally protected item to your own neighbors for three more years."

"e. providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce;"

"Carrier" includes the U.S. Postal Service — another ripe opportunity for the federal government to collect names of gun buyers.

"f. increasing penalties for violation." (P. 22-23)

What do you think America's Founders would say about the NRA calling for "increasing penalties for violation" of unconstitutional gun laws?

At least as early as 1930, the NRA supported:

"...requir[ing] the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to local police authorities..."

Historically noteworthy is the fact that the Germans were simultaneously doing the same thing, laying the groundwork for a Hitler to happen.

and

"...requir[ing] a license to carry a pistol concealed on one's person or in a vehicle..." [emphasis mine]

Ever heard of a license to carry a firearm in a vehicle? NRA has — over 70 years ago.

Not only has NRA management long supported gun owner registration, they've worked hard for it and still do. And NRA's current management still supports "penalties" for exercising your rights, which they now call "zero tolerance enforcement". (See Project Exile Condemnation Coalition and the Project Exile Archives for more information.)

"Many other instances of NRA support for worthwhile gun legislation could be quoted. But these suffice to show that Senator Kennedy's 'terrible indictment' of the NRA is groundless." (P. 23)

"Worthwhile gun legislation"?

The "terrible indictment" of NRA, as you will see in the full text below, was that NRA didn't support gun control. NRA set that matter straight with a loud thud. NRA Management still to this day supports a wide variety of ever-complex gun controls. And despite taking in hundreds of millions of dollars a year, they've still never managed a Supreme Court court victory based on the Second Amendment's historically-valid "individual right" argument. It's no wonder — their version of the Second Amendment is different than that of America's Founding Fathers.

Do notice the subtitle of NRA's 1968 article below. A "97-year record" of supporting gun control, to NRA's management, was a matter of pride. Some things never change:

"We think it's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. ... We think it's reasonable to expect full enforcement of federal firearms laws by the federal government. ... That's why we support Project Exile -- the fierce prosecution of federal gun laws...we think it's reasonable because it works. ... We only support what works and our list is proud."

—NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre
Congressional Testimony, May 27, 1999
Hearing Before 106th Congress
House of Representatives
Committee On The Judiciary
Subcommittee On Crime
First Session
(source)

[Ajax]

Being a NRA member is a great step in the right direction. What I recommend is that you write your state and federal congressmen and make you opinion known. The left is if nothing else organized in that one area. Remember the squeaky wheel gets the grease. It take no longer than 30 minutes for me to write my congressmen a week. I know some of you will say they don't read them anyway. I guarantee you, at least in Pennsylvania they have a staff member who marks whether they are for or against legislation. I got this straight from the head of staff of representative Adam Ravenstahl, they then submit a report to the senator on how the constituents feel. So the letters do make a difference.

Andy

[dakota]

lifer since 69. I will be buying memberships. I've sent moeny to NRA-ILA, but think I might get better results by buying memberships - one annual per person that I know is a shooter but not NRA.

[smokemjoe]

My uncle said he help built a bridge across the Rhine river for we could shoot and play pool, You had better be a NRA member.

[captaint]

I have been an annual member since 1972. Every year. Since they still have the 300 dollar life deal going, I'm gonna have to take them up on that. This week. Thanks. Mike

[Epd230]

I was a member for awhile. Quit because I figured that I would save them money by not renewing my membership. That way they can quit sending me all of those mailers asking for more money.

Just joined about two weeks ago. At this point in time, I'll deal with the mailers and realize the importance of adding another number to their membership count.

Who knows, might even send back one of those mailers with some extra scratch in it.........if I can ever find extra scratch!

[deltaenterprizes]

Endowment member

[Down South]

Annual member here. I usually stay a year or two ahead on my dues. I take advantage of deals that come along. The last one was through Bass Pro. They offered a one year membership and offered a $50 gift card to join. Kinda like a free membership so to speak.

[Down South]

What I recommend is that you write your state and federal congressmen and make you opinion known. the letters do make a difference.

Andy

I also do that. I get canned letters back but like you, I figure they have someone taking tally on how many are or are not for whatever.

[rexherring]

It does help. Our new Senator from here is a Democrat but, she's a member of the NRA and speaks for the people of North Dakota so she voted the gun bills down. I wish more of the legislators would listen to their constituents and not their party.

[VintageRifle]

888-678-7894 $300.00 life membership.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

out ...

[GaryN]

I've been a life member since 1983. But what bugs me is Harry Reid. He got an A rating from the NRA. He also had a big spread in their magazine last summer. I think something stinks in the NRA.

[Bad Water Bill]

I think it had something to do with Reid getting a 2,000 acre range built in his state probably with fed money.:evil:

[Gliden07]

If you are not, you need to be. It is the only thing THEY are afraid of.

http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJhbmYwbmQ2BF9TAzM5ODMwMzA0MQRnc3RhdGUDM QRwb3MDNQRzZWMDbndfdG9wc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGF yA25ld3MueWFob28uY29t/SIG=12ur32m2q/EXP=1367777969/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/gun-control-forces-seek-path-big-loss-152516059.html

I didn't belong to the NRA for a while, I do not agree with some of the things they do and still don't!! But they are the only organization that has the clout to take on the Anti's!! Please if you are a Firearms enthusiast and don't belong to the NRA consider it!

[VintageRifle]

The normal price for a life membership is $1000.00. The $300.00 promotion may not last much longer. It is a good deal. I changed my status from annual to life because of that good deal. You also get a choice of magazine subscription.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

post ...

[montana_charlie]

This is what I don't understand ...
What I don't understand is why you and rfp357 don't start your own 'Let's Bash The NRA' thread and see how many participate, instead of hijacking this one to do your bashing.

CM

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

What I don't understand is why you and rfp357 don't start your own 'Let's Bash The NRA' thread and see how many participate, instead of hijacking this one to do your bashing.

CM


http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?132690-Have-you-received-the-quot-Special-quot-from-NRA

[waksupi]

The ones who can't get it through their heads the NRA don't pay for the trinkets probably wouldn't be able to handle the chore of contacting their representatives anyway. More democrats, apparently. They are the only ones I can think of that could have something repeated over and over, and not understand it.

[Gliden07]

I got a $10.00 membership that gives me an Email for my membership book a couple of stickers (on the car!!) and a membership card. For 10 bucks a year!! It also gives me a BIG voice in a very recognized organization!! They helps gun enthusiasts and are big enough to make a difference! Politicians don't listen to individuals but they do listen to the NRA!! Even Diane Feinstein notices their influence and the thorn in her side is definitely worth the 10 bucks I spent!!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

,,,...

[waksupi]

If that is directed towards me ... Since I'm the only one to mention trinkets previously ... I'm probably right ...

I not only contact my representatives (both email and phone) but am not a democrat either!

Further more ASRPA is the local state division of the nra ... Not the DC fat cats!

The reason of the post with the mention of the "trinkets" was to show that alot of people who want the "lifer" title ... Are unwilling to shell out the $1,000! We don't hear "I paid $300 for the life membership, but I sent them an extra $700 anyways"

The purpose of my first post in this thread was to show that the nra has some compitition ... They are not "The Only Ones" fighting for our rights, that are recognized by the idiots in DC or the media!

And once again you didn't pay attention. NRA doesn't spend a nickle on the trinkets.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

money!)

[Bad Water Bill]

Diesel curious minds want to know?

Is it true that the ONLY enjoyment you have in life is bashing the N R A ?

Personally I and I am sure many others are sick and tired of your CHILDISH tantrums.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

problem?

[dragon813gt]

Complaining about how much mail they send you is one of the dumbest reasons to not be a member. It takes less than a minute to opt out of all of it. I don't get much from them besides my magazine subscription.

I don't agree w/ them 100% and doubt I ever will. But they're the biggest player in the game. Just imagine how much power they would have if every firearm owner was a member. There would be no way the media could spin the numbers if they were 100 million strong.

[Love Life]

When other people bring up GOA I say "Who?" That is also what big DC says.

If you can't bring yourself to support the NRA then please pack your **** and go home. No worries though. Others will continue to pay your share in the defense of our gun rights.

[Sweetpea]

When other people bring up GOA I say "Who?" That is also what big DC says.

If you can't bring yourself to support the NRA then please pack your **** and go home. No worries though. Others will continue to pay your share in the defense of our gun rights.


Yep, I've never once heard of GOA in the media talking about how much clout they have...

The ONLY time I EVER hear of them, it's from someone that has a "problem" with the NRA.

[Bad Water Bill]

G O A ?
We have problems here in Illinois as my signature said.
G O A ?
We have an N R A rep watching our legislators and doing many other deeds for members and even folks that are not members.
G O A ?
We hold marches on Springfield and other locations and the N R A is actually present.
G O A ?
The only time I ever see them or heard from them is every 3rd day they are BEGGING for money.
N R A
The magazine is the ONLY literature that hits my mailbox.
N R A
ANY TIME there is any LEGISLATION either county,state or federal I get E mails and have permission to post them here and at other sites.
N R A
June 9 2013 we will have a reasonable CCW law in place.

I have personally marched as a staff member at many parades and attended meetings all over this end of the state and MY N R A is there.
G O A?
The only time I ever see them or heard from them is every 3rd day they are BEGGING for money.

If AND when they decide to march with me and the thousands of families with little children in THE FIRST OF MARCH weather here in Illinois then and only then will I even consider them as someone who has my back.

Till then I again say G O A ?

[waksupi]

And you have not acknowledged that they do pay for the pretty little membership cards, and the publishing company, plus postage.

How much of Gliden07's $10 is left to fight the gun grabbers? After they mail him his shiny membership card and bumper stickers (not including the dozen mailing trying to get more money!)

When those things are mailed out they are done by jobbers, who get a small cut of any funds they may raise. I see you can not understand something this simple. The NRA DOES NOT spend any money on this stuff.

Now I remember why I quit GOA some years ago.

[Phoenix]

Only thing I to say here. compromise.

The NRA lives in the world of compromise. Like was said earlier in a different thread compromise = loss of rights a tiny bit at a time. The NRA should not be compromising on anything EVER. There has been enough erosion of our rights. every compromise just equates to more erosion. The answer is NO COMPROMISE. I am also not confident that the NRA will not hand over their membership list with names and addresses when told to do so. They sell the list to so many people we know the government has the list. Where can you get a more complete list of gun owners that will be labeled as "extremists" than the NRA. The reason some like the GOA is they yell the mantra 'no compromise' I agree they are not big enough to be as effective, but the NRA like to play the political game instead of the lobby game. I don't see pro life groups compromising. Don't see the opposition compromising. Actually I don't see any group that opposes our thinking of any sort compromising. We should not be either. It is hard to stand behind any group that gives away ground, and sells its members info. I know they do it, my father has a PO box that noone has the info for except the NRA. that mailbox gets a dozen gun related mailings per month. How do you suppose they got the address? most of the mailings do not mention the NRA anywhere on the mailing.

The southern poverty law center thinks all christians that own guns are potential domestic terrorists and need to be watched. You don't think the NRA members are included?

If the NRA offered a confidential membership, No personal information, no mailings, no selling my info, no magazine. Just dues paid via money order, then I would join. Until then I will just support them via donations. Made in cash at the gun shows. I don't need to be on any more lists.

[Bullet Caster]

I joined the NRA and glad I did. I opted out for the magazine 'cause I want more money going to preserve our 2nd Amendment rights. I don't need any magazine as I can find most of what I want online anyway. And I'll be joining again next year, so put that in yer pipe and smoke it. Just my 2 cents worth. BC

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

truth.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

arms ...

[uscra112]

Well, yes, I am very reluctantly an NRA member, at the lowest level they offer. They are the strongest lobbyists in DC, and I'm OK with letting them add me to the list of people the "represent", for what little it's worth.

But for every dollar that I send NRA, I send two to SAF. Don't need to say why, 123.Dieselbenz just said it for me.

Anyone who doesn't support SAF before they support NRA is being fooled, IMHO. Alan Gura did all of the legal heavy lifting in the past five years, and the NRA has done next to none. (Although they have horned in and tried to take credit.) At one point NRA even opposed SAF on Heller ! ! ! ! Not my kind of advocate, but I'll play along once I've paid my dues to SAF.

And by the way, also pay your dues to Judicial Watch !

[montana_charlie]

How about one of the other organizations I mentioned ... Ever hear of SAF?
Yep.

Unlike conversations that include GOA people, when THEY have a discussion like "Second Amendment Foundation vs NRA" the consensus is that the organizations work in different ways but that both deserve equal support. http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/second-amendment-gun-legislation-discussion/161749-second-amendment-foundation-vs-nra.html

On the other hand, some are holding back on their love for Alan Gottlieb ever since learning that he and other SAF people helped to write the Manchin - Toomey amendment. http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-gun-rights-advocate-reveals-key-role-in-writing-manchin-toomey-background-checks-amendment/

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

not ...

[No_1]

Life member.

[skeettx]

Benefactor Member

[jcwit]

Re-read post #26 ... They know ...

So ... You don't want the help of organizations like GOA, SAF, NMLRA, ASRPA, and AZ-CDL helping in the fight?

Of those mentioned I have heard of GOA, where I have no idea anymore, and the NMLRA which I have been a member of in the past. None of them have I ever heard mentioned on any news program or on C-Span in regards to any gun legislation. But hey what do I know, I'm old and have been informed many times I'm lacking in knowledge by the younger generation.

[Bad Water Bill]

MacDonald vs Chicago - Notice NRA not mentioned ...

How do you know they were not there?

Have you EVER sat down with my friend Otis and even talked face to face with that Army vet?

Have you personally asked him if the N R A helped him?

Have you EVER asked ANY of the leaders of our fight here in Illinois if anyone else has been there at any of our marches or rallies.

I could go on with a lot more questions but since I am honestly living in Illinois and fighting the fight I do know there is only one lobbyist in the state capitol speaking for us.

I do know only the N R A is represented here and NO OTHER gun rights group ever shows up to help us when we NEED them.

Yes I DO wear a STAFF hat each year I march on Springfield with ONLY --N R A & I S R A --banners flying.

IF and when others PROVE they have EARNED my money will I consider supporting them.

On June 9 2013 thanks to the N R A We in Illinois will finally have our 2A rights restored.

[Sparky141]

Endowment member .

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

course!

[jcwit]

because most people freak out when they see what little good Wayne does for his million dollar salary!

OK, lets vote Wayne out and replace him with a $20/30 thousand dollar whizz kid and see what kind of leadership we get.;):happy dance::guntootsmiley:

[Gar]

I'm a Life Member of the NRA.
With that said, I have not been happy with their actions in the past support of gun control measures (68 GCA, 86 NFA act, etc.), but they are currently the biggest boy on the block.
I suggest anyone interested in protecting your 2 Amendment rights give serious consideration to joining or supporting other groups in addition to the NRA.

http://www.saf.org/
http://gunowners.org/
http://jpfo.org/

These are just a few of the organizations that are fighting for your 2 Amendment rights on a daily basis.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

more ...

[waksupi]

The reason I reiterate a point over and over again, is to combat repeated use of misinformation.

[Gliden07]

I don't get this post?? We all share a common goal!! The preservation of our Second Amendment Rights!!! I'm going to school right now and can't afford to belong to multiple organizations. I support the NRA (monetarily) and if I could afford to probably other Pro Gun Organizations!! Two come to mind in my State of Mass GOAL (Gun Owners Action League) and Comm2A. They both do more for my State than the NRA! I don't support everything the NRA does, but most organizations do things that not all the members agree with. My point is that the worse thing you can do is nothing, so if you chose to join a Pro Firearm group its a step in the right direction regardless of the organization.

[Bad Water Bill]

I am for supporting those that you like. After all it still is your money.

I have PERSONALLY met with most of the real movers and shakers and have their personal phone # to contact if needed.

I do not just nit pick from printed word I ACTUALLY meet and talk,march and do what ever else a 77 year old can do to defend our 2A rights.

Yes I will miss the conversations with Aaron from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. He always had a warm smile and never gave up the good fight.


Do I like EVERYTHING the N R A does NO. Do I think the frenchman needs to go YES. New faces bring in new ideas and we need more of them. What the N R A did 20-100 years ago is past history just as Custers fight is. With ACTUAL members working we will change things with the N R A BUT you have to be a MEMBER first.

In the mean time I will watch and see who steps up and actually shows their face where I and many of my friends are actually fighting.

I am waiting for 6-10-2013,fighting, sending politicians messages, and communicating with others volunteering help.

Well that is what I am ACTUALLY doing. What are other members here doing besides bashing other gun rights groups because you read something.

Yes my feathers are up but I am ACTUALLY there doing what I say.

[Gliden07]

I am for supporting those that you like. After all it still is your money.

I have PERSONALLY met with most of the real movers and shakers and have their personal phone # to contact if needed.

I do not just nit pick from printed word I ACTUALLY meet and talk,march and do what ever else a 77 year old can do to defend our 2A rights.

Yes I will miss the conversations with Aaron from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. He always had a warm smile and never gave up the good fight.


Do I like EVERYTHING the N R A does NO. Do I think the frenchman needs to go YES. New faces bring in new ideas and we need more of them. What the N R A did 20-100 years ago is past history just as Custers fight is. With ACTUAL members working we will change things with the N R A BUT you have to be a MEMBER first.

In the mean time I will watch and see who steps up and actually shows their face where I and many of my friends are actually fighting.

I am waiting for 6-10-2013,fighting, sending politicians messages, and communicating with others volunteering help.

Well that is what I am ACTUALLY doing. What are other members here doing besides bashing other gun rights groups because you read something.

Yes my feathers are up but I am ACTUALLY there doing what I say.

I'm with you Bill it takes more than a card to make you a member of any organization. I have written over 50 letters since December of last year and participated in a couple organized marches. Not to mention alienated most of my Facebook friends! I have posted some of my letters on this site and they have gotten mostly good reviews. There are always naysayers but I will continue doing what I believe is right for me! I've also petitioned members here to join the fight and do what they can. A letter here, phone call there, a conversation, it doesn't take a lot to be active just a will to do the right thing!!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

river ...

[flounderman]

I bought one of the 300 dollar life memberships, even tho I was paid up for years ahead. I was a member most of my life but never could afford the 1000. I think every gun club, shooting range or gun organization should require membership in the NRA. I don't understand a shooter, bad mouthing the NRA. What is their objective, what is their alternative, and where do they think they would be if it hadn't been for the NRA? If they want to shoot themselves in the foot, fine. Just don't do it around my feet and take their minority opinion to some tinfoil hat site where it belongs and I don't have to be offended by it. You can join all the other shooter organizations you want and they all want the second amendment left alone, but at the end of the day, the NRA is the group the politicians are listening to. If you don't choose to be a member, that's your choice, but don't be working against what they are trying to do for us.

[Gliden07]

Ric,

Just to be clear, when I say "trinkets" I'm referring to the freebe hat or bumber sticker or some little coin or doo dad ... I'm not talking about "promotions" like I went off about in the thread I linked to here back in a post to Charlie ...

----------

Gliden07,

Yes, I agree we should do what we can ... With who we choose, but we do need to do SOMETHING! Everybody has different situations, and perspectives that affect how they see what is "best"

----------

Bill,

I'm glad your out doing what you can and see as the most helpful, as I posted earlier there are other options in ADDITION to just the nra ... To me, from where I'm at ... They seem like a better choice, of course I expect you to do the same, never have I said that you (or anybody) must join/support some group. I was just offering alternate choice for people to look at ...

Unfortunately because of my job as a long distance truck driver I do much more of the writing and calling duty ... From local, state, federal level, and back it up with money. I have only been to one rally out here, as I work most weekends, and am gone from home for two to three weeks at a time ...

Do you know John from http://www.gunssavelife.com/ he is on the forum over at frugal squirrels ... Where I spend alot of time ... The have quite a few small road signs up along the highways in south/central IL ... Or did awhile ago ... I changed jobs, and my current co doesn't send me across the river ...

+100 on that thought!!

I have a lot of friends that shoot, hunt etc... They do nothing to protect there rights yet there the first to complain when they loose something!!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

out???

[jmort]

As stated above,I too will continue to be the lowest level NRA member possible, but the NRA blows in so many ways. They fought the CATO institute on Heller - what a stupid decision. Thankfully CATO was right and the NRA failed. The end for me, was the despicable sell-out of the First Amendment over the Disclose Act. Treason. NRA Board Member, and all around great person Cleata Mitchell had this to say in her 6-17-2010 Washington Post Op-Ed piece of the NRA sell-out of the Constitution:

"The NRA "carve-out" reaffirms the wisdom of the First Amendment's precise language: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."

Congress can't help itself. Since 1798, with the Alien and Sedition Acts, incumbent politicians have yearned for legal duct tape for their opponents' mouths. The Disclose Act is a doozy of a muzzle.

For its part, the NRA -- on whose board of directors I serve -- rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for "neutrality" from the legislation's requirements. In doing so, the NRA has, sadly, affirmed the notion held by congressional Democrats (and some Republicans), liberal activists, the media establishment and, at least for now, a minority on the Supreme Court that First Amendment protections are subject to negotiation. The Second Amendment surely cannot be far behind.

Since the court's January decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations cannot be constitutionally prohibited from making independent candidate-related expenditures, Democrats have been hyperventilating at the notion that corporations might spend millions of dollars criticizing them. To foreclose that possibility, the Disclose Act would impose onerous and complicated "disclosure" restrictions on organizations that dare to engage in constitutionally protected political speech and on corporations that dare to contribute to such organizations.

Democrats would effectively neuter the court's decision by requiring the names of multiple donors to be recited in ads (thus shrinking the time spent on actual speech), requiring the CEO of a corporate donor to personally appear in campaign-related ads, expanding the coverage period to virtually the entire election year, and including myriad other rules that the NRA described last month as "byzantine" and an "arbitrary patchwork of reporting and disclosure requirements."

The NRA's wheel-squeaking bought it an exemption from those requirements. Tea Party organizations arising spontaneously since 2009? Out of luck. Online organizations with large e-mail followings but perhaps no formal dues structure? Forget it.

Receiving less attention than the NRA "carve-out" but no less cynical is the bill's sop to organized labor: Aggregate contributions of $600 or more would be disclosed. Why start at $600? Why not $200 or, say, $500? Because most union members' dues aggregate less than $600 in a calendar year and thus members' contributions to labor's campaign-related spending wouldn't need to be disclosed . . . even to the union members whose dues are spent for political purposes.

In Citizens United, the court held that the First Amendment doesn't permit Congress to treat different corporations differently; that the protections afforded political speech arise from the Constitution, not Congress. Otherwise, it would be tantamount to a congressional power to license the speech of some while denying it to others.

The NRA carve-out is a clear example of a congressional speech license.

The ostensible purpose of the legislation is benign "disclosure," upheld in Citizens United as permissible under the First Amendment. Even conservative Justice Antonin Scalia has expressed skepticism about the constitutional infirmity of disclosure requirements in another case argued this term; Scalia intoned in oral argument that "running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage."

That's true. Indeed, the law upheld in Citizens United requires all donors to candidate-related expenditures to be publicly disclosed to the FEC in a timely manner.

But the Disclose Act isn't really intended to elicit information not currently required by law. The act serves notice on certain speakers that their involvement in the political process will exact a high price of regulation, penalty and notoriety, using disclosure and reporting as a subterfuge to chill their political speech and association.

It is only disclosure, say the authors. And box-cutters are only handy household tools . . . until they are used by terrorists to crash airplanes.

This is not just "disclosure." It is a scheme hatched by political insiders to eradicate disfavored speech. There is no room under the First Amendment for Congress to make deals on political speech, whether with the NRA or anyone else.

The writer is a partner at Foley & Lardner who works in campaign finance law and is a member of the NRA's board of directors."


Yes I will continue to be a member, but not a numb-nut who puts his head up his **** and repeats over and over - "My NRA right or wrong." F- the NRA for being Quislings. And finally, the NRA ratings are a complete joke. The GOA ratings are the real deal. The SAF is good as well. I will support all pro-Second Amendment groups, but the the NRA is closer to a RINO than a Conservative. NRA sells-out too much. My rating of the NRA - C- My rating of GOA and SAF - A+

[Case Stuffer]

Perhaps this thread was started to just create controversy ,after all it seems most NRA member have the NRA Logo in thier user's name area.

Is the NRA perfect ,no not by a long shot.
Could be firmer in their roll protecting the 2nd. Amemdment yes but at what cost.

Call it compromise ,bargaining ,negationing or whatever term you like but if a person,group or origination takes a firm stand and clearly states it is my way or no way the results are rarely good.

Like it or not we live in a give and take world ,the trick is to keep more than you give.

[Phoenix]

Call it compromise ,bargaining ,negationing or whatever term you like but if a person,group or origination takes a firm stand and clearly states it is my way or no way the results are rarely good.

The opposition never seems to do that. Name a special interest that gives one single inch. Allot of special interest groups seem to accomplish plenty by doing exactly that taking an unmoving stand.

The anti-gun lobby never gives an inch.
The pro-life groups NEVER give one inch.
The animal rights groups never give an inch.
Environmental lobbies never give an inch. (actually some of these go far beyond they are flat out terrorists)

When you think about it very few if any of those groups ever give anything.
We have an In-alienable right behind our position, more than any of those other groups can say most of the time. We talk about doing what is right. I don't think anything but rock solid and unwaivering would be the right thing. I am willing to bet almost every constitutional congress member would agree, dont give them an inch because after enough times it will be a mile.

I am not saying anyone is wrong or right. Just pointing out a simple fact. Look all around you. noone else but us is giving any ground, so we always lose ground.

[jmort]

[B]"...more than any of those other groups can say most of the time." [/B

Well I generally agree with you, but disagree with Pro-Life lump-in with dumb-a$$ groups. The #1 "right" is the right to life.

[Case Stuffer]

Snip from post #72


The pro-life groups NEVER give one inch.

Snip from post #73


The #1 "right" is the right to life.

Nothing to do with OP other than off topic examples of slippery slope and standing firm.

I should not even reply to the last but ....

When does Life begin? If at the moment of conception or even 6weeks. 8 weeks then I stronly disagree. What if the mother to be is a drug addict allready live on Goverment funded programs. Now she will likely bring another unwanted addict into a live of poverty,addatiction,prostution,crime for the tax tayers to support and law enforment to deal with.

What if the mother to be was your daughter who was raped by a HIV positive crack head?

Sorry but as I posted above Not Many Things are Truely Black and White.

[Bad Water Bill]

:hijack:One child without a financially supporting husband, well accidents can happen.

Second child YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

If you find yourself pregnant AGAIN the child is removed from your care and SNIP SNIP.

Just because you CAN produce babies is no lawful reason I should be REWARDING you to the tune of over $1,000 per month for the next 18 years for each additional MISTAKE.

Prostitution is still against the law in most states.
'
Sore spot feels better, thanks.[smilie=s:

[Combat Commander]

I'm a Lifer

[troyboy]

Politics are not understood by many,but the ones that do do. I chose to pay the full price. All politicians are corrupt.

[220swiftfn]

When other people bring up GOA I say "Who?" That is also what big DC says.

If you can't bring yourself to support the NRA then please pack your **** and go home. No worries though. Others will continue to pay your share in the defense of our gun rights.

Yep. The way I look at it is this..... Join the biggest, baddest, heaviest gorilla in the fight (NRA, @ what, 5 million members???) you know, the one the media ALWAYS blames. Join a local group too (my state it's SCOPE). Then, if you're able, join others. But the important one is the one that's drawing the most (media and political) fire.


Dan

[220swiftfn]

Only thing I to say here. compromise.



Now imagine this, every gun owner in the states being an NRA member, that would be what, 54 million members???

Now imagine them signing up their offspring, who they'd like to have the same LIBERTIES (or more) as we do..... @80-90 million members???


Now imagine that group, that wonderful, glorious, grassroots group, DEMANDING their rights back as specified in the Bill of Rights....


They wouldn't have to compromise on any damn thing........





Dan

[220swiftfn]

ETA: And what's with all the "rah rah $300 life memberships" People could really help them out more by giving them the regular dues, it adds up to more, and is a more consistent income ... Yes it is nice that somebody gives $300, but if that is there only contribution ... Lets just hope not ...

I'm life, and I send in what amounts to more than yearly membership to ILA, so "huh???"


Dan

[NSP64]

If anybody needs to know, I haven't renewed my membership yet, it doesn't come up till may. I have sent them emails stating if they cave in to legislators then I won't renew.
MY post in the PIT states this. This in NOT the pit. I vote with my money. IF I renew this year and they cave, I won't next year.
The LIFERS can't email them and tell them this.
If we can get more members this year to help hold of the idiots in d.c. , Good.
I have spent more than the cost of the life memberships over the years.
Politicians (those in the Gvmt, and NRA ) only fear one thing. LOSS of MONEY

[farmallcrew]

Membership in numbers talks more than the government. Thats why i'm a member of every sportsmans club in my county and some in the neighboring county, im on the county line. Yes its a lot of money, but strength in numbers will always win.