NRA Leader LaPierre Says Being Extorted,

[bblhd672]

Looks like there is a power struggle in the NRA.

NRA Leader LaPierre Says Being Extorted, Resign Pressure...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/nras-wayne ... 1556314763

Longtime National Rifle Association leader Wayne LaPierre has told the group’s board he is being extorted and pressured to resign by the organization’s president, Oliver North, over allegations of financial improprieties, in an extraordinary battle roiling one of the nation’s most powerful nonprofit political groups.

Wayne LaPierre's letter to the Board:
https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/do ... 042519.pdf

[K.Mooneyham]

Looks like there is a power struggle in the NRA.

NRA Leader LaPierre Says Being Extorted, Resign Pressure...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/nras-wayne ... 1556314763

Longtime National Rifle Association leader Wayne LaPierre has told the group’s board he is being extorted and pressured to resign by the organization’s president, Oliver North, over allegations of financial improprieties, in an extraordinary battle roiling one of the nation’s most powerful nonprofit political groups.

Wayne LaPierre's letter to the Board:
https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/do ... 042519.pdf

Now I really don't know what to think. I hope that someone can make better sense of all of this.

[joe817]

Looks like there is a power struggle in the NRA.

NRA Leader LaPierre Says Being Extorted, Resign Pressure...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/nras-wayne ... 1556314763

Longtime National Rifle Association leader Wayne LaPierre has told the group’s board he is being extorted and pressured to resign by the organization’s president, Oliver North, over allegations of financial improprieties, in an extraordinary battle roiling one of the nation’s most powerful nonprofit political groups.

Wayne LaPierre's letter to the Board:
https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/do ... 042519.pdf

Wow! Just wow! IMHO, if the Second Amendment is to survive, the NRA must survive as well.

[Soccerdad1995]

I wouldn’t mind seeing the NRA fallout and members of NRA join up with Firearms Policy Coalition or Gun Owners of America. Heck I think the reason most of us still support the NRA is because it is the biggest and most powerful. I don’t think that their views actually align with most gun owners today.

I support the NRA, and their Texas affiliate the TSRA, because they are the most effective organizations we have. Show me one piece of legislation that any other progun group has passed at the federal level, or a single piece of legislation in Texas. If we reject a group because they don't agree 100% with us then we will have no groups at all.

For the record I know for a fact that members of the NRA board of directors don't always agree with the NRA, if they did they wouldn't need a board to vote!

I genuinely understand where you’re coming from, I just can’t make myself support a group that advocates for the removal of my rights. I mean honestly when is the last time that the NRA passed legislation at the federal level that did any good for gun owners? It seems that recent history they have only advocated for the loss of rights i.e. bumpstocks and red flag laws.

Here’s a link to recent accomplishments from FPC and GOA:
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/news

https://gunowners.org/about-goa/#section-about-goa-6

This seems like a backwards way of looking at it. Keep in mind, there is opposition and public perception and ignorance is on the side of the gun control crowd. Sometimes a compromise or sacrifice has to made to protect the larger number of gun owners and rights.

What percentage of gunowners actually own bumpstocks? I know several that didn't even know what they were until Las Vegas.

The ATF estimate was 500,000 bump stocks. Some no doubt owned multiple, so fewer owners, but still in the hundreds of thousands. I agree that this is a low percentage of gun owners. In fact, the percentage is probably right down there with the percentage of gun owners who actually own suppressors (aka "silencers!"). Or the percentage that actually own body armor. Or the percentage that actually own reloading components. Or the percentage that own truly "high caliber" firearms in calibers greater than 30-06.

Should we expect the NRA to roll over when any of those things are targeted next?

[mojo84]

I wouldn’t mind seeing the NRA fallout and members of NRA join up with Firearms Policy Coalition or Gun Owners of America. Heck I think the reason most of us still support the NRA is because it is the biggest and most powerful. I don’t think that their views actually align with most gun owners today.

I support the NRA, and their Texas affiliate the TSRA, because they are the most effective organizations we have. Show me one piece of legislation that any other progun group has passed at the federal level, or a single piece of legislation in Texas. If we reject a group because they don't agree 100% with us then we will have no groups at all.

For the record I know for a fact that members of the NRA board of directors don't always agree with the NRA, if they did they wouldn't need a board to vote!

I genuinely understand where you’re coming from, I just can’t make myself support a group that advocates for the removal of my rights. I mean honestly when is the last time that the NRA passed legislation at the federal level that did any good for gun owners? It seems that recent history they have only advocated for the loss of rights i.e. bumpstocks and red flag laws.

Here’s a link to recent accomplishments from FPC and GOA:
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/news

https://gunowners.org/about-goa/#section-about-goa-6

This seems like a backwards way of looking at it. Keep in mind, there is opposition and public perception and ignorance is on the side of the gun control crowd. Sometimes a compromise or sacrifice has to made to protect the larger number of gun owners and rights.

What percentage of gunowners actually own bumpstocks? I know several that didn't even know what they were until Las Vegas.

The ATF estimate was 500,000 bump stocks. Some no doubt owned multiple, so fewer owners, but still in the hundreds of thousands. I agree that this is a low percentage of gun owners. In fact, the percentage is probably right down there with the percentage of gun owners who actually own suppressors (aka "silencers!"). Or the percentage that actually own body armor. Or the percentage that actually own reloading components. Or the percentage that own truly "high caliber" firearms in calibers greater than 30-06.

Should we expect the NRA to roll over when any of those things are targeted next?

It depends on the political climate at the time. If the choice is suppressors or all semiautomatic guns, then goodbye suppressors for now and we will live to fight another day to get them back. It's called compromise.

People seem to not understand the political climate changes that happens when a tragic shooting is carried out. Public perception is on the side of the anti gun crowd right after a mass shooting.

It appears a lot of people are ignoring the unprecedented attack Trump has been under by the left since before he took office and some RINOS and how rabid the gungrabbers get everytime there is a mass murder.

[RoyGBiv]

NRA board member: 'Imperative' to clean house, move on from CEO Wayne LaPierre

LT. Col. West calling for LaPierre to be ousted. Meadows, Lee and Cotton defending LaPierre.

In a joint statement to ABC News, Meadows, Cotton and NRA second vice president Lt. Col. Willes Lee, appeared to issue a strong rebuke to West and called on board members to “end this petty bickering immediately” and “return to its core mission.”

“It is unfortunate,” the statement reads, “that certain board members have resorted to making false and misleading public statements about proceedings of the NRA board of directors,”

Hopefully this is resolved soon.

[Lynyrd]

NRA board member: 'Imperative' to clean house, move on from CEO Wayne LaPierre

LT. Col. West calling for LaPierre to be ousted. Meadows, Lee and Cotton defending LaPierre.

In a joint statement to ABC News, Meadows, Cotton and NRA second vice president Lt. Col. Willes Lee, appeared to issue a strong rebuke to West and called on board members to “end this petty bickering immediately” and “return to its core mission.”

“It is unfortunate,” the statement reads, “that certain board members have resorted to making false and misleading public statements about proceedings of the NRA board of directors,”

Hopefully this is resolved soon.

It is very troubling to read about the alleged improprieties in regards to spending our membership's monies. Allen West is someone who has always come across and truthful to the point of not caring who he offended. I'm sure we will never know the real truth about the accused financial misdealing's, but it is something I will definitely think about the next time I consider sending the NRA some of my hard earned money.

I agree with you. I hope this gets resolved soon. Very soon.

[WTR]

I think all executives making over $100,000.00 / year need to have term limits ( as I believe congress should have.) We need an audit by a reputable independent accounting firm and let the chips fall where they may. If anyone is opposed to such an audit then something fishy is most likely afoot.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I think all executives making over $100,000.00 / year need to have term limits ( as I believe congress should have.) We need an audit by a reputable independent accounting firm and let the chips fall where they may. If anyone is opposed to such an audit then something fishy is most likely afoot.

The NRA is audited by RSM annually. They are a major accounting firm. The chips will fall and as soon as the lawsuit against the NY Governor and the NY AG's attempt to make good on a her threat are over, the truth will come out. Until then, everyone must understand that we cannot disclose information that would waive the attorney-client privilege. When deciding who is telling the truth, don't let a public persona deceive you as to a person's true motive. Ask yourself this: why would a current NRA Board Member discuss confidential information discussed in executive session, when doing so violates their fiduciary duty to the Association? The answer is painfully simple.

Your $100,000 figure for critical positions in a $350 million organization is naive to say the least. You get what you pay for and $100,000 executives don't get Donald Trump elected President. As for term limits, we all are subject to term limits. When the Members decide we should go, then we don't get elected. What you mean by term limits is when the Members don't vote as you want them to vote, then you want to be able to impose your will over theirs.

Chas.

[WTR]

I think all executives making over $100,000.00 / year need to have term limits ( as I believe congress should have.) We need an audit by a reputable independent accounting firm and let the chips fall where they may. If anyone is opposed to such an audit then something fishy is most likely afoot.

The NRA is audited by RSM annually. They are a major accounting firm. The chips will fall and as soon as the lawsuit against the NY Governor and the NY AG's attempt to make good on a her threat are over, the truth will come out. Until then, everyone must understand that we cannot disclose information that would waive the attorney-client privilege. When deciding who is telling the truth, don't let a public persona deceive you as to a person's true motive. Ask yourself this: why would a current NRA Board Member discuss confidential information discussed in executive session, when doing so violates their fiduciary duty to the Association? The answer is painfully simple.

Your $100,000 figure for critical positions in a $350 million organization is naive to say the least. You get what you pay for and $100,000 executives don't get Donald Trump elected President. As for term limits, we all are subject to term limits. When the Members decide we should go, then we don't get elected. What you mean by term limits is when the Members don't vote as you want them to vote, then you want to be able to impose your will over theirs.

Chas.

$100,000.00 may be naive. Up the salary to $500.000.00 of any paid Executive. I still think there should be mandatory term limits. I

[Lynyrd]

When deciding who is telling the truth, don't let a public persona deceive you as to a person's true motive.

Chas.

Wise words Mr. Cotton. Many a public persona has hidden nefarious motives.

There are times all the public sees is conflicting public personas. Those times should make us think, and dig deeper for the truth.

[G.A. Heath]

I think all executives making over $100,000.00 / year need to have term limits ( as I believe congress should have.) We need an audit by a reputable independent accounting firm and let the chips fall where they may. If anyone is opposed to such an audit then something fishy is most likely afoot.

The NRA is audited by RSM annually. They are a major accounting firm. The chips will fall and as soon as the lawsuit against the NY Governor and the NY AG's attempt to make good on a her threat are over, the truth will come out. Until then, everyone must understand that we cannot disclose information that would waive the attorney-client privilege. When deciding who is telling the truth, don't let a public persona deceive you as to a person's true motive. Ask yourself this: why would a current NRA Board Member discuss confidential information discussed in executive session, when doing so violates their fiduciary duty to the Association? The answer is painfully simple.

Your $100,000 figure for critical positions in a $350 million organization is naive to say the least. You get what you pay for and $100,000 executives don't get Donald Trump elected President. As for term limits, we all are subject to term limits. When the Members decide we should go, then we don't get elected. What you mean by term limits is when the Members don't vote as you want them to vote, then you want to be able to impose your will over theirs.

Chas.

$100,000.00 may be naive. Up the salary to $500.000.00 of any paid Executive. I still think there should be mandatory term limits. I

In government I agree with term limits, but everywhere else I don't. You get what you pay for when it comes to executives, and if someone is doing good then you want them to keep doing a good job so you pay them what it takes to keep them. Otherwise you are placing government controls on salaries and wages which is somewhere we really don't want to go...

Does the NRA need some reform? Yes, EVERY organization will need some reform in some way at any given time, but going in and demanding changes without knowing details can be a major problem. Consider the way Col. North approached WLP regarding the improprieties that reportedly happened. That alone cost Col. North my trust. "Hey I've got this letter with a bunch of dirt on you that I will turn over to the BOD if you don't step down quietly, but if you step down quietly I will make it all go away." is NOT the way you fix a supposedly corrupt organization. As for everything else I am waiting to see what happens and as Mr. Cotton said, the NRA is audited regularly by an independent highly reputable firm so we will find out what is going on.

[Ruark]

Of course the liberal media is pouncing on all of this. They smell blood. But to the undiscerning public eye, it does all look suspicious. Wayne's $39,000 shopping trip in Beverly Hills, trips to places like Bahamas, Italy, Hungary, Istanbul, etc., luxury hotel stays, $19,000 for a car and driver, etc., all paid out of membership dues. NRA members read that and think, "so that's where my $25 is going?"

Marion Hammer says the expenses have been "properly vetted," but we never see any details - no justification, no "what really happened was...." PLUS the little detail that LaPierre gets a $1.4 million annual salary. And at this point, LaPierre has been so demonized and vilified in the media, nobody takes him seriously any more, except when he's "preaching to the choir." He's been reduced in the public eye to little more than a cartoon character.

True or not, that's what's in the media, and it doesn't look good.

[NathanJK]

I think all executives making over $100,000.00 / year need to have term limits ( as I believe congress should have.) We need an audit by a reputable independent accounting firm and let the chips fall where they may. If anyone is opposed to such an audit then something fishy is most likely afoot.

The NRA is audited by RSM annually. They are a major accounting firm. The chips will fall and as soon as the lawsuit against the NY Governor and the NY AG's attempt to make good on a her threat are over, the truth will come out. Until then, everyone must understand that we cannot disclose information that would waive the attorney-client privilege. When deciding who is telling the truth, don't let a public persona deceive you as to a person's true motive. Ask yourself this: why would a current NRA Board Member discuss confidential information discussed in executive session, when doing so violates their fiduciary duty to the Association? The answer is painfully simple.

Your $100,000 figure for critical positions in a $350 million organization is naive to say the least. You get what you pay for and $100,000 executives don't get Donald Trump elected President. As for term limits, we all are subject to term limits. When the Members decide we should go, then we don't get elected. What you mean by term limits is when the Members don't vote as you want them to vote, then you want to be able to impose your will over theirs.

Chas.

All of that glosses over the meat of the subject. Wayne makes millions of dollars every year working for a “non-profit” using members dues. Then we find out he’s blowing 280 grand on clothes on rodeo drive, putting an intern up in a rented apartment and jetting all over using up even more money? If things were great maybe it’d be no big deal, but this is the guy who didn’t even try to fight the bumpstock deal, supports red flag laws, and hasn’t gotten the ball into the end zone on the HPA. Let’s not even get into the 24 or whatever it is million dollars to the law firm, I’m sure it’s TOTALLY on the up and up to pay them 100k a day. It’s so legitimate some board member or Oliver North himself had to leak their concerns.

It’s sickening that you publicly commented on this issue to the news. It’s got thug written all over it, and you are over there just polishing away. You and Wayne should both be ousted.

[nobius]

Of course the liberal media is pouncing on all of this. They smell blood. But to the undiscerning public eye, it does all look suspicious. Wayne's $39,000 shopping trip in Beverly Hills, trips to places like Bahamas, Italy, Hungary, Istanbul, etc., luxury hotel stays, $19,000 for a car and driver, etc., all paid out of membership dues. NRA members read that and think, "so that's where my $25 is going?"

Why is the NRA leadership even going to those places? I was very bothered by that report. And a reply from leadership complaining about leaks only proves it's true.

I’m a life NRA member, but they won’t get another dime out of me until this is resolved.