The NRA.....lets talk!

[mr.72]

I think Chas' point...was to "find a way" to make this group more interested and supportive of RKBA.

You mean, get them to join the NRA?

Maybe you'd like to join the Austin Cycling Association? What? You don't support my right to ride a bicycle on the road? Or the ACLU? What, you don't support the first Amendment? Does the average citizen have to join and contribute to a lobbying organization in order to support every right they think they have?

Ambivalence is indeed the problem. I would characterize this kind of "support" as static at best...and "stagnant" at worst. This group may profess to support the 2nd, and it makes good "conversation" over dinner for them, but they do nothing (for the most part) to actively further a pro-gun cause.

This is the thing. It doesn't have to be "pro-gun" in order to be "pro-RKBA". That right there is the difference between the NRA and the regular people. Regular people support their rights, and don't care about equipment.

I know you meant "pro-gun-rights cause". But that also misses the point. Taking people to the range misses the point. That's about warming them up to guns, and I am talking about the fact that most people support rights even if they are scared stiff of guns! We don't need to get people to not be afraid of guns! We just need to let the lawmakers know that it's not just pro-gun, gun-owners, NRA-members, etc. who support our rights.

There must be some way to reach a small portion of these folks and persuade them to actually support their belief though membership, monetary support and their vote.

Their vote? For what? You mean, voting for politicians who do not actively oppose the RKBA? I think the majority of Americans already to this, every time. The NRA has nothing to do with it! I voted for Republicans and Libertarians who are strong RKBA supporters for years before I owned a gun or cared about owning a gun, because I support freedom. This argument would make sense if ONLY NRA members voted for pro-RKBA candidates.

SAYING "I support the 2nd amendment and RKBA" is very different from ACTING upon it. [/quot]

Acting on it, just exactly how? Why do I need to act on it? The Constitution was ratified a couple of hundred years ago. I keep voting for people who do not actively try and change our form of government and restrict my guaranteed freedoms. Is this not enough "acting" on it?

Also, with each generation...you have to deal more and more with the "whats in it for me" people.

Here we are with the dig at people younger than you.

That's the way to get them to join!

[Charles L. Cotton]

. . . Something I have observed. It seems a large portion of folks are neither pro or anti gun. Many seem to have no emotional investment either way. Many just don't have guns or the desire to own them while at the same time not having the desire to keep me from owning them. These are the folks, IMHO, that we need to get on our side.

. . .

My point is. We need to work on getting the middle of the road folk with us. Many of them are possibly swayed by taking them shooting and getting them interested. I have yet to take anyone shooting for the first time who did not just eat it up and want more. Making sure they realize that being silent is the same as being in agreement with the anti-gun mob. Many of the middle of the road folks are just sitting by thinking the laws don't affect them.

I couldn't agree more. This is precisely the audience we will be trying to reach with Texas CHL Forum, Inc. when it "goes live" next month. These people are an untapped political resource that can make a huge impact not only on the NRA, but on the entire national debate on gun rights.

Chas.

Why does this group of people have anything at all to do with the NRA?

Why don't you accurately read my post, rather than taking yet another opportunity to erroneously claim the NRA is ineffective and out of step with Americans?

My post didn't mention the NRA; it specifically addressed the mission of Texas CHL Forum, Inc., an organization that will have nothing to do with the NRA. The mission of that organization is to court people who 03Lightningrocks identified in his post.

Chas.

[mr.72]

Why don't you accurately read my post, rather than taking yet another opportunity to erroneously claim the NRA is ineffective and out of step with Americans?

My post didn't mention the NRA; it specifically addressed the mission of Texas CHL Forum, Inc., an organization that will have nothing to do with the NRA. The mission of that organization is to court people who 03Lightningrocks identified in his post.

Chas.

Sorry, Charles. My mistake. I assumed that since 03Lightningrocks post seemed to imply that these people needed to be courted for the NRA, that implication was adhered to by your agreement with his post.

I don't know anything about Texas CHL Forum, Inc.

[flintknapper]

You mean, get them to join the NRA?

I said nothing about the NRA. You may have drawn that conclusion because this thread has "NRA" in the title, or because the NRA is a "burr under your saddle", but I did not specify them.

Maybe you'd like to join the Austin Cycling Association? What? You don't support my right to ride a bicycle on the road? Or the ACLU? What, you don't support the first Amendment? Does the average citizen have to join and contribute to a lobbying organization in order to support every right they think they have?

Certainly not. However...it begs the question: Is it really "support" if all you do is (profess support) and give it a bit of lip service now and then? I think not. (not effective support anyway)
Tell ya what, you join the NRA...and I will join the ACA and donate to the helmet fund to boot, deal?

This is the thing. It doesn't have to be "pro-gun" in order to be "pro-RKBA". That right there is the difference between the NRA and the regular people. Regular people support their rights, and don't care about equipment.

Well, being pro-RKBA pretty much means "you need to be O.K. with guns as well". You might not want one for yourself (thats fine), but if you are not "pro-gun" (meaning you accept it is a tool....and do not demonize this inanimate object) then you are by default...on the other side, or uninformed (you pick). As concerns "regular people", I think there is something Freudian going on there.

I know you meant "pro-gun-rights cause". But that also misses the point. Taking people to the range misses the point. That's about warming them up to guns, and I am talking about the fact that most people support rights even if they are scared stiff of guns! We don't need to get people to not be afraid of guns! We just need to let the lawmakers know that it's not just pro-gun, gun-owners, NRA-members, etc. who support our rights.

Huh? To me...this is just so flawed...it gives me a headache.

Their vote? For what? You mean, voting for politicians who do not actively oppose the RKBA?

This would be helpful...but I do not suggest people be "one issue" voters.

I think the majority of Americans already to this, every time.

Apparently not, else we would not need the NRA, TSRA and others.

The NRA has nothing to do with it! I voted for Republicans and Libertarians who are strong RKBA supporters for years before I owned a gun or cared about owning a gun, because I support freedom.

With that in mind, we can surmise that those who vote otherwise (against RKBA) do NOT support freedom. Thank you, for demonstrating and practicing the kind of "other" support I was speaking about. Now, what can you do to convince others to do the same?

Acting on it, just exactly how? Why do I need to act on it? The Constitution was ratified a couple of hundred years ago. I keep voting for people who do not actively try and change our form of government and restrict my guaranteed freedoms. Is this not enough "acting" on it?

You need to "act upon it" beyond just voting...because there are factions still attacking your rights. They don't particularly care what the constitution says.

Here we are with the dig at people younger than you.

I do not "dig" at anyone simply because they are "younger" than me. Heck.... nearly everyone is younger than me. I am just stating an undeniable fact, (each generation becomes increasingly self absorbed, self serving and sensitive). There are exceptions of course, perhaps you are one of those.

That's the way to get them to join!

Well...it's cheaper than putting on a rock concert and then busing everyone directly to the voting booth to vote.
Athough...I do enjoy a "good" concert.

Anyway, just let me know what you want to do about the "membership swap". I'd be happy to support your cause (in a demonstrable way).

[brianko]

But the fact remains that the NRA does not appeal to the majority of normal people, and the majority of normal people have no reason to believe that the 2nd Amendment is under attack.

Actually, this is no longer the case...as of last year, more than half of all Americans hold a favorable opinion of the NRA (the first time since 1994 that this has happened). (Source: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/443/the-nra ... trol-slips" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

However, there's another interesting tidbit: Support of the NRA by women and blacks has not increased appreciably since 1995.

[flintknapper]

But the fact remains that the NRA does not appeal to the majority of normal people, and the majority of normal people have no reason to believe that the 2nd Amendment is under attack.

Actually, this is no longer the case...as of last year, more than half of all Americans hold a favorable opinion of the NRA (the first time since 1994 that this has happened). (Source: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/443/the-nra ... trol-slips" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

However, there's another interesting tidbit: Support of the NRA by women and blacks has not increased appreciably since 1995.

Makes me wonder what percentage of these two groups are democrats (perhaps a more telling statistic).

[mr.72]

But the fact remains that the NRA does not appeal to the majority of normal people, and the majority of normal people have no reason to believe that the 2nd Amendment is under attack.

Actually, this is no longer the case...as of last year, more than half of all Americans hold a favorable opinion of the NRA (the first time since 1994 that this has happened). (Source: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/443/the-nra ... trol-slips" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

However, there's another interesting tidbit: Support of the NRA by women and blacks has not increased appreciably since 1995.

I didn't say they didn't have a favorable opinion, I said "appeal".

I have a favorable opinion of onions. I know a lot of people like them and that's well and good with me. But they do not appeal to me. So you can have onions and I will support you in doing that, but for me, hold the onions.

This is what I meant.

If the majority of Americans found the NRA to appeal to them, they would join, no?

[flintknapper]

But the fact remains that the NRA does not appeal to the majority of normal people, and the majority of normal people have no reason to believe that the 2nd Amendment is under attack.

Actually, this is no longer the case...as of last year, more than half of all Americans hold a favorable opinion of the NRA (the first time since 1994 that this has happened). (Source: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/443/the-nra ... trol-slips" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

However, there's another interesting tidbit: Support of the NRA by women and blacks has not increased appreciably since 1995.

I didn't say they didn't have a favorable opinion, I said "appeal".

I have a favorable opinion of onions. I know a lot of people like them and that's well and good with me. But they do not appeal to me. So you can have onions and I will support you in doing that, but for me, hold the onions.

This is what I meant.

If the majority of Americans found the NRA to appeal to them, they would join, no?

If it were "free" and required little or no effort yes.

BTW, I can give away free onions all day long too.

[brianko]

If the majority of Americans found the NRA to appeal to them, they would join, no?

Maybe the NRA's recruitment efforts are lacking in some way?

[nitrogen]

If the majority of Americans found the NRA to appeal to them, they would join, no?

Maybe the NRA's recruitment efforts are lacking in some way?

I've said it (loudly and constantly) that the NRA, or some orgin general needs to reach out to your "nontypical gun owners", like Obama voters, Democrats, etc.

The thing we always have to remember: We're RIGHT. They are WRONG. (On the gun issue at least!)
The problem however isn't logical, its emotional. We need to win these folks emotionally.

I think Chas has the right idea with TexasCHLForum INC, and hopefully it's a model that can prove to work, and will get attention.

[flintknapper]

If the majority of Americans found the NRA to appeal to them, they would join, no?

Maybe the NRA's recruitment efforts are lacking in some way?

I've said it (loudly and constantly) that the NRA, or some orgin general needs to reach out to your "nontypical gun owners", like Obama voters, Democrats, etc.

The thing we always have to remember: We're RIGHT. They are WRONG. (On the gun issue at least!)
The problem however isn't logical, its emotional. We need to win these folks emotionally.
I think Chas has the right idea with TexasCHLForum INC, and hopefully it's a model that can prove to work, and will get attention.

Is this because they have no logic to appeal to?


Just kidding.

[kd5zex]

I have read all 19 pages of this thread and in commemoration I have completely paid off my Life Membership. I understand and appreciate what the NRA does for all of us. My children will also be receiving NRA Life Memberships for their tenth birthdays provided the NRA still represents what it does today.

When I initially joined the NRA I received a voting guide which did not list a single Libertarian Party candidate. In frustration I drafted a lengthy email on pro-firearm Libertarian candidates and why the NRA should be supporting them. Much to my surprise, I received a personally written and equally lengthy email that changed the way I look at many things. Extremely paraphrased, it said:

"Look, we know exactly what you are talking about and if it was a perfect world we would fully endorse Libertarian candidates. But this is the real world and the Libertarian platform is not the most popular thing around. We only get x amount of money and have to determine the best way to spend it. How about you do your part and increase the base of the party and we can skin that wagon when it comes around."

Individuality is great, and I support it more than I can put into words. When you join a group, no matter the kind of group or its objective, there will be things you don't like and things you do like. It is almost guaranteed that someone will not agree with your positions and the chance of this increases with the size of the group. I am not suggesting that you should take your licks and be move on but sometimes minor concessions must be made for the greater cause.

The fact is that our RKBA is under attack and the currently the NRA does the best job of countering these attacks. I hope one day to be more active in the organization, but for now I will support the NRA via my checkbook and continue to soak up the wisdom contained in this forum.

Cheers

[Liberty]

"Look, we know exactly what you are talking about and if it was a perfect world we would fully endorse Libertarian candidates. But this is the real world and the Libertarian platform is not the most popular thing around. We only get x amount of money and have to determine the best way to spend it. How about you do your part and increase the base of the party and we can skin that wagon when it comes around."

That's a load of horse puckeys. Rating the Libertarians wouldn't cost them anything. As I have posted before its not even about endorsement, they won't recognize us. Even in a 2 party contest against a nonsteller RKBA performer. As a former candidate let me tell you, It is very tough running in a local election with a pro RKBA against a candidate with mediocre support for the RKBA when the NRA/TSRA won't even acknowledge that there are 2 candidates on the ballot.

[Abraham]

I just discovered this thread.

I'm a $10.00 a year member i.e., no magazines - just membership.

I've maintained this membership status for a few years now and I receive ALMOST no mail from them. I think the first year after membership, I received zero mail from them and in the last two years I received a little more, but really, very little.

[flintknapper]

I just discovered this thread.

I'm a $10.00 a year member i.e., no magazines - just membership.

I've maintained this membership status for a few years now and I receive ALMOST no mail from them. I think the first year after membership, I received zero mail from them and in the last two years I received a little more, but really, very little.

Thank you for your support Sir. Please do all you can to encourage others to join as well.

Flint.