The NRA.....lets talk!

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Locked

brianko
Banned
Posts in topic: 14
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:56 pm

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#226

Post by brianko »

Liberty wrote: Some of your catagorizations of the platform are little distorted also. Libertarians as rule to not support state funded abortions, or abortions of a minor without parental consent. As with the the other party's there is room for drift from the official platform, and it changes from election cycle election to year. Even I as an active member and past candidate don't fully buy into the whole platform. The NRA is probably stepping out of its character when it refuses to acknowledge the only party who unabashedly supports the 2nd amendment and the RKBA. I would love to discuss the Libertarian platform but I understand I am drifting way off topic.
Thanks for setting the record straight...if you hadn't, I was set to :)

One other thing of note to get this back on topic: Libertarians, as a rule, abhor government intervention in their personal lives. To that end, they tend to support the position of less legislation and a greater focus on enforcing the laws that are already on the books. One of the "benchmarks" that NRA supporters like to brag about is the amount of legislation the NRA lobbies for in favor of gun owners. Many libertarians (including myself) would not agree that more legislation is needed: The Constitution itself is the law of the land, and instead efforts should continue to be made to stop the bastardization of the Constitution.
A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves. --E. Murrow
Member GOA (life), JPFO
User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 20
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#227

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

brianko wrote:
Liberty wrote: Some of your catagorizations of the platform are little distorted also. Libertarians as rule to not support state funded abortions, or abortions of a minor without parental consent. As with the the other party's there is room for drift from the official platform, and it changes from election cycle election to year. Even I as an active member and past candidate don't fully buy into the whole platform. The NRA is probably stepping out of its character when it refuses to acknowledge the only party who unabashedly supports the 2nd amendment and the RKBA. I would love to discuss the Libertarian platform but I understand I am drifting way off topic.
Thanks for setting the record straight...if you hadn't, I was set to :)

One other thing of note to get this back on topic: Libertarians, as a rule, abhor government intervention in their personal lives. To that end, they tend to support the position of less legislation and a greater focus on enforcing the laws that are already on the books. One of the "benchmarks" that NRA supporters like to brag about is the amount of legislation the NRA lobbies for in favor of gun owners. Many libertarians (including myself) would not agree that more legislation is needed: The Constitution itself is the law of the land, and instead efforts should continue to be made to stop the bastardization of the Constitution.
Neither I nor the NRA attack the Libertarian Party, but I'm growing weary of Libertarians blaming the NRA for their Party's failure to grow. The NRA is not impeding the Libertarian Party's ability to attract members. The Party's platform is very conservative on most fiscal issues, but ultra-liberal on social issues. This is an odd mix that is not likely to appeal to a lot of people. Conservatives won't like the liberal social positions and liberals won't like the "no taxes," "no social programs" and a "hands off" form of government. Again, I'm not blasting the Party, but I'm not willing to let Libertarians blame the NRA for people not warming up to the platform set out below.

Here is the Libertarian Party Platform from the Party's website. Please point out where I'm wrong.
Libertarian Party Platform wrote: Statement of Principles

1.0 Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.

1.1 Expression and Communication

We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.

1.2 Personal Privacy

We support the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.

1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.

1.4 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

1.5 Crime and Justice

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.

1.6 Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the right to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.

2.0 Economic Liberty

A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.


2.1 Property and Contract

Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.

2.2 Environment

We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.

2.3 Energy and Resources

While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.

2.4 Government Finance and Spending

All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.

2.5 Money and Financial Markets

We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies, the repeal of legal tender laws and compulsory governmental units of account.


2.6 Monopolies and Corporations

We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals. We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Industries should be governed by free markets.

2.7 Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

2.8 Education

Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education.


2.9 Health Care

We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.


2.10 Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We favor replacing the current government-sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3.0 Securing Liberty

The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of government. Government is constitutionally limited so as to prevent the infringement of individual rights by the government itself. The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.

3.1 National Defense

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression.
The United States should both abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world and avoid entangling alliances. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.

3.2 Internal Security and Individual Rights

The defense of the country requires that we have adequate intelligence to detect and to counter threats to domestic security. This requirement must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The Bill of Rights provides no exceptions for a time of war. Intelligence agencies that legitimately seek to preserve the security of the nation must be subject to oversight and transparency. We oppose the government's use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law.

3.3 International Affairs

American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and its defense against attack from abroad. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid.
We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.

3.4 Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property.


3.5 Rights and Discrimination

We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual's rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs.

3.6 Representative Government

We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. As private voluntary groups, political parties should be allowed to establish their own rules for nomination procedures, primaries and conventions. We call for an end to any tax-financed subsidies to candidates or parties and the repeal of all laws which restrict voluntary financing of election campaigns. We oppose laws that effectively exclude alternative candidates and parties, deny ballot access, gerrymander districts, or deny the voters their right to consider all legitimate alternatives.


3.7 Self-Determination

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty.

4.0 Omissions

Our silence about any other particular government law, regulation, ordinance, directive, edict, control, regulatory agency, activity, or machination should not be construed to imply approval.

brianko
Banned
Posts in topic: 14
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:56 pm

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#228

Post by brianko »

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Here is the Libertarian Party Platform from the Party's website. Please point out where I'm wrong.
Considering I've been chastised once already for going off-topic in this topic, I'll not do it again. Maybe a debate for another day and another topic.

However, just to keep the post on-topic, I should point out that whatever other beliefs you attribute to the LP, the one that is important to the discussion, and the one that refutes many of your positions about the LP, is the very first one you post:
Libertarian Party Platform wrote: Statement of Principles

1.0 Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.

So you see, unlike yourself, some of us do believe there is room for choice when it comes to supporting organizations that fight for RKBA and 2A rights. The NRA is not the end all to everything that is 2A, and those who want to believe this are obviously no fans of personal choice and freedom. Not exactly an organization I'm ready to throw my support behind...
A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves. --E. Murrow
Member GOA (life), JPFO

mr.72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 34
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:14 am

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#229

Post by mr.72 »

We should take the Libertarian Party debate to another topic, I think.

I had never read the LP platform in detail before, since I am much more of a "small-l" libertarian and not a party libertarian. However, given the quote from above:
We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.
I think it would be worthy of discussion since this is a very unequivocal position of the Libertarian Party regarding gun rights.

Bringing this back on topic, I think in 16 pages of discussion here it has become clear to me that some gun owners have some legitimate reasons for not supporting the NRA completely. Many of the people who are strong supporters of the NRA seem to be unwilling to address the concerns of these people. Instead they intend to convince these people to kind of hold their noses and support the NRA anyway since the NRA is the only chance we could have at defending our 2A rights.

So it's kind of like, if you want the baby, you had better be ready to keep the bath water as well. Is that about right?

I can't claim to be inside the minds of possibly hundreds of millions of Americans who own guns but do not join the NRA. I do know my own mind and I'm fairly confident about my understanding of the opinions of my close friends and family members who own guns and are not members of the NRA. So far, from what I can tell, NRA members who are vocal in this thread are not willing to hear the reality of the position of at least those people who I can represent about reasons for not joining the NRA, and perhaps it is true that only this small number of people that I know are completely unique in their opinions and it is sensible for other NRA members to ignore this input. In that case, then the few hundred dollars in membership fees that the NRA loses with me and my kind is not worth seeking. However, if it is possible that maybe this range of opinion that I share with my friends and family is more common than just a few dozen people in the Austin suburbs, then it would be advisable for the NRA to make some changes.

Basically, if the NRA is going to change, then the NRA members have to quit defending the old way and look for opportunities to change. There are millions of gun owners out there who don't join for some reason. Maybe it's time to start actually listening to the reasons.
non-conformist CHL holder
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 7875
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#230

Post by anygunanywhere »

mr.72 wrote: Bringing this back on topic, I think in 16 pages of discussion here it has become clear to me that some gun owners have some legitimate reasons for not supporting the NRA completely. Many of the people who are strong supporters of the NRA seem to be unwilling to address the concerns of these people. Instead they intend to convince these people to kind of hold their noses and support the NRA anyway since the NRA is the only chance we could have at defending our 2A rights.
I beg to differ with you, Mr.72. Those of us that are "strong supporters" of the NRA just might be happy with the way things are.

Why should I vote to change the NRA to suit someone else?

As has been stated here, no organization will be 100% to everyone. If the NRA changes to suit someone else then I might not like it.

As I read these posts it appears that the ones most opposed to the NRA are harboring hurt feelings and allowing their ideologies to get in the way of their joining. Fine. That IS their choice.

They can stand by their ideology when the knock at the door comes.

Their choice, their freedom to do so.

If you have not noticed, over the years the only group to compromise has been us. It needs to be our CHOICE to now, this day and time, to draw a line and tell the antis that we will not tolerate any more infringements. Period. I think that that is worth someone "holding their nose".

If that ideology can not convince people to join up, then that is their decision. If the Libertarians have such a problem with the NRA then let them AND their party focus their time and money on the RKBA as effectively as the NRA and prove their worth to the cause.

The NRA is not going to change unless we vote to do so. Convince me that I need to.

Respectfully,
Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
User avatar

Topic author
flintknapper
Banned
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 4962
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: Deep East Texas

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#231

Post by flintknapper »

anygunanywhere wrote: I beg to differ with you, Mr.72. Those of us that are "strong supporters" of the NRA just might be happy with the way things are.

Why should I vote to change the NRA to suit someone else?

As has been stated here, no organization will be 100% to everyone. If the NRA changes to suit someone else then I might not like it.

As I read these posts it appears that the ones most opposed to the NRA are harboring hurt feelings and allowing their ideologies to get in the way of their joining. Fine. That IS their choice.
They can stand by their ideology when the knock at the door comes.

Their choice, their freedom to do so.

If you have not noticed, over the years the only group to compromise has been us. It needs to be our CHOICE to now, this day and time, to draw a line and tell the antis that we will not tolerate any more infringements. Period. I think that that is worth someone "holding their nose".

If that ideology can not convince people to join up, then that is their decision. If the Libertarians have such a problem with the NRA then let them AND their party focus their time and money on the RKBA as effectively as the NRA and prove their worth to the cause.

The NRA is not going to change unless we vote to do so. Convince me that I need to.

Respectfully,
Anygunanywhere
:iagree:
Spartans ask not how many, but where!

mr.72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 34
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:14 am

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#232

Post by mr.72 »

anygunanywhere wrote: As I read these posts it appears that the ones most opposed to the NRA are harboring hurt feelings and allowing their ideologies to get in the way of their joining. Fine. That IS their choice.

They can stand by their ideology when the knock at the door comes.

Their choice, their freedom to do so.

If you have not noticed, over the years the only group to compromise has been us. It needs to be our CHOICE to now, this day and time, to draw a line and tell the antis that we will not tolerate any more infringements. Period. I think that that is worth someone "holding their nose".

I don't think that is true. In fact, I think many of those who have posted in this thread are categorizing the disagreements in these terms because it makes them easy to dismiss.

In this thread, I don't think I have read one single disagreement with the NRA over their support of RKBA or the 2A. Not one! Please point out one! That's the "baby" that we all support.

However there is lots about the NRA that is not directly related to this, and that's where most of the disagreement begins. It's the "bathwater". So yeah, if we want an organization to support the RKBA, why do they have to do all of these other things? Because these other things they are doing, not directly related to RKBA, are driving away legitimate RKBA supporters who have not joined the NRA.

Now I actually agree with most of what the NRA does, but I also think that the baggage dilutes their message when they take on the RKBA front, and they are meeting a focused and unified resistance. A more focused and unified organization, in my mind, would be better suited to the RKBA fight. And it is my personal opinion that the NRA is not the right organization to do the RKBA fight because they are more well known among the vast majority of people who are not members (gun owners or not) as an organization supporting primarily hunters and shooting for sport, whether this is accurate or not.

As long as the NRA insists on keeping up all of the non-RKBA policies, then they will be unnecessarily limiting their membership and maybe weakening the RKBA front as a result. As a strong RKBA supporter, I see this as a genuine need for change.

Give me one organization focused on RKBA alone, and one without political or ideological baggage, or stigma of being about hunters and wannabe militiamen, and one which can attract a more diverse membership than the current NRA. Frankly, I agree with you. NRA members like it the way it is. If so, then lay off those who choose not to join. You are choosing to limit the membership and you only invite division if you try and get people to join who do not adhere to the whole, non-RKBA agenda of the NRA.

Mr. Anygun, I truly appreciate your willingness to just admit that maybe the NRA members like it the way it is and don't want to change. That's honest and IMHO, right on the money. Of course the whole point of this thread was to discuss opportunity for change in the NRA. I don't think such a thing really exists in practical terms.
non-conformist CHL holder
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 7875
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#233

Post by anygunanywhere »

:tiphat:

Nice response, sir.

Anygun
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 20
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#234

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

I have no idea what point you are trying to make, if any. How is the NRA limiting anyone's choice as to what Second Amendment organizations they support? I am promoting NRA membership and the NRA is doing likewise. You have never seen me say not to join other organizations.

BTW, your dodging the LP Platform is most enlightening.

As for the "unlike yourself . . ." comment I highlighted below, knock it off. I've warned you before; talk about the issue not the poster. You said you're a dedicated member of the Libertarian Party and I suspect like most LP members, you are mad at the NRA for not listing your candidates in the Voters Guides. I get it; I've heard it from other sources including Liberty who is a strong Libertarian that is always respectful to others who don't share his views on some issues. Express your views without the insults or express them elsewhere.

Chas.
brianko wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote: Here is the Libertarian Party Platform from the Party's website. Please point out where I'm wrong.
Considering I've been chastised once already for going off-topic in this topic, I'll not do it again. Maybe a debate for another day and another topic.

However, just to keep the post on-topic, I should point out that whatever other beliefs you attribute to the LP, the one that is important to the discussion, and the one that refutes many of your positions about the LP, is the very first one you post:
Libertarian Party Platform wrote: Statement of Principles

1.0 Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.

So you see, unlike yourself, some of us do believe there is room for choice when it comes to supporting organizations that fight for RKBA and 2A rights. The NRA is not the end all to everything that is 2A, and those who want to believe this are obviously no fans of personal choice and freedom. Not exactly an organization I'm ready to throw my support behind...
User avatar

WildBill
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 14
Posts: 17350
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Houston

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#235

Post by WildBill »

mr.72 wrote:As long as the NRA insists on keeping up all of the non-RKBA policies, then they will be unnecessarily limiting their membership and maybe weakening the RKBA front as a result. As a strong RKBA supporter, I see this as a genuine need for change.
The NRA, like all organizations, can improve. I don't believe the NRA would or should change to an "all RKBA" organization. In addition to the supporting the RKBA, the NRA is the leader in firearms training - firearm safety, marksmanship and hunter safety. The NRA educates both civilians and LEO agencies. Their training classes and certifications are known and respected through out the world. I believe that most of the forum members [and all shooters, I hope] agree, training is an essential ingredient for handling guns used for self defense. For this reason alone, the NRA is a useful and worthy organization.
NRA Endowment Member
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#236

Post by Keith B »

I don't feel the smaller membership is as much about what they do that folks don't like as it is about what they do not do or provide.

A good example is my Father-In-Law. He has nothing against the NRA. Being a gun owner in a rural area, he hasn't seen the need to really belong, even though he has been a member in the past. He doesn't see the benefit of paying out $35 a year for a membership that gets them one more magazine that he may or may not read. He also doesn't shoot at the range that requires an NRA membership. He doesn't need the insurance it provides or the discounts on items. He has been through the Hunter Safety classes (hunting is his draw.) So there is not really an incentive from that angle. Many gun owners have this view.

Many individuals are also not tied into politics at all, so when we have a gun friendly government, they don't see or understand the constant threats (Brady, etc.) against the RKBA that exist and the need to continually fight to keep a level playing field. If they aren't hearing continually about the potential for THEM to loose rights, and they don't see it in the media, they don't understand the need to support a lobbying group. A good example of this is the threat of reinstating an AWB. Look at what it has done to increase the demand for EBR's. Prior to that, it was 'Someday I will buy one.' It all comes down to priorities. I talked to him and other family members that don't belong at Thanksgiving and enlightened him on the reasons they SHOULD make it a priority. They now understand the need.

I think we will see the ranks increase though. With the now large impending threat of gun owners rights being trampled, there will be more attention to the need to belong and help support the one organization that has the voice in DC for gun owners. We will see an increase in membership as it will draw more folks to the call, but there needs to be more done. The NRA needs to find a way for those who don't belong to make it a top priority, no matter what the current status of RKBA is, so we can keep the ranks strong and the fight funded. Marketing is key. I know they try to do this, but I feel there needs to be more focus on the demographics and figure out how to reach those that are not joining, and find out why there are those that choose not to renew their memberships.

We need that collective voice of the NRA and we need to stand behind the organization, even if we may not like some of the things it does. We can show our support and spread the word to those out there that are not members. As a member you can also participate and help get things changed that you don't particularly like, but you won't succeed by standing back and complaining about them.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

longtooth
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 12329
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Angelina County

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#237

Post by longtooth »

Good post. I know I fit into your Dad's mold many yrs ago.
All I saw the NRA for was to teach the new shooters, LEOs, do the Camp PErry thing that I could not even think about let alone afford, their hunting trips in NM that would only be a dream for me even today,
There just was not a benefit for me of being a member.
Glad I woke up 30 or so yrs ago.
Still trying to wake up some others.
Image
Carry 24-7 or guess right.
CHL Instructor. http://www.pdtraining.us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
NRA/TSRA Life Member - TFC Member #11

mr.72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 34
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:14 am

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#238

Post by mr.72 »

WildBill wrote: The NRA, like all organizations, can improve. I don't believe the NRA would or should change to an "all RKBA" organization. In addition to the supporting the RKBA, the NRA is the leader in firearms training - firearm safety, marksmanship and hunter safety. The NRA educates both civilians and LEO agencies. Their training classes and certifications are known and respected through out the world. I believe that most of the forum members [and all shooters, I hope] agree, training is an essential ingredient for handling guns used for self defense. For this reason alone, the NRA is a useful and worthy organization.
I agree wholeheartedly. However I think this also makes the NRA a poor choice as our primary RKBA voice.

Simply I think an RKBA-only organization, split off from the NRA, with tens of millions of members, would be much more effective to carry the RKBA flag, and then the NRA could be left to do all of their other non-RKBA things without impacting the RKBA issue.

This is why I think RKBA-supporters joining the NRA and then trying to change it from within won't work, not in the least. The change that makes the most sense for RKBA support, is the one that makes the least sense for the NRA. It makes far more sense to just support a more focused RKBA-only organization and in fact I think if the NRA would just endorse such a third party and get out of this game altogether (maybe just simply split), then it would be better for our rights and also would not undo any of the other good that the NRA does.
non-conformist CHL holder
User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 12
Posts: 6343
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#239

Post by Liberty »

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Neither I nor the NRA attack the Libertarian Party, but I'm growing weary of Libertarians blaming the NRA for their Party's failure to grow. The NRA is not impeding the Libertarian Party's ability to attract members. The Party's platform is very conservative on most fiscal issues, but ultra-liberal on social issues. This is an odd mix that is not likely to appeal to a lot of people. Conservatives won't like the liberal social positions and liberals won't like the "no taxes," "no social programs" and a "hands off" form of government. Again, I'm not blasting the Party, but I'm not willing to let Libertarians blame the NRA for people not warming up to the platform set out below.

Here is the Libertarian Party Platform from the Party's website. Please point out where I'm wrong.
The NRA probably shouldn't be supporting the Libertarian Party, nor any other party. This thread was about issues folks might have about the NRA issues on why folks might be reluctant to join. I and most Libertarians don't hold the NRA accountable for our partys growth and future. The issue we have had with the NRA is very clear and well defined. They will not rate us. Every election cycle they list Every Democrat and Republican yet they choose to ignore our candidates as though we don't even exist. We never expected or asked the NRA to endorse us even approve us, just to acknowledge us and rate us fairly. I haven't seen any one blame the NRA for our shortcomings we have our own issues and take full responsibility for how well or poorly we do. . Our platform on other issues shouldn't have anything to do with whether they rate us or not. I do understand that some folks have issues with some of the Libertarian main platform. So don't I, but taken as a whole I find it more palatable than a party bent on government growth with out paying for it. I prefer a government that stays out of my home, my bedroom and between me and my family Doctor over a Government that bails and federalizes our banks and automakers without any concern on how they will pay for it. But this is a topic that probably doesn't belong on this thread. It is suppose to be about how the NRA can attract more people. My suggestions for the NRA to list Libertarian candidates was made in this context, not to tear down the NRA.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy

brianko
Banned
Posts in topic: 14
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:56 pm

Re: The NRA.....lets talk!

#240

Post by brianko »

Charles L. Cotton wrote: BTW, your dodging the LP Platform is most enlightening.

As for the "unlike yourself . . ." comment I highlighted below, knock it off. I've warned you before; talk about the issue not the poster. You said you're a dedicated member of the Libertarian Party and I suspect like most LP members, you are mad at the NRA for not listing your candidates in the Voters Guides. I get it; I've heard it from other sources including Liberty who is a strong Libertarian that is always respectful to others who don't share his views on some issues. Express your views without the insults or express them elsewhere.
I'd be glad to meet you online for some intelligent debate about the LP platform. As I explained to you, this isn't the time or place for that debate.

I'm afraid you have me at a disadvantage. Your forum, your rules. When someone steps up to the plate with valid counterarguments to your position, you shut them down. You've done it with me previously, and you're doing it now.

There were no insults, explicit or otherwise, and I believe the readers of this forum know full well that this is the case. This is the very intolerance for alternative viewpoints that makes me leery of the NRA. As previous posters have indicated, the NRA's plan of action excludes segments of the population (non-hunters, liberals, etc.) who would otherwise support the fight for our 2A rights. This position has an uncanny parallel some of the statements that have been made right here in this thread by NRA supporters.
A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves. --E. Murrow
Member GOA (life), JPFO
Locked

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”