Colt Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Nra

3K views 35 replies 29 participants last post by  Zorros 
#1 ·
Kind of a hot button topic right now where many feel they initially caved to political pressure over Bump Stocks, however what is everyone?s opinion on the NRA? I?m conflicted. On one hand I hate to waste my money on lobbyist bank accounts who are more self serving than helping, on the other, I want to take a stand protecting our second amendment rights. Ultimately I decided to join. Just curious what others think.
 
#3 ·
Just my opinion, but the NRA is the only group with enough members and money to make a difference for gun owners. I don't like everything they do, but I don't necessarily like everything my friends do either.

As far as the bump stocks, no one I knew ever thought that the BATF would make them legal to begin with. I had much rather the BATF made a ruling on them than let Senator Feinstein decide along with a grocery list of other legislation she would like to have.


 
#5 ·
The NRA is the only gun organization that has enough clout to actually protect our rights. I find it difficult to believe that any gun owner would not belong to the NRA. I also support our state organization which has an uphill battle here in California.

Jim
 
#7 · (Edited)
I've been a Life member longer than I can remember and an Endowment member for going on 5 years. I don't agree with everything they do, but like others have said, who else are you going to depend on to guard your rights? Yes, RIGHTS, given by God, not man. Not only rights, but duty to country and your fellow man being armed and ready. My oath didn't end when I was discharged. I simply went from active duty to militia.
 
#10 ·
If you can afford to buy guns and ammunition, you should in my opinion be able to afford an NRA membership. I'm not a big donor to the NRA but when I order gun stuff online I "add a buck" or "round up" so they my share anyway.
I'm also a member of GOA and I do donate to them a couple of times a year.
 
#15 ·
Join, if you do not agree with something they do or endorse you have a right to voice an opinion.

I've been a life member since I was 16. Both of my girls are life members.

When I see a N.R.A. booth at a gun show I give them enough $ for 3 to 5 Jr. memberships, I just tell them to pick out kids as they see them and ask the parents if it's O.K. Membership numbers speak loud and clear to those in office.

Take care.
 
#21 ·
I don't know if you realize it, but complete gun ownership bans in the U.S, were close to being reality in the 1960's and 70's. When some within the NRA saw the lighting on the wall they changed the message, formed the Institute for Legislative Action to combat the gun control agenda. And we had organizations like the Citizens Committee for The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and Gun Owners of America formed by concerned people that the Liberal Progressives want total civilian disarmament.
It is all about CONTROL!
 
#20 ·
The "left" is the biggest threat to our second amendment rights everyday. The elites want us disarmed so they can control us. The NRA is fighting to reverse the stupid laws that infringe on our rights. We have to be diligent in our fight to keep what is rightfully ours!! We must never give in or give up! Our forefathers were very intelligent people that created the constitution to protect us. The moron politicians are afraid of the NRA and the power it can wield in elections. We must stand united and grow the organization that will defend our right to keep and bear arms. That is why I am a lifetime member! I'll encourage every person I come across to join and support the fight against evil.

Over the years I have converted many folks that were ignorant about the 2nd amendment and guns. I took the time to teach what I know, and take them to the range. Once they were hooked/converted then I would encourage them to join the NRA. Like others have pointed out here they (NRA) are not perfect but I believe in them. Remember that there is strength in numbers!!! God Bless America!
 
#22 ·
Prior to the late 1960s the NRA was essentially a non-political organization...mostly about gun safety, hunting, training and conservation. Once it was obvious the rights of all were at stake there was an in-house upheaval within the NRA about becoming more politically oriented.

While I also don't agree with every position the NRA takes (who does?)...I would hate to think where we might be today if not for the NRA regarding our Second Amendment rights. Yes...there are other pro-gun organization that are out there and very effective in their own right...but none have the political clout of the NRA. An additional advantage with the other pro-gun groups is that while the NRA takes the hits from anti-gun groups and media the smaller national and local groups can fly under the radar and get some things done. It's a group effort...even if not coordinated.
 
#24 ·
I felt that the way the NRA handled the 'bump stock' issue was excellent. By beating the Anti-Gun Groups to the punch with a suggested action, they kept that issue fairly quiet. If they had not done that the solution would have been a bill to ban all semi-autos.

I think the NRA was aware that the 'bump stocks' were going to be a pretty tough apparatus to legitimize a use for and I agree.
 
#26 ·
While I don't care about the bump stocks I do care about precedents. If we allow the precedents of banning them, that can open the door to banning other accessories...each one another chip out of the Constitution. Remember the "assault rifle" ban? It banned certain things like pistol grips on a rifle...bayonet lugs...grenade launcher attachments...collapsible or folding stocks. I don't remember ever any stories in the news about bayonet charges in the street or rifle fired grenades flying overhead. The only saving grace was that the law sunsetted after ten years and luckily we had a Republican majority Congress that allowed it to sunset. If not for that we could still be stuck with it.

No matter what position we or the NRA takes...no matter what we give up...we're gonna be assaulted and vilified in the media and anti-gun politicians as obstructionists that don't care about safety. These people don't realize or simply don't care that we're more concerned about stopping such violence than anyone else is...it's our rights at stake and we also know what they promote isn't going to help. Firearms rights are their rights as well but they choose not to exercise those rights...which is fine. Because they don't is no reason to deny us exercising those rights.

Even on issues such as the bump stocks...something many, if not most, would probably be willing to sacrifice if it would end the constant ongoing assaults on the Second Amendment...but it won't so stopping the attacks at the water's edge keeps the camel's nose out from under the tent. It's far easier to stop an unjust precedent from occurring to regaining rights after they're lost.

Fictional character Batman Comics Superhero Comic book
 
#30 ·
While I don't care about the bump stocks I do care about precedents. If we allow the precedents of banning them, that can open the door to banning other accessories...each one another chip out of the Constitution. Remember the "assault rifle" ban? It banned certain things like pistol grips on a rifle...bayonet lugs...grenade launcher attachments...collapsible or folding stocks. I don't remember ever any stories in the news about bayonet charges in the street or rifle fired grenades flying overhead. The only saving grace was that the law sunsetted after ten years and luckily we had a Republican majority Congress that allowed it to sunset. If not for that we could still be stuck with it.

No matter what position we or the NRA takes...no matter what we give up...we're gonna be assaulted and vilified in the media and anti-gun politicians as obstructionists that don't care about safety. These people don't realize or simply don't care that we're more concerned about stopping such violence than anyone else is...it's our rights at stake and we also know what they promote isn't going to help. Firearms rights are their rights as well but they choose not to exercise those rights...which is fine. Because they don't is no reason to deny us exercising those rights.

Even on issues such as the bump stocks...something many, if not most, would probably be willing to sacrifice if it would end the constant ongoing assaults on the Second Amendment...but it won't so stopping the attacks at the water's edge keeps the camel's nose out from under the tent. It's far easier to stop an unjust precedent from occurring to regaining rights after they're lost.

View attachment 413818
I agree that one inch equals one foot when dealing with Progressive gun grabbers, and I have no pro or con issue with bump stocks. When the NRA posted their statement after the Vegas shooting they said that the ruling should be revisited by ATF. The media lied and said the NRA was on the same page as the anti-gun crowd, but that wasn't so. If anything is going to happen pertaining to bump stocks, I'd prefer it not to be some kind of ambiguous legislation.

For some reason their are people that honestly believe the Gov't is not after their guns only everyone else's.
 
#28 ·
I think Wayne is a bit burned out on the interview issue. years ago he was quite a bit better. Chris Cox on the other hand is excellent imo, which brings me to something I thought was curious. Eric Pratt from GOA was scheduled to appear on Fox News Sunday. TV Guide, Fox program ads etc. touted Eric Pratt, but it was Chris Cox who appeared, so I think there is more coordination between these groups then most realize.
 
#29 · (Edited)
NRA: I'm a long term member and they have, of course, taken actions I do not like and seem to have lost some enthusiasm for competition shooting. Their position on the assault weapon ban was greatly mistaken. All things considered, as others have said better, they do a great job and are the only ones with enough clout to effectively protect our gun rights. JFPO takes a consistently stronger position and my state association (i.e., TSRA) is probably without peer. Bottom line: you must support the NRA if you truly believe in the Bill of Rights.

"Bump stocks"? Another case where some greedy morons have put us on the spot. While it is ok to ban them, the precedent is not so ok - I would like to see the manufacturers and dealers take a blood oath to not make them or sell them: it just hurts us. If a bill is passed outlawing bump stocks I hope it includes a provision moving the antique date up to 1920 or, maybe 1946. Regards, Ron


hmm.....'46: then I'd become an antique by more than a scant margin
 
#31 ·
Back in the '70's, thanks to increasing pressure from Senator Dodd and his anti-gun campaign, the NRA was teetering on giving up on handguns, if their precious rifles and shotguns could be saved.

This was back when they'd just gotten Raton and just sold their old Headquarters Building a stone's throw away from the Capitol - giving up key terrain.

Only the tale of 'The Camel's Nose' shook some sense into the then leaders, so they fought back - reluctantly, to be sure - but they did fight back and demonstrated that the Membership was indeed a powerful voting bloc when carefully manipulated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top