“Demographer William Frey, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program [not shown], recently analyzed the changes in the youth population across the 50 states from 2000 to 2014,” nationaljournal.com reports [charts at the link]. “Frey’s analysis produced the striking finding that the total number of whites younger than 20 declined in 46 of the 50 states over those years. While many Americans may be aware that whites are shrinking as a share of the youth population, the declining absolute number of whites in so many states points toward more profound changes in the nation’s make-up than most may be anticipating.” I think we can put the NRA into the category named . . .
“most.” While the National Rifle Association has put its money behind African American gun guru and firearms fashionista Colion Noir and has a handful of hispanic shooters in its PR portfolio, the organization is woefully deficient in minority members. Even a cursory glance around the NRA convention is enough to conclude that the NRA’s still dominated by OFWGs (Old Fat White Guys).
Simply put, the NRA must do more – a lot more – to increase the diversity of its members, or risk being marginalized. Or worse. At the moment, minorities skew Democratic, the party of gun control. The clock is ticking….
[h/t Pascal]
So what-the US is doomed-and not just the NRA- FIFY…I’m doing my part with my 2 IRC sons and 2 white sons who hate my gun rights(but they are 38 and 40)…at least my non-white kids don’t mind guns and are not left-wing…things change and often not for the better. When I was a teen I worried about ending up in Vietnam,girls and my bad skin…
Or maybe we could reduce immigration, secure the border, deport the illegals, just an idea. When has becoming a minority in your own nation been a good thing? More over when has being a disarmed minority ever been a good thing?
Go to the link. Then find the link to William Frey’s paper that also includes a spreadsheet. You will find that he even factored in illegal immigration and even if you remove the illegal immigrates, whites are still loosing.
Also, he did not consider just Hispanics, he has also considered Asia’s which include many from India and Blacks including those from the Caribbean. The majority of Whites are OFWG and part of the baby boomer generation.
@hank that was brave of you to say, the truth is inconvenient to some who think that whites need to give away their children’s future, without a fight.
Whites fell for the trap to only have kids if you can take care of them. While we work for paying for others we are bred out by the poor minorities.
The English did this to the Scots and it is called:
Fornication
Under
Consent of the
King
Whites know this acronym better as the f-word. Breed out the indigenous blood by birth not a blade, is what has been allowed in America.
>> the truth is inconvenient to some who think that whites need to give away their children’s future
So what you’re saying, one white to another, is that we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children?
You just explained how the Romans became Italians.
>> When has becoming a minority in your own nation been a good thing?
Given that we’re talking about white vs non-white here, your question basically implies that this is a nation that belongs to the whites, and others are not “real” Americans.
I must be so naïve . I didn’t know there were liberal atheist skin heads .
I’m not at all supportive of these notions. I was merely pointing out the not-so-obvious implications of OP’s wording betraying the “dog whistle”. Kinda like this:
http://ct.thisonesite.com/ol/to/se/i60/2/11/9/frabz-Oh-so-youre-afraid-of-Whites-being-a-minority-Why-Are-minorities-30cba7.jpg
I was hoping you would say that , thanks .
Why is the onus on the NRA here? Minorities should step up and join the NRA and get involved. As a mixed race person and a NRA lifer I have been to several NRA events and never felt, hey, look at all these racists discriminating against me. We all had a great time. Do I like Ted Nugent? No, but not because I think or care if he is a racist, I don’t like him because he seems unhinged and I don’t like mentally unstable people.
Stop blaming the NRA. The problem is in your head.
This. It’s the fault of the other side for making assumptions that they can’t prove.
The problem isn’t about “blame” or whatever you’re thinking. It’s simple demographics. Yes, maybe minorities should just “step up” and vote for pro-gun politicians and join the NRA, but that’s all assuming they currently care or even know about their gun rights. The NRA (and we as gun owners) must do everything to get as many people involved, and the demographics game says that the populations falling behind are minority populations. If we do not do this, the alternative isn’t that minorities won’t get to the range, but that they will vote to eliminate that range and your rights with it.
A lot of people feel insulted by the fact that we must seek out minorities instead of the other way around, but the demographics game says we must do this to win. You can expect that the next president, Democrat, Republican, or whatever is going to do something about the current illegal immigrant problem, and like it or not, those people are having kids here, and they will most likely eventually gain citizenship or other sort of legal status. So what do you do about this? Do you plan for a dream scenario where they all go home for free, and everyone votes republican? Or do you plan for the likely scenario where they become legalized and vote straight democrat? Logic dictates that we must do the latter.
The obvious best solution is to make gun rights a non-issue by making it just like other civil rights, but this is a long-term strategy. The minority vote and appeal to gun rights is a “this decade” issue. That means it’s now or never. The current victories we have won as gun owners will mean nothing as long as there is opposition to our rights and the demographics are against us. It’s only a matter of time before everything is turned back.
The best thing you can do right now is to take people you know to the range. Black, white, Hispanic, or Asian, it doesn’t matter. Get them shooting. However, the NRA must advertise itself as something for everyone. Once that critical population is established, gun rights will naturally spread, just like they did with whites who have always had a history of gun ownership. The black population has long vilified guns as something for criminals or white rednecks. This must change, but guys like me cannot change it. Only other black folks can do so, and that’s who the NRA and gun owners must reach out to.
This black man, and NRA member, respectfully disagrees.
The NRA should do much more to promote the organization to minorities, mainly because far too many minorities still believe that the NRA is only for OFWG’s. Yes, we have Colion, a handful of other minorities and many more women stepping up and representing. But it’s not enough. Not by a long shot.
More minorities and women in prominent positions in the NRA will help. If all the general public sees are OFWG’s running the organization, they’ll continue to think it’s only for OFWG’s.
The NRA’s marketing needs to shift gears and let the general public know that the organization is fighting for gun rights, not gun manufacturers, as the media portrays it. That means stop preaching to the choir and getting out in the streets – literally and figuratively – to combat the lies.
There are more things the NRA can do, but this is a good beginning.
I have a question for you as an African American (and knowing nothing about your background)– is it hard to get your other Black friends and family to listen to the NRA with some of the things Ted Nugent… an NRA board member… has said recently?
The first step in all this is to be color blind and more blacks than whites base things on color these days.
The second is to treat everyone as you would want to be treated…..do THIS before joining the NRA!
As for myself, those listed need to come over to MY way of thinking! America has negotiated away their morality and strength to that same list. DO NOT negotiate away the Bill of Rights!
When the SHTF and the whole world comes unhinged ,
when there is blood in the streets from end to the end ,
no food in the stores and no policeman to call ,
no gas in the pumps , no power in the wall ,
no news in the waves and no room for the graves ,
folks will be glad they have A GUN .
When the reset comes , I think the NRA will have plenty of support .
“Kamikaze from the 7th floor…”
You cannot join an organization you know nothing about. You cannot join an organization you do not understand is trying to save your right.
It’s called outreach and education. Would it kill the NRA to have classes/literature in Spanish or reach out to the minority community?
A waste of time and money…
“Pssst.. hey kid, wanna protect your rights? Everyone’s doing it, and your mom will never know.”
Of course the number of whites are declining, they typically don’t breed like rabbits as some other cultures do. It’s a fact that people need to wake up to.
Not for lack of trying…
Lord knows I’m doing my part. I figured at some point I’d get a bulk discount. Boy was I wrong. JWT
Sorry, it’s my medication – no interest in such things. Kids are also a bit expensive for my taste anyway.
They still are. Even when they hit their 20’s…
Or 30s.
Sorry boys and girls but after the age of 18 , they’re not kids anymore and shouldn’t cost you a penny . You can of coarse be generous from time to time but obligations are over , you should have had them well trained and ready to contribute to society by 20 and good Lord , by 30 , they should be helping you . I don’t want to sound crabby , not my intention to point fingers , but I think that is a large part of Americas problem , spoiled 20 -30 year old punks and punkets , send em packin .
The NRA is going down the rebranding path quite nicely with not only Noir, but their other shows as well. They are now marketing to the younger hip crowds, and women. If you haven’t checked out their online shows then you really should. It’s all about lifestyle branding.
But overall, firearms are getting more popular with young people and it seems that the more the left tries to demonize GUNS!, the more young people think they are cool and want to own them. The OFWG posterchild is changing slowly but surely.
If you don’t trust Republicans, Democrats OR libertarians who is left to trust? your talking about anarchy
If we can’t trust anybody to hold power over others (and history shows we cannot), then we should not allow anyone to do so. Anarchy (i.e. voluntary, peaceful cooperation and interaction) is a very beautiful thing.
Look around you the next time you’re out in public. Do people refrain from stealing, raping, and murdering because it’s illegal, or do they refrain because 99% of us know it’s wrong and have respect for each other?
I dunno about 99% but I do suspect a large, most certainly a significant, number restrain themselves from any number of anti-social acts because they are, in fact, illegal. To assume 99% of the population is made up of naturally good, sociable, respectful-of-others folks is the stuff of pixie dust and unicorns.
Given the number of adults I see who will cheerfully pilfer ten cent items left unattended (but clearly “spoken for”) I don’t rely on “innate” morality for anything.
The other portion who have no moral compunctions about stealing generally don’t steal because anti-social behavior makes life more difficult. I don’t walk out on the tab in a restaurant for two reasons. One, because I have a moral objection to doing so. Two, because I might like to come back. And word spreads fast. Some types of businesses even share info on dishonest patrons to protect one another out of self interest. Casinos sharing info on cheaters comes to mind. The illegal factor is a consideration, but it’s not at the top of my list.
Tell us, which “anti social” acts would you commit if there was no Big Brother watching you? Would you steal? Kill? Rape?
Most people don’t need government of any kind. We can take care of those who do.
The word in the pic is “Libertarian”, not libertarian. There’s a difference: the Koch brothers, advocates of corporate feudalism, have turned the Libertarian Party into a wealth-and-property worshipping choir for plutocracy, favoring policies that won’t actually shrink the government but will instead deliver it over the the 0.01% whose only interest in we the people is that we produce wealth for them.
As a libertarian, I decided some time back I’ve been betrayed by the Libertarians, just as by the Republicans and Democrats.
You have clearly confused them with establishment Republicrats. Or should I say Dempublicans?
republicrats
the NRA must do more – a lot more – to increase the diversity of its members
Got any suggestions on how to lead a horse to water AND make him drink? It cannot be done. Moreover, if the NRA was to suddenly devote a majority of its time and energy to minority recruitment — which is bound to fail — what happens to the people who have actually been loyal to the organization for the last 144 years?
Diversity for the sake of diversity is a very leftist construct that has no value to the NRA.
Agreed.
I see minority shooters all the time at the range, but since minorities are higher percentage liberal it will take a while for some minority families to accept guns.
Waterboard the horse.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to hold down a horse?
Kinda. I mean, I can tell you with some authority that it takes 6 Afghans to hold down a donkey.
Ralph ,
I owned multiple horses over the coarse of some twenty years . Only been without now since July of 2011 and I truly miss them , Missy , Babe and Trixie , my babies .
brushed , toweled , filed and shoed , worked out bot flies , cleaned up their biscuits constantly , washed down stalls more times than I needed , put up more hay than I could count and otherwise spent more time with em than I did my wife sometimes but I never tried to hold one down . Nope , I ain’t that stupid .
I will add though , spending quiet time with a good horse is SPIRITUAL .
Ya gotta get ’em stump trained.
>> Diversity for the sake of diversity is a very leftist construct that has no value to the NRA.
They aren’t talking about diversity for the sake of diversity here. They’re talking about diversity for the sake of survival.
“Old” guys refuse to admit that the NRA is a dinosaur. Times have changed and the NRA is not the rights organization that they claim to be. In states at the forefront of the anti-constitutional offensive, it falls on local gun rights organizations to do all the fund raising and awareness raising, then when they win, or when they seem to be winning, the NRA steps in to join the victory parade. Young people are seeing this and saying “I don’t need the NRA, they aren’t doing what __________ group in my state is doing for me with money and hard work.” Even young whites are wary of the NRA’s actual impact versus their grandstanding and of course, their rather successful fundraising efforts compared to how they use those funds to block the draconian legislation in places like Washington, Conn, CA, and New Jersey. Its not a race issue, its an issue of fighting the real fights using the real resources, instead of spending it all on lavish banquets and nice show rooms.
it falls on local gun rights organizations to do all the fund raising and awareness raising
Who better to fight local issues than local organizations? Asking the NRA to solve local problems is as wrong as asking a local org to lobby Congress. And in many cases, the local org is an NRA affiliate and has received assistance from the national org.
Here’s a list of state affiliates. If I hadn’t checked, I would not have known that my own state org is an NRA affiliate. The NRA also has local affiliates — 13,000 of them.
http://clubs.nra.org/state-associations.aspx
I disagree. I am the NRA along with millions of others. The organization is far from perfect but when it’s done, unless something on equal footing takes it’s place, the country will be in trouble. I guess the good part is that it will be far enough down the road that it won’t make any difference to me or to those I love. I am really getting tired of the racists calling out old fat white guys. How about live and let live?
Sent in my dues to the NRA ,
got back some paper , a pin and a bag ,
got me a letter of thanks the other day
with a sweepstakes for a gun and a mag ,
I threw it away
but then the next day ,
there came in the mail some more stuff
It seemed that my dues were only a rues
and my contributions never enough .
hear, hear !!
there, there.
and all around everywhere.
you spoke well my friend.
wish i had written that poem…..
maybe i will
The problem is not just in someone’s head. As members, the NRA is OUR organization. It is a supposed to be one of the main institutions supporting gun rights. If it does not reflect all the demographics that get politicians elected, it will eventually lose power and we, the members, will all be the worse for it. The NRA spends a lot of our contribution and dues money on recruitment and it does not have the right things to show for it. As a proud OFWG, I don’t even feel the organization represents me very well. I re-up every year, but I confess I’m reluctant. Wing nuts like Nugent are one of the reasons, but the NRA’s stubborn reluctance to do the right things is the main reason. I welcome minorities to our ranks and I think recruiting them would do more than any other strategy to increase the NRA’s power. I feel the NRA does not place enough priority on that.
Maybe the NRA should open an office in Ferguson.
or dare I say it Mexico?
Our problem is not controlling our borders, and it is not just the 2nd Amendment that is in jeopardy, it is our entire national identity. Once upon a time when people came to the USA it was because they wanted to become a part of this country, that is to assimilate. That is no longer true for the majority of the people who come here. This a problem with the illegals and also legal immigrants we need to put stop to illegal immigration and cut back the legal kind in a major way.
That’s because somehow the American Dream changed from being about liberty to being about money. Both major parties have bought into that new version, and that won’t change until corporations are thrown out of politics, and we end the two-party system oligarchy.
The irony is that your sentiment has always been held by a significant proportion of the population, from the earliest days of the USA. Look up Know-Nothings – they said all the same things about Catholics (mostly Irish). After all, how can Catholics truly integrate in a Republic when they are required to hold the Pope as a supreme leader? Clearly impossible! Not to mention that Irish are kinda suspect as far as whiteness goes. Got to close the borders, man!
The possible problem is that generally speaking, gun owners tend to be more often conservative. While many are Libertarians, and there’s even a “Liberal Gun Club” the Left in this country works off of what “Feels right” as opposed to what should be logical. The right does it too with things like gay marriage, so don’t pretend it’s all the Left. But one thing I have found with gun owners. We’re a pretty open and friendly group. We’re far more accepting than either Republican OR Democrats.
NRA has kind of defaulted to supporting Republicans, because as of late Democrats have fallen lock step in with the party leaders who want to ban guns. That wasn’t always the case. Giffords used to be hard pro-gun. Reed used to be A+ from the NRA. But the party leaders have steered the Democrats to supporting anti-gun legislation everywhere. This is further dividing up the gun owners, whose primary issues may not be gun rights. If you’re gay and a gun owner. Would you be more interested in defending guns or being able to be with your love.
It’s too bad there isn’t a group of politicians out there saying, “Is THIS the government’s business?” to every piece of legislation.
>> It’s too bad there isn’t a group of politicians out there saying, “Is THIS the government’s business?” to every piece of legislation.
Heinlein had at some point half-jokingly proposed instituting a two-chamber parliamentary system whereby one chamber is solely concerned with passing new laws, and requires a 2/3 majority to do so; while the other one is solely concerned with repealing laws, and only requires 1/3 minority in favor to do so.
Sounds kinda like liberals and conservatives .
…………… well actually more like progressives and the tea party .
I appreciate the info , interesting tid bit and actually compelling as a separate subject for discussion .
You never cease to amaze and confuse me at the same time . Thanks and God bless .
Long time listener, first time caller…
Once the NRA quits sounding like an extension of the Republican party, a lot more people (myself included) would be more interested in supporting them. Until they start focusing on 2A issues alone, they will never be supported by people who are 2A supporters but not Republican party supporters. Playing the “there’s only two parties and we’re on this side” game is going to hurt them in the long run.
The NRA used to support pro-gun Democrats like Harry Reid, Kirsten Gillebrand and Gabrielle Giffords. How’d that work out.
And here’s the platform that Democrats embrace:
“Right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation
“We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements–like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole–so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.”
Source: 2012 Democratic Party Platform , Sep 4, 2012
“Reauthorize assault weapons ban, close gun show loophole
“We will protect Americans’ Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do.”
Source: The Democratic Platform for America, p.18 , Jul 10, 2004
“Strengthen gun control to reduce violence
“Democrats passed the Brady Law and the Assault Weapons Ban. We increased federal, state, and local gun crime prosecution by 22 percent since 1992. Now gun crime is down by 35 percent. Now we must do even more. We need mandatory child safety locks. We should require a photo license I.D., a background check, and a gun safety test to buy a new handgun. We support more federal gun prosecutors and giving states and communities another 10,000 prosecutors to fight gun crime.”
Source: 2000 Democratic National Platform as adopted by the DNC, Aug 15, 2000
Fvck the Democrats. That’s my platform.
The NRA gave West Virginia (D) Sen. Joe Manchin’s and A rating — how did that work out?
Truth is, the NRA does not give a crap if they are a (D) or (R) or (I) as long as they support gun rights. Go to this website https://www.nrapvf.org/ — they have supported (D) and (R) depending on the state as long as they are for gun rights.
The fact is that to get the funding you need to be a (D) you have to espouse gun control even if you do not believe in it. In order to get funding as an (R) you have to support gun rights. Look at the sudden turn around from Chris Christie. All of a sudden he is our gun buddy.
Sorry, politics is a game. They mostly support Rs because the base of the R party is pro-gun — that is all.
Because the majority of gun owners are OFWG, there is no reason for the D’s to support guns.
If the entirety of the LGBT community suddenly turned pro-gun, so would many D politicians.
Ding, ding. Winner. Not talking about the Democratic party suddenly becoming pro-2A, talking about getting people in their voting base to become pro-2A. If people in the Republican party’s voting base already are 2A, why cut out supporters who are more likely to vote Democrat due to other issues from being interested in the NRA and 2A issues? To put it another way, by catering to people whose support the NRA already has (Republicans) by speaking out on OTHER issues along the party line divide, you kind of by nature cut out building any kind of support from people on the other side of that party line who might otherwise be interested. If this supposed surge of democrat voters IS gonna happen, unless some of them come to support 2A rights, they’re not gonna think twice about supporting anti-2A politicians or supporting anti-2A legislation. And that’s gonna be problematic.
The fact is, for the past few years NRA has been using the word “liberal” as an insult. Repeatedly.
As a liberal, therefore, the only reasonable response for me is to say: fuck you, NRA.
I’ll take my money to people who have some respect and some class. Like SAF.
As a 30 year NRA member, back at you!
http://www.nrafreestyle.tv/sharp
This is going in the right direction. Go to this link and cruise around, watch some episodes.
The NRA doesn’t “need” to make the same PC mistakes as the GOPe in thinking a rainbow coalition will advance their agenda based solely on skin color.
You don’t recruit people into an organization that will essentially water down the core principles. Inclusiveness should be based solely on an individuals love for personal freedom and their god given right to KABA.
What you are basically proposing is Affirmative Action for the NRA, and we all know how that turns out.
You win on principles and lose on race every phucking time.
If a white NRA member marries a Japanese women and they have daughter who marries someone whose mother was from Spain and father from Vietnam and they couple has son. What is the race of that son?
That is a large part of the demographic if you would bother to read the article versus spewing race stupidity.
Further more, what is to say that there are not people of any race or gender out there who believe what you believe. Should they not be part of the NRA?
Or, are you proposing that the NRA be exclusive to OFWGs?
Wow, completely missed the point.
I’m not sure you read the same article I did. Nothing was said about being PC; what was said was that the NRA needs to reach out to the folks who are ending the white majority to bring them into the traditional mainstream of America — I’d say it as turning them into real Americans. It doesn’t matter if they turn conservative or libertarian, because liberalism ought to still support the right to keep and bear arms as it used to.
If the only core principle for NRA would have been pro-gun, you’d see a lot more support.
Unfortunately, they’re now all in on a good chunk of the Republican platform: immigration, voting restrictions etc – all under the premise that these would provide fewer anti-gun votes. Of course, it also means fewer non-white votes, which a lot of people take rather personally.
“Even a cursory glance around the NRA convention is enough to conclude that the NRA’s still dominated by OFWGs (Old Fat White Guys).”
Maybe it’s OFWGs who are most able to travel to a convention? I know I can’t afford to take the time off and cover the expense of going there myself. Another stereotype of OFWGs is that they have money to do things like that.
Maybe you should look at local NRA events and see the makeup of folks who show up there.
Yup. Demographics by attendance is terrible. I know our local gun club complains of an aged membership based pretty much on who attends the monthly pot-luck at 4PM on a Friday. Same with Rotary.
If you do OFWG things at times only accessible to people with nothing else to do (retired) you can’t be surprised when the only people who show up are the types of people who have nothing else to do and attend things like pot-luck dinners.
That key demo everybody wants to see, 18-49 with disposable income, has other things to do and more important places to put their money so that one day they can be 65, fat and afford to do whatever they want with all the free time they now have.
That raises an interesting proposition. What sort of reaction could the NRA expect if they started sponsoring attendance grants to the convention? It would cover transport, hotel, and fees – food and vacation time are on the attendee.
Maybe 5 to the under 25s, 5 to women, and 5 to minorities. If an 23yo black woman receives the grant, she would only count as one of those against the 15 slots.
I’ve seen a few other groups do grants for populations they are looking to attract, and it does help increase diversity (as they start to attend on their own and become ambassadors), but I’ve never seen it in action in an OFWG convention.
“Simply put, the NRA must do more – a lot more – to increase the diversity of its members, or risk being marginalized.”- Yeah, why use some critical thought and try to determine if there are policies in place that are doing this on purpose?
On a lighter note here is a story I just read .
Jon Doe was paying $49.95 every month for a advanced security system that sounded an alarm if any of his windows were jarred open or broken or his doors forced open when he activated it , which he would always do when he was away .
Last week he returned from a trip with his wife to discover that his home had been violated and a few items had been stolen , luckily , he had his firearms secured in a safe that the perpetrators could not get to or move .
This is what Jon Doe did .
He removed the beware of dog sign from his fenced in yard .
He removed his Gadsden flags and the stars and stripes from his front porch .
He took down the posters in his storm door glass that said , ” Ammo is expensive , I won’t fire warning shots “.
He removed his 6 foot tall NRA sign from his garage door .
He went online and purchased a black ISIS flag .
He had a large poster printed that said ‘ I support a Palestinian State ‘ and placed it where the NRA once was .
……………. Now he has twenty four seven police and FBI protection ………… he he he
Yes !!
This is the ticket. Free police protection. Like it, like it.
Maybe, since I am surrounded by libs who are anit-gun, live in a fantasy world of make nice, i should add signs left and right pointing to the neighbors as Israel lovers and members of JDF.
If John Doe tried that here, the police would pretend not to see as his house was firebombed from all sides.
I would like to say I could probably guess where ‘ here ‘ is in three tries but on second thought , today , it could be almost anywhere , according to the comments I see on TTAG .
I will say , it wouldn’t be that way ‘ here ‘ in WV.
I would like to know where your ‘ here ‘ is , so I could stay the hell away .
I was unaware that the NRA released the demographics of its membership. Can you point us towards the data, Mr. Farago?
Yup, the NRA does not fall into the demographic trap.
However, the names of the NRA board members are published, and I recognize some of them. Roy Innis, Carl Rowan Jr., Karl Malone and Ken Blackwell are definitely black. I can’t determine how many directors are Hispanic.
Carl Rowan’s story is quite interesting. He was an editor at a Chicago newspaper, with typical left-wing opinions and anti-gun. He suffered an armed robbery in his home and was transformed truly overnight.
Also young people are seeing the shitshow that the boomers are leaving them, and they don’t like it. They don’t trust the government, don’t trust police, and are realizing that they’re going to be responsible for their own security.
They also don’t like the NRA, but by the time it matters, it will be full of people a lot more like they are. I think they’ll do OK.
I don’t know exactly how the NRA would recruit minorities. I freely admit that marketing is not my strong suit. That said, I have, in my personal life, seen a very simple message and a question a have great impact on the minorities in my life.
“Predominantly white people are trying to take away your freedom to protect yourself. Ask yourself how well that’s gone for you in the past, and why are they doing it now?”
The next message and question is always a fun one.
“Predominantly white people want you to have the freedom to protect yourself. Ask yourself how you can use them to keep your rights in tact.
+1 Good idea pulling them into the middle of the debate from their POV. Make a person feel included and regarded, and they’ll naturally warm up to you.
It has been projected that by the end of this century that America will be comprised of a 75% mixed race population. This has been a solid projection for maybe two years now and the Democrats (like me) are counting on attrition to dissipate the Republican ranks of “old angry white guys”.
I just sent this to the Second Amendment Foundation asking for assistance:
Hi,
I’m trying to get some FaceTime with my MA senator (Markey) & volunteer as a research analyst and advisor so I can educate him and his staff before he can act on his promise to introduce more insane gun control laws, which he announced about a month back. I asked for some words of wisdom from the CCRKBA & 2AF to help me come up with a collaborative approach and am waiting for a response. I’m 60 years old, a retired federal contractor and registered Dem but have always embraced the 2A. I can’t understand why politicians can even consider gun control legislation when there are so many examples of them being abject failures, but deep down I know it is simple pandering to the squeakiest wheels.
I am a regular contributor to the TTAG website and have garnered some attention to my pitch of collaborating (in a good way) with democratic leaders to bring some sanity into the issue and start a serious dialog because it seems that Senators like Markey have completely missed the point of making laws in the first place – they must be effective or the same mistakes are repeated throughout history.
Anyway, I’m asking for your help in advising me and providing solid numbers to use when I do get my 15 minutes with Senator Markey. I’m also trying for Senator Warren, who will undoubtedly support any gun control legislation that Markey comes up with. I already asked the CCRKBA organization for advice too.
If successful, I will also have introduced the idea of modifying our MA gun control laws to get rid of registration, plus set the stage a federal-level pre-emption law that would prevent any law violating the Constitution from being enacted.
As a non-lawyer, I need all the help possible. My only advantage in trying to gain access is my being a democrat possessing a very good perspective on gun rights and what gun owners’ hot buttons are – which are being completely ignored by lawmakers. I believe if they knew where the landlines were and why these issues are important, they could focus on making informed decisions on how to set boundaries in their legislative endeavors.
Any advice, verifiable statistics and logical arguments are appreciated.
Sincerely,
Mark Lee
The NRA can start recruiting minorities by ceasing their pro-police cheerleading.
Let’s see some ads of a black family mowing down a SWAT team during a no-knock raid in American Rifleman instead of the stupid home invasion caricature.
The trolls seem especially thick this time of year.
Wahhhh. 2A was used as intended. WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH. 🙂
In what way was #2A used?
By you saying the NRA needs to stop cheerleading for police?
Or by your suggestion that the NRA needs to run ads showing armed resistance by minorities during execution of no-knock warrants?
You have an interesting interpretation of the intent of the second amendment.
It would be the latter, brah. Armed resistance against tyranny, i.e. the definition of 2A.
And of course the NRA’s current pro-police cheerleading would be the antithesis of 2A.
Tyranny isn’t involved here. In any way.
Anti-police is in no way pro second amendment. Pro police or, better put, pro rule of law, is in no way anti-second amendment.
Again, emphatically, you have an interesting interpretation of the second amendment.
A police state is not tyrannical. Got it. 🙂
I see sweetie-pie is still grouchy. Summers Eve didn’t do the trick huh? You may need to make an appointment with your obgyn , this could be serious.
The trolls seem especially thick this time of year.
And so is the aroma that wafts up from their mothers’ basements.
Feel free to stop your bootlicking to enjoy a smoke, Ralphie. 🙂
I have no love for the NRA, but in the interests of fairness, they did come out in the support of the criminal justice reform.
Was it in the narrow context of minimum sentencing of people like Brian Aitken, or was it a general endorsement of the movement?
If it is the latter then it is a big step in the right direction.
They obviously root for different people, but I think that at this point the list is long enough for them (and I don’t mean just NRA, but many conservatives in general – this has also become a topic in the GOP debates, for example) to throw their weight behind the cause in general.
So the NRA encourages minorities not to join? Or they don’t go far enough in encouraging minorities to join, above and beyond perceived non-minorities?
This isn’t really a thing, is it?
They support and promote policies [not directly related to RKBA] that are counter to the interests of, or outright offensive to, those minorities.
Voting for Hillary huh? Attaboy. The dems have done so very much for minorities lo these many years.
democrats, liberals, progressives, minorities of all the rainbow cannot tolerate any organization, thought or speech that does not agree 100%, 100% of the time with the entire agenda. they are offended by the existence of anyone who does not share their attitudes. they cannot be reasoned with, they cannot be negotiated with, they cannot live outside the bubble of mind control. and eventually….they turn on and destroy one another.
just not fast enough.
int19h is an enigma , confusing and difficult to spar , if I were playing him in poker it would be hard to get a reliable tell and his bluff would probably confound me .
Interesting paradox .
Out of the candidates that are running so far in this election, I’d pick Sanders, actually.
In the past one, I was rooting for Ron Paul.
Make of it what you will.
i’m thinking we have a statist who believes in being responsible for yourself? conundrum?
Conscious left-wing libertarianism as a coherent philosophical and ideological platform actually predates such on the right wing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_market_anarchism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
I’m not even a particularly extreme left libertarian (e.g. I don’t believe that “property is theft”). But it’s a perfectly viable ideological position, in many ways more consistent than anarcho-capitalism and other right libertarian subdivisions (and I say this as someone who used to be an ultra-radical, Ayn Rand worshipping ancap 10 years ago).
I am not a statist any more so than you are a “gun-ist”. I don’t worship the state, or believe in its infallible nature. Like a gun, a state is a tool. Like a gun, a state is a very dangerous tool, that can be easily misused with grave consequences. I believe that the correct approach, therefore, is for us as a society to learn to use it properly and maintain it such that it does not become a safety hazard; and then use it in cases where it’s necessary and the alternative is even worse, and in any case to use it thoughtfully and sparingly; but not to discard it. Many minarchist capitalist libertarians would agree with this general sentiment, but where we disagree is the specific list of things where alternative is even worse (and market libertarians tend to be very starry eyed about the outcomes of some of their policies, IMO; I sure were when I was one, as were most in my circle of acquaintances).
I’m also pragmatic. Regardless of what kind of perfect society I may have as a vision in my head, I recognize that we’re not getting there in my lifetime, if ever. But it can be approached, and in some cases that means compromising with other people who have their own, radically different visions that may even be antagonistic to mine, and even people who don’t really have much in terms of vision and are happy with the present system other than some minor aspects of it. It all depends on what exactly is the result of such collaboration. I can agree to disagree, and even tolerate some negative aspects of the outcome, if the positive outweighs it, and I see a way to counter the negative in the long term. Two steps forward and one step back is still one step forward, and if we get there slower, that’s fine so long as we get there after all.
Just to give a specific example of such consensus and collaboration (and befuddle mark s even further, I suspect) – I host & admin this website (and I’m a member of the group, not just a sympathetic outsider). As you’d expect, the personal politics of most other members are far to the right of mine. But it doesn’t mean that we cannot work together towards a common goal that we all share, even if motivations for it are different.
The liberalism you speak of is quite the opposite of a state controlled “utopia”. Those liberals were about the sovereignty of man, limited, if not near-absent, government. It was about freedom, not serfdom. It was about freeing mankind to reach his highest potential without artificial bounds set by rank, privilege or government largess. It was about freedom, not universal equality of outcomes.
Left libertarianism and its various subsets (libertarian socialism, anarcho-communism etc) are not the same as classic liberalism. There are many issues on which we can be allies with classic liberals, just as there are many issues on which we can be allies with libertarians and with progressives, but the underlying philosophy is quite different.
The terms define you. Liberalism (classic) is little understood by the general public (leftist always capture, then pervert the language), so the current and popular understanding of the term puts one in the same bucket with the radical leftists. Generally, trying to explain the concepts results in a distinction without a difference (to copy a term). Not too long ago (20yrs?) the term Libertarian almost re-captured the classic definition.
I had never really thought of myself as any race, but after the race incitement by Pres Obama I stopped to take a look at where I stood in the race “alignment”. I had casually thought of myself as white at times, but come to find out that since I was not 100% white, I was not considered white by many statistics. Since I am no longer considered white, I guess I am one of the “minority” NRA members!
These statistics are overblown and IMO racist. The fact that they make it the centerpiece to “accidentally” incite violence through the imposing of the feeling in groups that they are being exploited should be telling of motives.
I still really can’t get myself to care about race. I do care about if people are criminals, or opportunist or exploiters, but I have known people of many races and ethnic backgrounds. And the world isn’t made up of Black and White as the media seems to be saying. I care about honesty and integrity in people and found those characteristics are colorblind as is the opposite.
Except for the black, atheist thing i was all of the above at his age
It’s not the NRA’s job to racially recruit, or even recruit for that matter.
The number of renewal requests that show up in both my electronic and physical mailbox beg to differ. I don’t remember if they recruit heavily for new members, but the existing…
Frankly, I’m tempted to let my membership lapse – they send me more junk than any other org I’ve ever contributed to.
I forget where it is, but there’s a place on the NRA website you can go to opt out of all the mailings, or limit it, as I did, to just the sort you want (I get NRA-ILA high-priority alerts).
I think it’s a contest with the AARP to see who can clog my mailbox with more crap.
So, let’s cut to the chase. HOW does the National Rifle Association attract minorities into the fold?
An equally important question: HOW do you and I attract minorities into the fold?
Rather than beating up the NRA for not bringing minorities into the fold, let us figure out how to do it, both collectively (as the NRA) and individually.
Decouple RKBA from all other political questions. Don’t lecture people on government overreach, immigration, same-sex marriage, abortion, religious freedom etc. It should be all strictly about guns. For all those other topics, you can have separate single-issue organizations where you can invite people, but don’t give the impression that the two must necessary go together.
Don’t push for absolute deregulation and decry any and all gun control as unconstitutional. Even if you personally believe it to be the case, you’re a minority even among white males, much less everyone else; most people do believe in some degree of gun control. You can try to convince them otherwise, but you won’t convince anyone by telling them that they’re wrong straight away. Compromise is key in politics, and this is no exception. If you can get a moderate pro-gunner on your side on an issue like AWB, say, that’s well worth the trouble, even if he won’t support you when it comes to UBC. Your other option is getting UBC first anyway, and then also UBC.
Stress the self-defense angle, as opposed to the whole militia / justified rebellion thing. This last part scares a lot of people off right away. And when it comes to self-defense, focus more about realistic and likely real-world scenarios, like defending against a home invasion or a rape attempt.
Don’t bring up figures that are controversial as role models for armed self-defense. This means Zimmerman and Bundy, for example. This goes regardless of what you personally think of them and the corresponding events.
Yep. That. They have to decide if they want to be a Pro-2A organization, or a Pro-Republican platform organization.
The latter is a turn-off for a likely not-insignificant portion of the gun-owning population.
Actually , to the point , after years of conversations and much dialog in writ and oral forum , I do not believe in any gun control by order of authority over the citizenry . I do believe it is acceptable that a free citizenry can delegate certain employees of it’s republic to maintain and inventory certain types of self defense weaponry in specified areas ( Army , Navy , AF , Marines ) * ( military bases ) * ( tanks , AC Carriers , SAMs , Nuclear warheads , etc. )
for the common good and protection , knowing that the it all belongs to the citizens of our Republic . I
………. For the person that wants to jump the reference to the ‘ Republic ‘ as non existent , please refrain ,
we have drifted afar for sure , but the DNA is still there and I refuse to completely irradiate it for good .
Yes, the game is already over. We, the POTG, are dead trees waiting to fall in the coming strong wind. We can fight a valiant rear guard (a fighting retreat), We can make some gains that temporarily resist the tidal wave of government dependents (democrats, libs, etc.), but the numbers are beyond the tipping point. We have a relatively short life ahead of us, and we can make the most of it. But, as Erwin Rommel noted at Normandy, “Sie kommt [they are coming].”)
Confiscating 300,000,000 guns will not be as difficult as we like to believe. First, we will be declared terrorists because we have the potential to do so much damage. Once we become terrorists, we will be branded insurrectionists (or maybe this first). At the moment we are declared insurrectionists or high potential insurrectionists, the army may be employed to put down rebellion (evading Posse Comitatus) Don’t forget, in the early days of BHO the Secretary of Homeland Security (I was disappointed they didn’ use ‘Vaterland’ or ‘Motherland’) declared Iraq war veterans were highly likely to become terrorists, along with US residents who favored strict constitutionalism and/or limited government. These people lost that point, but they never go away. Sie Kommt.
Sadly there is some truth on your post. Many guns owners still cling to the fake left vs right, or conservative vs liberal paradigm, leaving them debating/arguing about the wrong issues.
Well, it wasn’t that hard to get whites to adopt black culture. Eminem didn’t need outreach from the black community to pursue a career in rap, he just had to be born and steeped in the hip hop scene. I imagine people of all races engage in legal gun use more often when a middle class income enables it, and a solid, stable upbringing in such an environment would eventually end in confidence that one could handle the responsibility of legal firearm ownership. Get EVERYONE moving up that ladder and the demographics will take care of themselves.
Maybe the NRA can recruit Rachel Dolezal.
Perhaps the NRA could send some recruiters out onto the streets around midnight in Ferguson , MO .
I have a suggestion… get rid of Ted Nugent. It’s hard to win people to your side when leaders of your side are perceived as always insulting them.
Maybe the NRA should concentrate on Detroit for new members. The Chief of Police there is encouraging responsible citizens to arm themselves. He is of color and so are most of the city’s 600,000 +/- citizens. Then think about covering Milwaukee where Sheriff Dave is pretty much doing the same thing.
The key for the NRA and gun rights is to get the girls women on our side. They are easier to convert than the “minorities”. I am doing my share which is why I am just not into a lot of the sexism that is in the gun culture.
I really despise macho men taking the little women to the gun range and handing them a powerful weapon that they know a beginner will have problems with. So the little lady falls on her butt from the recoil of the powerful gun and she is turned off about guns for the rest of her life. Bravo!
LaPierre has to go. He has no vision, no forward thinking, and does nothing but make gun owners look bad.
If they shoot it, they will come…….take them to shoot it.
Full Disclosure: I’m OFWG and don’t support the NRA.
Hate to break it to you but there’s nothing the NRA can actually do – the Oath Keepers are doing it for them. They are going to pick up a few black converts, the military will produce some, but on the whole America’s black population is as much a write off as California, NJ, MA, Australia, the UK, etc. Watch Stefan Molyneux r/K selection series, and his interview on the Scandinavian welfare state and it’s effects. All of this will be brought into focus and the reality of the situation will hit you like a truck.
There is NO WAY to fix the United States via the election system. That ship sailed at least a generation ago and it’s just now that the effects can be really be seen. The piling on top of each other in the cities(no matter their skin tone) produces our natural enemy and they will eventually overwhelm through sheer weight of numbers unless brought to heel. America WILL go the way of the rest of the world in another generation or two if Washington DC is not completely dismantled.
Bingo-it’s a lost cause. SEE: enormous loses on Wall Street. I have a helluva’ lot of experience talking to black folks-there’s a massive disconnect going on. One more thing-Carl Rowan JUNIOR is NOT the deceased columnist Carl Rowan…
I would have to agree with most of your observations . The large metropolises are orgies of progressivism because they need ‘ Big Government ‘ for their survival . There is a disconnect between those that survive within and those that don’t . The very idea of independence is lost inside the structure of a large city and therefore a dependence develops in it’s place between those who are dependent and the people they choose to protect and serve them .
The black American is truly a enigma in that they struggled and fought so hard for independence and yet in the most part have been forced into the roles of the welfare state . Some of the very first anti 2nd A gun grabs were instigated against the black population by none other than one of Americas greatest Progressives , Woodrow Wilson .
One needs only to look at the electoral maps over the last 10 elections and see the growing power of the largest cities over the rest of the nation . If we want to reverse these trends we need to lure people out of the cities and into the rural communities where true independence still somewhat exist and truly open our hearts and arms to people of all colors . I really mean , lure ( entice , bribe , if you will ) .We can not expect black Americans and Latinos or anyone to embrace the independent culture of freedom and self determination if we continue to exclude them from our communities . I think people ( self included )have allowed the exodus of minorities from rural to urban so we could continue to consume and enjoy the pleasures of overabundance while we ignored the plight of those different than us . Walls may help to stem the growth of non white Anglo Americans but it will not solve our nations problem of electoral imbalances , which is the real root of the growth of progressivism in America . If we embraced those different that us and include them and teach them independence then they too would fight for the same rights we hold so dear , the right of self determination , which is foreign to most of the world .
Hire them , help them , love them and teach them . These are people exactly like you and I if we include them in our lives and if we exchanged places with them , inside the walls of metropolis , we would soon be and think just like they do . Humans are their environment .
>> One needs only to look at the electoral maps over the last 10 elections and see the growing power of the largest cities over the rest of the nation . If we want to reverse these trends we need to lure people out of the cities and into the rural communities where true independence still somewhat exist and truly open our hearts and arms to people of all colors . I really mean , lure ( entice , bribe , if you will )
You cannot de-urbanize the society without consequences. Numerous large cities of this kind originally arose because industrial revolution required a concentration of labor, and while we have partly mitigated that with automation, it is still the case that heavy industry has significant labor demands. Cities also host universities and other centers of scientific development.
Get rid of the cities, and you get rid of your industry and science. And then other societies, which didn’t do such a thing – like, say, China – will come and eat you for lunch in a few decades. That was always the problem with Jeffersonian ideal of an agrarian country, and his opponents understood it even back when he originally proposed it. It is basically a desire for an ultimate form of social conservation, putting the society in a kind of stasis in a socioeconomic formation that is deemed ideal. Regardless of whether it’s actually ideal or not, real world doesn’t work that way, and any society that’s foolish enough to disregard that will feel the consequences eventually (a good example is state-mandated medieval stasis in Japan, that was eventually very rudely interrupted by European armies).
If you want to get rid of the cities without ill effects, you need to make all those other things work without cities. This means developing highly scalable and efficient rapid transit system for masses of people who will need to be able to get from their rural homes to their factories and labs, to get together with all the other people working on the same projects, every day. Do you really think a free market would develop such a system? Why would it, if congregating people close to their workplace is much cheaper in short- and medium-term, and the negative side effects of high population densities (crime rates, ghettoization etc) are spread over the entire society, and not the economic beneficiaries of that concentrated labor?
I see the point you’re making and have enough sense to agree that large cities are a necessary evil in a nation that wishes to be a world superpower , but I would argue that many cities of the population size below 50,000 persons are fully capable of supporting wonderful recourses of higher education , support successful industry and retail environments , social and community organizations and everything else required for modern comfort without losing itself to progressivism and the loss of individualism that modern thought seeks to dismantle . I believe we can stay strong nationally , provide ‘all ‘ people an opportunity to excel if we expand our small communities rather than continually growing the major metropolises that are already unable to sustain themselves morally without the strong hand of government .
Small government simply functions more efficiently .
>> But I would argue that many cities of the population size below 50,000 persons are fully capable of supporting wonderful recourses of higher education , support successful industry and retail environments , social and community organizations and everything else required for modern comfort
You might well be right in assuming that this is viable at the present stage of technological development. But how do you intend for this to happen, given where we are? How does the transition occur? It won’t be instant, and it won’t be free. And like I said, it won’t happen by itself, because it’s not in the economic interests of the large market players who actually have the resources that would be necessary to invest to change matters here.
So you if you want to see this happen, you would need some kind of entity that can pool resources and invest them not where the short- or medium-term profit lies, but where the profit is very long-term, and perhaps not even material at all, and certainly not specific to that entity, but literally everyone in society – a public good, so to speak. An entity that would be dedicated to solving such global social welfare issues, without a profit motive that would skew the intent. We could call that entity “government” 🙂
Actually , you make my point exactly , before the last sentence .
The people must understand the problem and solve it without government , grass roots style . If we , as a concerned populace , want to save our rights from being trampled for the good of the state , we must act cohesively to open our hearts and our communities to those that are currently ostracized because of race or their economic position .
It really wouldn’t require large sums of money or government input but could simply start by the local mom and pop hiring a black American or Latino to run their counter . I know all to well the internal changes a lot of these companies and businesses would have to cope with but the first change must start with in our own hearts . If we as a nation can not cross this single hurdle then I do believe our days as a cohesive , powerful , free people , are indeed numbered .
I struggle each day to be as much like the character of Christ as I can be . I fail constantly but I insist on trying to love people for what they have to offer society and humanity . I believe everyone has something to offer and most are stifled until they give up .
Ben Franklin gave the world the Franklin stove and freely created hospitals because it was the right thing to do , not because he sought a profit . For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul .
Identify the problem , humble our souls and act for the future of this country , the world needs a strong righteous America .
So if you aren’t Caucasian, join? How hard can it be?
Well I’m tall, dark and handsome and I like guns. The NRA can hire me anytime now! Just gotta supply me with guns and whiskey ;D
So the vibe I’m getting is that the answer is for all the OFWG’s to quit the NRA and stop your fight for the RKBA. If you do that then there will be a higher percentage of minorities in the NRA, and that’s what really matters. Or something.
int19,
I am a little less befuddled now , at least to the position you are coming from . I find myself in agreement with you more than you might imagine albeit we come at things from different directions . I have on more than one occasion appreciated your forthrightness on each issue you tackle .
Each of us are in a continual state of growth , if we are truly alive , both spiritually and cognitively . I am open to learning from your views and I imagine you may be from mine , one cannot grow when we close our minds and limit ourselves to a mirror viewpoint .
Thanks .
Pascal, I dont think the NRA is going to be moved by a Jesse Jackson like effort to extort money for poor blacks, or a Rev Sharpton blame game, or the same sort of pathetic tactics used by La Raza, no matter how well meant.
The defining characteristice that “enables” freedom for poor blacks, or hispanics, or anyone else for that matter, is when they use their common sense to make their own decisions, take responsibility, and stop waiting for someone to give them a handout. This is really the essence of the American Dream, and why people risk their lives to get here.
Hyterically demanding that the NRA bow down to pat them on the head, and “reach out to them” because of the color of their skin, is both racist and incredibly arrogant- but then if you have spent any time around left-progressive-dems you would already know that.
The NRA could back away from all the country music, Jesus and NASCAR. That might help broaden its appeal.
Dear Will ,
I believe I can somewhat understand your contempt for country music ( too twangy ) and Nascar ( too twangy ) , but your contempt for a man who allowed Himself to be brutally tortured , despised , rejected and murdered so you could have life is a paradox . Please don’t judge Jesus for what evil men have done in his name .
Go on Amazon and purchase a book by Lee Strobel titled ‘ A Case for Christ ‘ . Read it and then get back to me .
Comments are closed.