As we noted earlier, three injunctions currently protect the members of GOA, FPC and SAF from enforcement under the ATF’s new pistol brace rule that effectively bans almost all use of the accessories. The rule went into effect June 1 and, predictably, very few brace owners elected to comply with the law during the designated “amnesty” period.

Now, the National Association for Gun Rights and the National Rifle Association have moved to protect their members as well. If successful, that would add millions more Americans to the roster of those protected from the ATF’s enforcement efforts.

Yesterday, NAGR filed suit in Texas against the ATF in conjunction with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty and Texas Gun Rights. NAGR issued the following press release . . .

Today, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) filed a new federal lawsuit against the Biden Administration on behalf of gun owners across America in coordination with National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) and Texas Gun Rights (TXGR). 

The lawsuit argues that the new rule usurps Congressional authority by significantly expanding the definition of “rifle” under federal law, imposing potential criminal liability on millions of Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“Biden’s ATF is a rogue entity, making rules that plainly violate the Constitution. Their rule on pistol braces has turned millions of gun owners into felons, overnight,” said Dudley Brown, President of the National Association for Gun Rights. “We’re taking legal action to rein the ATF in and restore the rights of our members. We are pleased to partner with WILL to do just that.”

WILL Deputy Counsel, Lucas Vebber stated, “The Biden Administration cannot ignore Congress and this rule is a clear violation of separation of powers and a violation of the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Now that the ATF’s rule is in effect, it’s critical that we act.”

“The ATF are acting like foot soldiers for the anti-gun Biden administration. Their abuse of power is both unconscionable and unconstitutional. Texas Gun Rights looks forward to overturning their draconian rule,” said Chris McNutt, President of Texas Gun Rights.

The Congressional Research Service estimates 10 to 40 million stabilizing braces are currently in circulation. The ATF says only 250,000 have been registered as of the May 31st deadline.

The NRA took a different approach. They’ve petitioned the court to join the Second Amendment Foundation’s lawsuit as a named plaintiff, a move SAF welcomed today with this announcement . . .

The Second Amendment Foundation today said it welcomes the National Rifle Association’s request to join in a federal lawsuit filed by SAF and its associates in a challenge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ new “arm brace rule.” 

NRA announced the effort Wednesday on its website, explaining the move was to obtain injunctive relief for its members to stop the ATF from enforcing its new rule – which totally reversed the agency’s previous position that pistol braces did not convert pistols into short-barreled rifles, making them subject to regulation under the 1934 National Firearms Act. The case is known as SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al.

On May 31, U.S. District Judge Jane J. Boyle in the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, confirmed the scope of a preliminary injunction she had issued in the case applied not only to SAF, but its members as well. “The Court confirms that its Preliminary Injunction Order applies to both the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. and its members.” 

The NRA announcement confirmed the organization “is going to court to obtain preliminary, and ultimately permanent, injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing the ‘Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces’ (the “Final Rule”) against law-abiding NRA members.”

“We welcome the NRA’s motion to join in our lawsuit,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “If their motion is granted—and we certainly have no objection—it will mean more American gun owners will enjoy the same protection SAF members were granted under Judge Boyle’s preliminary injunction order. It only makes sense NRA would want the same protection for its members.”

SAF is joined in the case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. They are represented by attorney Chad Flores at Flores Law in Houston, Texas.

“We’re in this for the long haul, and we intend to win,” Gottlieb said. “SAF has become a recognized leader in Second Amendment litigation since our 2010 Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago. We’re serious in our intent to win back firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.”

SAF offers several different tiers of memberships which are available at https://www.saf.org/join-saf/. Annual membership is $15, a five-year membership is $50 and a life membership is $150. Membership is effective upon date of receipt.

For questions regarding membership, please contact [email protected].

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

83 COMMENTS

  1. I find it hard to credit that the NRA actually have many members left who might possibly own such a non-Fudd firearm such as a braced pistol. And if there were any left they are probably members only on paper that the NRA is keeping on their membership rolls only to keep their numbers up on the books but no dues have been paid for years.

    • Lots of folks bought lifetime memberships back during the Clinton Administration.

      • I bought mine during the Obama years.
        I had just moved to a free state for my 2nd A rights and the thought of being screwed federally after leaving everything and everyone behind for a shot at freedom was something I just couldn’t bear. I poured time and money into every org and campaign that I could.

      • I am a non monetary contributing voting NRA Life Member. I want the suits I paid for so I can donate them to Goodwill.

        Nonetheless when it comes to helping stop Gun Control Rats something is better than nothing.

        • Debbie
          Here is my response from Clay.

          Hi *******,

          Thank you for reaching out! The NRA-ILA works closely with many other organizations, groups, and coalitions. Unfortunately, Governor Polis and the anti-gun legislature have passed several anti-Second Amendment Bills that we will continue to fight against. As per the lawsuit, I have attached a link that provides all current litigation the NRA is involved in.

          Current Litigation: NRA-ILA | Current Litigation (nraila.org)

          Yours in Freedom,
          Clay Kimberling

          https://www.nraila.org/legal-legislation/current-litigation/

          I won’t cuss this time just for you.
          What have you done today to advance gun rights from being stomped upon by the powers that be talk a homeless person to death?

          I’m happy that Clay responded to me in 24 hours no less.

          Go visit the litigation of the NRAILA

    • Nikita, define FUDD. I ask because I find myself a member of the NRA. GOA and 2nd Amendment Foundation. I own a number of hunting rifles. Mostly bolt and lever actions. A few shotguns too. Mostly Remington repeaters. One Browning Citori in 20 w/Prince of Wales grip. One must maintain appearances when upland bird hunting. I understand that pretty much defines FUDD. Except, that I also have a 91, Galil, M1A, etc. I even own a couple of ARs. Again. Am I trans? I think I need to talk to a therapist. There are no FUDDS. There are just citizens that own firearms for different reasons. We do ourselves a disservice by disparaging any person that owns a legal firearm. For whatever reason.

      • “I understand that pretty much defines FUDD.”

        Thinking you have been misled. A FUDD is a gun owner who is also amenable to control of firearms not traditionally, historically, used for hunting and some competitions; no other purposes for firearm ownership are legitimate. A claimed characteristic of FUDDs is that they will not protest background checks, and will quietly surrender their hunting arms if government requires.

        Proper gun owners (FUDDs) don’t need no weapons of war, or other gun gimmicks.

      • a FUDD would tell you that you don’t ‘need’ that 91, Galil, M1A or ARs. Ijn fact, most of them would tell you ‘no one needs them’.

  2. Of course the NRA jumps on board after it’s already seen success. Cowards.

    And I say that as an endowment member who will never contribute to them again.

    • “Of course the NRA jumps on board after it’s already seen success.”

      And of course you and others give absolutely no credit for the $5 million plus, and the years it took NRA ILA, via NYSRPA, to run Bruen from start to finish, which has opened up all of these rights restoration attempts. Oh yeah, but not one DIME.

      On another hand- the number of people now involved in this action has just been increased by some 4.7-5 million. More than all the other groups combined. Continue to be short-sighted…

      • “And of course you and others give absolutely no credit for the $5 million plus, and the years it took NRA ILA, via NYSRPA, to run Bruen from start to finish….”

        Gotta admit that the reasoning to credit NRA with the Bruen decision reads like something a former federal employee would write. The Bruen battle was led by NYRPA, not NRA. NYRPA is an affiliate, but it is not “the” NRA.

        Why does NRA push the responsibility for defending the Second Amendment onto affiliates, rather than stand tall, and take on government?

        NYRPA is not the “500 pound gorilla. It is comparably a nebbish. “The” NRA is the 500 pound gorilla, and the nation needs to see NRA in direct action. You know, kinda like SLPC, BLM, ACLU, AFL-CIO, Teamsters.

        If NRA’s mission is serving as a “Go Fund Me” source of funding, it should proudly say so.

        • “The Bruen battle was led by NYRPA, not NRA.”

          Not sure where you get your info, Sam. Have you ever spoken with Tom king, for example, who is a colleague of mine? He’s also the President of NYSRPA. My knowledge, statements and info concerning Bruen come from in-person, one-on-one conversations with him over the past 3 years or so.

          Yours? Ditto many of the other NRA haters here and around the web.

        • Craig, it is virtually impossible to change the minds of these anti-NRA sycophants. They have one track minds. I’ve met Tom King and I agree with your analysis. If it had not been for the NRA the NYSRPA case would have withered on the vine. But these anti-NRA types refuse to accept that the NRA could do anything right. I’m a Patron Life Member of the NRA and proud of it.

    • Tori, Yadda, yadda, yadda, So what!? If you don’t like the NRA, that’s all well and good. It seems that the NRA has gone to bat for us many many times. Did you forget Heller, McDonald, and Bruen as well as a host of other cases?

  4. It is more that high time the NRA got into the fight.
    Better late than never and good luck in this unnecessary fight
    relative to a clear infringement or our rights by the ATFit’s self!

  5. I’m a Benefactor Life member.

    The NRA reminds me of Lindsay Graham – or maybe Gov Le Petomane – in that they huff and puff and harrumph but they never actually do anything. When was the last time you ever heard of the NRA taking the lead to go to court to defend our rights?

    All I ever see from the NRA these days are appeals for more donations. As a result, I’ve redirected my contributions to organizations that are actually, proactively in the fight.

    • “I’ve redirected my contributions to organizations that are actually, proactively in the fight.”

      Then name them..Ticked

    • “…The NRA reminds me of Lindsay Graham – or maybe Gov Le Petomane…”

      TTAG’s own Gov. Le Petomane keeps earth’s atmosphere stocked with fragrant methane gasses… 🙂

  6. NRA is chasing the productive tit even though they did absolutely nothing to deserve it.

  7. The NRA has become the biggest do-nothing gun rights group out there… the so-called elections of the officers is is rigged as our national elections are… whenever you see a lawsuit to overturn a bad law it is either the second amendment foundation, the G0A, and others on the lawsuit… wow Wayne, La peepee is out buying hookers and Armani suits… I only give them 10 bucks a year because our raffle range requires that..

    • 24and7, Yadda, yadda, yadda, So what!? If you don’t like the NRA, that’s all well and good. It seems that the NRA has gone to bat for us many many times. Did you forget Heller, McDonald, and Bruen as well as a host of other cases?

  8. OK.

    One point for NRA (although as an additional plaintiff, they will likely reap the benefit without much expenditure). Anyway, one good one for NRA as a defender of the Second Amendment.

    • “…they will likely reap the benefit without much expenditure…”

      Like you, GOA, FPC, NAGR, SAF, et al, invested squat in Bruen, Heller, McDonald. Right now, NRA ILA has some 15 cases going. Not small reactionary lawsuits, but full-blown cases, several of which may end up before SCOTUS. ILA is also involved in the global sphere as an NGO to the UN and also sits on the European arms trade commissions that are bent on restricting firearms, and especially ammunition, attempting to create a global UK-type scenario everywhere.

      And to be honest about this whole thing- the 2A rights/political/elections wing of NRA is ILA. NRA proper has always been all-in for training, marksmanship programs, women, youth programs, competition shooting, military and LEO programs/training and the like. You know- all those things that have made shooting and basic firearms handling so safe over the past 5 decades that accidents and unintended shootings don’t even show as major causes of negligent or accidental deaths or injuries. And, of course, FPC, GOA, NAGR, SAF, et al, don’t have to spend a dime on that kind of training.

      Not much can be done by any of these orgs about the Number One violence problem in the US: Intentional mis/illegal use of firearms by inner city feral gang youth.

      • “Not much can be done by any of these orgs about the Number One violence problem in the US: Intentional mis/illegal use of firearms by inner city feral gang youth.”

        Isn’t that interesting? Fighting for the Second Amendment is essentially the same stance those opposed to the Second Amendment; no interest in eradicating violence in the inner cities. We don’t actually know what could be done about violent neighborhoods, until the public raises overwhelming demand that the violence be reduced to near-zero.

        As to “15…full blown cases NRA is involved in, if NRA had funding to keep Bruen alive, it has sufficient funds to take on even more. The issue I raise is that NRA is either the lead, all across the spectrum, or it isn’t the lead. If NRA is simply funding law suits, then NRA is not the leader, but a backbencher putting up money; important, but not deserving of the credit for the win, as if it, alone, led the charge in favor of the RTKBA.

        NRA-ILA? Again, NRA talking to itself. Go ask any ten random persons if they ever heard of NRA. Then ask if they have heard of NRA-ILA. The public needs to see that “NRA” is the most legally active defender of the Second Amendment, bar none. All the other 2A defense organizations should be filing amicus briefs for NRA, not the other way round.

        • “…Go ask any ten random persons if they ever heard of NRA. Then ask if they have heard of NRA-ILA.”

          Meaningless. 10 random people? There are a score around here that know about ILA but, like you, would rather see NRA abandoned everything it has and does to stick all assets into some imagined 2A battle that will end all of this once and for all. I merely set the record right regardless of your constant supposed expertise.

          Actually, it’s a good thing non-engaged people like you do not belong to NRA, or NAGR, GOA, SAF, et al. Stay in the cheap seats and keep coming up with ways to try to influence an organization you do not belong to. You can find plenty of uninformed, vocal disciples around here who go along with the same uninformed mentality that BLM, Antifa and other anarchist groups use. Hands up- don’t shoot… Low-hanging fruit with no substance in the end.

          For some reason you seem to believe, or propose, that NRA should be trying to appeal to everyone. Is that the same for FPC, NAGR, GOA, SAF? If so, NRA is still millions of members in the lead.

  10. Oh bull shit, the NRA wants in on the gravy train. They saw what kind of cash cow it was for GOA, 2nd A. Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition. (I’m a member of the FPC and 2AF) The NRA doesn’t give a damn about the members, they see $$$ and I wouldn’t give the NRA a sweaty nut-penny of my money.

  11. This device isn’t worth it to me. I’ll likely never have one. Who knows?

    I’ll be a GOA and SAF member anyway.

    • “This device isn’t worth it to me. I’ll likely never have one. Who knows?”

      Pistol braces, and many other manufactured items “defended” by pro-2A groups are fringe concerns, mostly benefiting manufacturers income stream. Eliminate NFA and GCA, you got something “the people” benefit from. Why are none of the pro-gun groups attacking the center, rather than the far end of the flanks?

      Defending pieces parts is a long slog, and there is no end to the number of parts the anti-gun cartels can restrict/regulate.

    • Well Sam, you probably don’t have an AR pistol then. I have two, both in 300 blk, one suppressed.

      • Well Sam, you probably don’t have an AR pistol then.”

        You would be correct.

        The issue isn’t whether someone has a brace, a suppressor, or a bump stock. The result of the current lawsuits favors the manufacturers, more than the buyers. If NFA and GCA are repealed (or declared unconstitutional) law suits over braces, bump stocks and suppressors would be unnecessary.

        When one considers all the pieces parts under attack, we are just nibbling around the edges. NRA should be engaged in a massive lobby campaign to end unconstitutional restrictions on firearms (NFA/GCA), and simultaneously using NRA-ILA in mad dog attacks on NFA and GCA. The other brand name pro-2A organizations should be the ones filing amicus briefs for NRA lawsuits.

        • “NRA should be engaged in a massive lobby campaign to end unconstitutional restrictions on firearms…”

          Well, let’s see now. NRA sends out some 3 million-plus magazine publications each month and what you “wish” is addressed in each and every one of those. Every month. That’s likely more than 5 times the amount of information put out by NRA and ILA each month than all of the other groups combined. Is it any wonder it’s so inexpensive/cheap to join the other groups?

          Of course, as a non-member, you and the other NRA haters never see any of that. What you, and TTAG participants do see is a long line of perhaps a dozen to 20 dedicated posters here, on a FREE website, who claim to be disgruntled NRA members, but there’s really no way to prove they really are, or ever we’re, NRA members.

          Join up with who ever trips your trigger, or, as I believe Sam has stated in the past- don’t join anyone at all. Talk is cheap, and on the free and anonymous web, very cheap.

  12. Antigun folks trash the NRA incessantly.

    That’s because they know the NRA is the reason this country is not worse off than Mexico. Or UK.

    So naturally they badmouth every chance they get. Btw, Leticia needs her car washed – y’all jump right on that, ok?

  13. What bullshit, you can have if you join our club.
    “Your all in it together, bunch of gawddamn pimps”

      • “What stadium are you posting from? The astroturf looks nice.”

        Thinking “Ike Clanton” is an experiment in AI; conversation with a computer.

  14. @Fun Gunner
    “Agreed, except it’s Fudd, not FUDD.”

    Indeed. Was simply staying with the spelling in the original comment.

  16. for all the rip on the nra I’m still waiting for all the other organizations to file against the 86 ban.

    guess what ?
    none of them has.
    after all these years.

  17. The NYRPA suit was not led by NRA, nor was it filed by NRA.
    Affiliation is not a “division”, or “subsidary” (and even that isn’t the same as the organization as a whole).

    The legal filing (“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
    NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION,
    INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW
    YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.”), does not indicate NRA is/was lead plaintiff. Simply providing funding to NYRPA is not, in any way, the equivalent of NRA corporate filing a lawsuit. (the “et.al. does not mean NRA was lead, either).

    NRA should not be hiding behind “affiliates”, but leading the vast majority of challenges to US gun laws. The MSM pays attention, nationally broadcasting, when NRA is the lead, the mover and shaker, the plaintiff. MSM finds little use for free advertisement of NRA “affiliates”.

    BTW, talking to insiders is something the actual NRA does (talking to themselves). Of course, NRA gains more access to all the cool parties through its lobbying, but not through leading lawsuits.

    NRA revenue declined 23% ($367mil, to $282mil) from 2016, to 2020; down $85mil (based on latest NRA tax filings a/o 27May22).

    NRA membership in 2018 was ~6mil; “under 4.9mil” claimed by LaPierre in a 2021 legal deposition”(down 1.1mil a/o end of 2022); losses not due to anti-gun activities.

    Interestingly, the MSM has not reported that NRA is the bogeyman in recent pro-2A lawsuits filed by other 2A organizations. If NRA were the 500lb gorilla, the MSM would be shouting it to the rooftops.

    Funding other organizations to fight 2A battles is not “leading”.
    https://nrawatch.org/report/nra-2023-budget-analysis/

    https://momsdemandaction.org/new-report-nra-membership-hits-10-year-low-hemorrhaging-over-1-million-members-since-2019/

    https://www.thetrace.org/2023/01/nra-political-victory-fund-campaign/

    https://nrawatch.org/report/nra-2023-budget-analysis/

    • Didn’t say that the NRA was the lead plaintiff. but if it hadn’t been for the NRA once the case got past the District Court, it would have died on the vine as the NYSRPA was all but out of money. You see, I’m a member of both the NRA and NYSRPA.
      YAWN! Seems another anti-NRA protester is shot down. Your articles are all well and good but for sure SLANTED!

      • “Didn’t say that the NRA was the lead plaintiff. but if it hadn’t been for the NRA once the case got past the District Court, it would have died on the vine as the NYSRPA was all but out of money. You see, I’m a member of both the NRA and NYSRPA.”

        You seem to have missed my entire point: funding is not leading; NRA, with its fearsome reputation as a political force, should be the vanguard of every challenge to gun control. Rather than fund NYRPA’s legal challenge, NRA has/had the money to file the original suit (called “leading”), but used a stalking horse (NYRPA) instead (if NYRPA lost, NRA would be able to distance itself).

        Now, and only now, that NRA sees how well the other 2A organizations are doing with injunctions, NRA has come late to the party, attempting to become a named plaintiff. This is how the nation’s “longest existing civil rights organization” defends civil rights?

        • SAM, Bad news, son, It seems that it was an NRA lawyer who argued the case before the Supreme Court.
          Have you also forgotten who brought us Heller and McDonald?
          Look if you hate the NRA that is your problem. but don’t try making the NRA out to be the bad boy just because you don’t like Wayne LaPiere?

        • There is this well established legal requirement called “standing.” If your organization doesn’t have standing, its case will be dismissed before it gets past the first hurdle. It was easier for NRA to have NYSRPA file the case on behalf of their member to ensure standing was never an issue. Without the NRA money, Bruen could not have made it to the Supreme Court. I have zero time for Lil’ Wayne and the rest of the corrupt leadership of NRA but give credit where credit is due as the NRA’s deep pockets ensured a far reaching victory for every gunowner in America.

  18. @Walter E Beverly III
    “SAM, Bad news, son, It seems that it was an NRA lawyer who argued the case before the Supreme Court.”

    Hired help, but not “lead plaintiff”, by any stretch. NYRPA could have hired an attorney from Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe. The case would still have been “NYRPA v. Bruen”, not “NRA v Bruen”.

    LaPierre? If he is responsible for the mess that is the NRA, then, of course, I wouldn’t like him. I was a subscriber to NRA years ago. Learned NRA was not a servant of the subscribership, but a religion, complete with high priest.

    If my friends are making what I think is a financial, political, or association mistake, would I be a better friend for pointing out the mistake, or simply let my friend(s) find out too late they made a mistake? In such a case, I would not really care which decision my friend(s) make, but that they make the decision with the information provided, including my observation. Same is true regarding NRA.

    If NRA were the powerhouse it is supposed to be, there would be no need for SAF, FPC, GOA, NAGR, RMGO.

    QED

    There were 77 Amicus Briefs in “Heller”. NRA was one of 77; but not “lead” in the original case, nor the appeals.

    • Sam, It is clear that your hatred for the NRA has overcome your ability to accept the reality that the NRA was a MAJOR FORCE supporting the NYSRPA’s law suit. The NRA lawyer took over the appeal on behalf of the NYSRPA and the other plaintiffs. That is an INDISPUTIBLE fact. I don’t really give a rat’s behind about your “not the lead plaintiff” nonsense. It is totally and finally IRRELEVANT.
      For your edification, the other organizations are full of people with super egos trying to replace the NRA. If they can succeed in that endeavor, so be it. But your premise of “”no need” is also IRRELEVANT. So what is there were 77 Amicus briefs in Heller. Of those 77 how many were opposed to the Plaintiff? That fact is that the NRA has been involved in EVER significant pro gun rights decision. Even you cannot deny that. When these cases get the SCOTUS it is the NRA who takes the lead.

  19. “It was easier for NRA to have NYSRPA file the case on behalf of their member to ensure standing was never an issue.”

    Just as today, NRA had standing (recent motion to join litigation regrding ATF Bump Stock Final Rule, in the 5th federal circuit). NYRPA likely included NRA subscribers. If NRA has standing to intervene here (subscribers in the 5th Circuit), it had standing in Bruen.

    Funding is not leading, under any interpretation of “leader”. If NYRPA had been funded by Bill Gates, it would not be Bill Gates leading the legal challenge. Facilitating, alone, is not leading. If NYRPA had been funded by “Go Fund Me”, the “Go Fund Me” account would not be lead plaintiff/appellant.

    NYRPA could have hired an attorney from Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe. It would have still been an NYRPA case, not D,C & H.

    NRA should be lead challenger in any gun control case….if it wants credit for the victories (naturally, NRA wouldn’t want credit for losing a case; would any of us want that?)

  20. “Well, let’s see now. NRA sends out some 3 million-plus magazine publications each month and what you “wish” is addressed in each and every one of those. Every month. That’s likely more than 5 times the amount of information put out by NRA and ILA each month than all of the other groups combined.”

    NRA talking to itself; preaching to the choir. The general public does not see internal communications. If NRA were the real leader in defense of the Second Amendment, a proper campaign would make it impossible for MSM to not report on it (see D. Trump free publicity in 2015/16).

    NRA is three different organizations, and lets those identities water down whatever message NRA is sending at any given moment. The result is (as I published last evening) data that cannot be ignored, all if it a downward trend in NRA prestige.

    I honestly cannot understand why NRA subscribers spend so much energy defending NRA, rather than put the heat on the organization to “shape up, or ship out”.

    • “I honestly cannot understand why NRA subscribers spend so much energy defending NRA…”

      Ditto people like you who belong to no organized resistance to what once was the almost dismantling of not only the Second Amendment, but the entire Constitution. Of course, it’s so much easier to complain and point fingers than it is to work for a viable strategy and fund it with real time, effort, and of course, real money.

      • “Of course, it’s so much easier to complain and point fingers than it is to work for a viable strategy and fund it with real time, effort, and of course, real money.”

        Doesn’t that sound like putting stilts under mediocrity to you? Isn’t the old caution valid here: “Keep doing what you’ve been doing; keep getting what you’ve been getting”?

        I don’t want forever war; just a massive, overwhelming push to get rid of NFA, GCA, and all govt agencies pushing gun control. The SC will never declare any part of the constitution (except the 13th Amendment) as absolute. Only by attacking the beast in its lair, can the 2A be adequately defended.

        Note: there are numerous brand name charities I refuse to fund because they are more interested in staying alive, than actually doing anything. And they make it hard to do any good, because their fund raising efforts deliver 80% to 90% of the money to fund raising businesses, not the actual charity.

  21. @Craig in IA
    “10 random people? There are a score around here that know about ILA”

    – Of course; talking to ourselves about ourselves. It is the general public that needs to see NRA fronting all gun control challenges (and maybe “us”, also, as confirmation that NRA is defending us).

    “For some reason you seem to believe, or propose, that NRA should be trying to appeal to everyone. Is that the same for FOC, NAGR, GOA, SAF? If so, NRA is still millions of members in the lead.”

    Yes, NRA should appeal to everyone, and be the face of 2A defense, not a bunch of smaller orgs vying for money and attention. NRA is losing serious numbers of subscribers, and the smaller orgs are gaining.

    “There are a score around here that know about ILA but, like you, would rather see NRA abandoned everything it has and does to stick all assets into some imagined 2A battle that will end all of this once and for all.”

    If NFA and GCA are not eliminated, NRA, and everyone else, is doomed to fighting around the edges for crumbs. Keep attending to the symptoms, and we are doomed to forever war. Defeat NFA and GCA, we got a chance to really change the politics surrounding the Second Amendment. But truth must be told; nibbling the edges of gun control is “the long game” that primarily benefits the 2A organizations.

  22. “Again, I ask, what is your solution? All I hear is belly aching.”

    One, it ain’t my job to provide solutions; that is the purpose of the pro-2A orgs. It is their responsibility to attract me through demonstrating that they have a plan to put an end to the two most onerous gun control laws in existence today.

    Two, where have I not often enough pointed to eliminating NFA and GCA as a major offensive effort of all the pro-2A orgs?

    All the pro-2A orgs are simply spending money lawsuits begging govt for permission to have this little carve-out, or that little carve-out, that mostly benefits the gun industry, while doing little to rein-in the sources of most 2A infringements: NFA; GCA. NRA, and such, should be my tool, not my religion.

    • Sam, so what you are is a chronic complainer who has no solutions other than your complaints but are unwilling to take steps to “fix the” perceived “problems”? Ideas to solve problems come from the membership.
      Eliminating organizations does what? Nothing.
      Again, you are all complaints but no solutions. Typical “let George do it” mentality.

      • “Sam, so what you are is a chronic complainer who has no solutions other than your complaints but are unwilling to take steps to “fix the” perceived “problems”?”

        This is the fourth time I have submitted my solution: end the NFA and GCA. Where are all the pro-2A orgs on that? Why hasn’t NRA implemented that solution? Are you saying the NRA is not smart enough to come up with that solution? And why hasn’t the subscribership of NRA put that solution to the BOD, and demanded action, or face collapse of NRA?

        • And for the fourth time, how do you just “end the NFA and GCA? Someone has to either get elected to Congress or a law suit has to be filed. Why don’t you become a plaintiff and challenge such a case. That is usually how the NRA or other organizations get involved when the plaintiff goes looking for funding.

        • SAM, And for the fourth time, how do you just “end the NFA and GCA?” Someone has to either get elected to Congress or a law suit has to be filed. Why don’t you become a plaintiff and challenge such a case. That is usually how the NRA or other organizations get involved when the plaintiff goes looking for funding.

    • Sam, it seems that your hatred for the NRA has overcome your common sense. ONE of the basic functions of the NRA is lobbying, members of Congress. (Shaking my head)

      • “ONE of the basic functions of the NRA is lobbying, members of Congress.”

        Nothing focuses the mind, like a federal lawsuit claiming suppression of rights under color of law; lobbying cannot do that. Why is it we have no history of NRA-ILA (or other pro-2A org) doing that? Why is it you are not leading the movement within NRA to end NFA and GCA. Or pressing Wayne to order ILA to file a civil rights law suit in a class action in favor of its subscribers?

        Cut off the head, and the snake dies. Maybe that is actually the problem.

        • Sam, Lobbying is how you get laws introduced to a legislature. It’s how things get done in the political world.

  24. @Walter E Beverly III
    “Sam, Lobbying is how you get laws introduced to a legislature. It’s how things get done in the political world.”

    Yet, here we are, 23yrs into the new century, and NFA and GCA remain “on the books”. Rather effective lobbying, wouldn’t you say?

    • Sam for a guy who keeps bellyaching about the NFA and GCA, what have you done about it, aside from bellyache?
      For your edification, not every lobbying effort is successful?

  25. “Sam for a guy who keeps bellyaching about the NFA and GCA, what have you done about it, aside from bellyache?”

    Stopped throwing good money after bad.

    • Sam, and just what is your solution for real? When are you willing to put your money where your mouth is

    • Sam, and just what is your solution for real? When are you willing to put your money where your mouth is ?????

      • “Sam, and just what is your solution for real?”

        Not going to state my plan a fifth time; you have it, now push it inside NRA.

        BTW, the wonderful thing about what freedom we have left is I am not required to disclose my financials to just anyone.

        • Your plan is, basically, to do nothing. Are you willing to file your suit in Federal Court challenging the NFA and the GCA? AGAIN, put your money where your mouth is. Who asked you to “disclose” your financials?

  26. @Walter E Beverly III
    “Your plan is, basically, to do nothing. Are you willing to file your suit in Federal Court challenging the NFA and the GCA? AGAIN, put your money where your mouth is. Who asked you to “disclose” your financials?”

    It does seem that your plan is to send a letter to someone inside NRA, and continue to fund an organization so weak it must wait for me to lead it where it needs to go.

    Are you willing to file a suit in Federal Court challenging the NFA and the GCA, Walt? You have all the standing necessary.

    Telling me to put my money anywhere is asking me to disclose my financials. Instead of sending money to organizations nibbling around the edges, and hoping someday one of those orgs will be bold and take the offensive to those who are trying to eliminate the Second Amendment, and then, funding and hoping, year after year, my action is to avoid throwing good money after bad.

      • “You can thank NYSRPA and the NRA for Bruen”

        As for a hobbled victory, yes, NYSRPA did the work, and gets the recognition. NRA hid behind a local organization of 2A defenders (funding isn’t leading), and gets no “thank you”.

        Your plan, and the NRA plan, is to continue wasting time and money on peripheral matters, while law suits nibbling at the edge are filed, won, appealed, and hope for cert at the SC.

        That plan allows the anti-gun mob to bleed us dry financially, when overturning NFA and GCA cuts the heart out of the bulk of infringement laws. (there never will be the stomach for serious change in laws by so-called 2A friendly state and national politicians).

        • Wrong! Sam, it seems that the NYSRPA filed the initial suit in the Northern District of NY and won. The State Appealed to the 2nd Circuit which is based in NYC. The NRSRPA then asked the NRA for assistance as the NRA has a host of lawyers on retained to handle appeals. The NRA’s attorneys took over the case and the NYSRPA’s attorneys “became ‘second chair’ ”
          If you don’t mind try to get your facts straight.
          If you “think” you have such a great idea, plan, whatever, file your suit.

  27. @Walter E Beverly III
    “If you don’t mind try to get your facts straight.”

    Facts are straight: NYSRPA won their case. NRA funded the appeal. Coming in as designated hitter is not leading. If NYSRPA had not led the case*, NRA would have continued to suck its thumb, waiting for someone else to take lead, so NRA could claim to be the lead as the funding agent.

    The name of the the lawsuit remained NYSPRA, not NRA.

    • Sam, so sorry, but you are wrong. the NYSPRA won the case at the District Court level. Then the NRA took over the case with its appeal lawyers who in turn continued the case moving it forward and then CINCHED the case before the Supreme Court. Without the NRA the case would have died at the District Court level as NYSRPA was unable to fund an appeal.
      I don’t give a rat’s behind if the NYSRPA’s name leads the case as a plaintiff. If not for the NRA there would have been NO SUPREME COURT BRUEN DECiSiON.
      Denegrate the NRA all you want but the facts I presented are still the FACTS.

Comments are closed.