By The Gun Psychiatrist
Like most gun owners, I grew up being taught that the NRA is the oldest gun rights organization in the country. Not only did I believe this, I was a member of the NRA for some time before realizing that the organization was never really tough on gun control.
In 2010 I didn’t renew my membership and sought to tithe my hard-earned money elsewhere to a more deserving organization. Years later I learned about the untold history of the NRA, and what I learned shocked my conscience.
The NRA has become a hot topic in recent weeks beginning with its lawsuit against Ackerman-McQueen, their (now former) public relations company. Though its suit and the resulting countersuits have brought much overdue attention, it seems to finally be the breach in the dam.
Gun writers are doing an amazing job at breaking information as it comes out. Still, some of us know that the NRA is not the tip of the spear in defending gun rights, but few are discussing specific things the organization has done since its inception to undermine that fight.
For the record, I am a staunch Second Amendment supporter and believe in the original intent of the Second Amendment prescribed by the Founders in 27 words. Additionally, I believe that any attempt to add to or change those 27 words is simply an attempt at gun control.
NOTE: The information I will be presenting may not reflect the stance of NRA members, but pertains more to organizational leadership.
The Second Amendment and why we have it
For readers new to gun culture, the Second Amendment states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state (Pause – Part II) The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” ← PERIOD.
In 27 words the Founders established that states are sovereign, that in order to maintain a state’s sovereignty, a militia must be maintained, and separately, Americans have a right to firearms without infringement. Let us be clear on the exact definition of infringement.
INFRINGE In·fringe /in’frinj/ 1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. 2: Actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
On April 18, 1775 British General Thomas Gage marched to Concord to seize a large arms cache held by the Massachusetts militia, thus the story of Paul Revere and battles which ensued at Lexington. In short, fighting our way out of tyranny gave us the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This path to freedom was paved in blood, sacrifice, and the individual, unobstructed right to own firearms.
Though the Constitution was ratified in 1787, it wasn’t until Dec 15, 1791 that the Founders passed the law giving us ten amendments known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights, better known as a Bill of Restrictions on government, contains the Second Amendment.
History doesn’t reflect that a herd of deer were marching on Concord to seize weapons, nor does it reflect that the Founders hastily passed a gun rights amendment for sporting purposes, or defending themselves from a tyrannical wild game population.
The Founders were simply afraid of government. Thus, history has shown that an armed populace is a free populace, and subjects only exist via the mechanisms of disarmament.
The Cash Cow of Concealed Carry Permit Training
For about a century after ratifying the Bill of Rights, gun control, restrictions on guns, or harsh laws pertaining to firearms and gun ownership weren’t a part of the American psyche. The only two examples of early gun control were Georgia banning handguns in 1837 (ruled unconstitutional), and the Black Codes enacted in 1865.
It wasn’t until 1871 that the Second Amendment met its first true domestic enemy…the National Rifle Association.
“The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871.”
— NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
NRA’s The American Rifleman magazine, March 1968, P. 22
Franklin Orth, the CEO of the NRA at the time, admitted that since its inception, the organization had been finding ways to incrementally destroy the Second Amendment using unconstitutional legislation. This was a hard pill to swallow as I grew up believing the NRA was committed to gun rights.
The first sellout of gun owners began in the early 1920’s with the US Revolver Association (let’s call it the NRA²). The NRA² was a subsidiary of the National Rifle Association dedicated to handgun training.
Like Orth, the USRA had an issue with the Second Amendment. The NRA² was very busy from about 1918 and into the late 1920’s crafting ways to infringe in the manner in which arms were born by Americans. The NRA² led many efforts in several states to require concealed weapon licensing, a new idea in America at the time.
Or was it a business model?
²License (li·cense): 1: Permission to act. 2: A permission granted by competent authority [that’s hilarious] to engage in an activity or occupation otherwise unlawful. 3: A permit from an authority to own or use something
(Not found in the Second Amendment)
Initially passed in nine states, this legislation quickly spread throughout the several states like an STD. Today in America, there are only a handful of states which have reversed the litigious initiatives blessed by the NRA and have reinstated constitutional carry (permit-less carry).
Please do not confuse my disgust with carry permits as opposition to firearms safety training.
Have you ever asked yourself why the NRA pushes so hard for concealed carry permits? I’m not talking reciprocity, I am talking about why they want Americans to obtain government permission to exercise a constitutional right?
The NRA established itself as a training business, and most industries use the power of lobbying, pulling the levers of government for some sort of financial gain for themselves, at the expense of We The People.
In most states, to obtain a carry license you have to attend a training class in order to get a concealed carry permit. Good idea, right?
In my research, I found that most states, by law, only accept training classes conducted by certified NRA instructors. You would think military, police, gunsmiths, and others highly skilled in the use of firearms could conduct a state-recognized course and train people to carry a gun. Nope. In most states, only NRA certified instructors can administer the training gun owners are required to have in order to carry a concealed firearm.
Note: Some states now accept LEO and military training in lieu of an NRA class to obtain unconstitutional permission to carry a firearm.
Do you want to help people beg government for the privilege to carry a gun? I don’t, but if you do, you’d better pay the NRA because without their certification, you can’t train anyone.
Regardless of your opinion on constitutional carry or unconstitutional government permission requirements, the NRA sold us down the river. The right to carry a concealed firearm in most states is now a government-granted privilege, but the fruits of the NRA’s actions continue to make the organization loads of cash on instructor certification fees alone.
The NRA boasts that it currently has 125,000 instructors, 8,000 coaches and 2,200 training councilors on its web site. I fully support safety training for gun owners, but not by government requirement or mandate.
“I have never believed in the practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”
— Karl T. Frederick NRA President and VP, US Revolver Assn.
in NFA hearing before passage of 1934 National Firearms Act
Karl Fredrick also worked diligently to frame the Uniform Firearms Act of 1930 that was later adopted by several states.
The American Rifleman March, 1968 Issue
It is America in the year 1930, alcohol is illegal, but one could easily obtain a steady supply of marijuana, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns and machine guns. I dream at night frequently about mail-ordering my very own full-auto Auto Ordnance M1A1 SBR or 1927A1.
I go to the range, smoking a fat Cuban cigar in my coat and top hat, and proceed to saw targets in half with .45 reasons to achieve pure bliss. Then I wake up and realize the nightmare of the current reality.
During the 1933-34 period, the NRA was busy in an advisory role, blessing the passage of the Infamous National Firearms Act of 1934. In this unconstitutional pretended legislation, it requires a “tax stamp” on certain types of firearms and accessories (RIGHTS), like machine guns, SBR’s, SBS’s, and today, suppressors. These items are not illegal to purchase and own, to do so without paying a tax to an unconstitutional bureaucracy to exercise a right is. So what does the NFA of 1934 have to do with the NRA?
“The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles, and sawed-off shotguns.”
– American Rifleman, page 22, Issue: March 1968
If you are speechless right now, trust me, I feel your frustration. In black and white, the NRA, in its own publication, is on-record as supporting one of the most outrageous, unconstitutional pretended laws pertaining to firearms, the NFA.
This law has destroyed the lives of countless men, women and children who ran afoul of it. No Founder could have foreseen an America where a 1/64” length variation under 16” or 18” on a barrel could land you in prison for 10 years.
“The NRA Supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition…”
So far, America’s “oldest defender of the Second Amendment” has abolished constitutional carry in most states, financially burdened the right to own a machine gun, SBR/SBS or suppressor, and has supported the Federal Firearms Act of 1938.
What was their justification? Gangland weapons. As with any garbage legislation, the problem they were attempting to solve only grew into a bigger issue while criminalizing the law-abiding.
The NRA went further, discussing their support for Sen. Thomas Dodd’s bills.
“The NRA supported the original Dodd Bill to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that the purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun.”
It gets better….
“In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns.”
Then, in the next quote, the NRA decided it couldn’t take the pressure…
“The parting of ways came only when Senator Dodd introduced still another bill (S. 1592) in March, 1965 which drastically intensified his earlier bills. The NRA opposed S.1592 and subsequent bills introduced by the Connecticut Senator.”
So, when Dodd doubled down, the NRA ran off, hanging all gun owners, making the rounds in D.C. to insure successful passage of the 1968 Gun Control Act.
The American Rifleman continues:
NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts. The essential provisions which the NRA supports are contained in 2 Senate bills introduced by Senator Roman L. Hruska (Nebr.) and House bills introduced by Congressmen Cecil R. King (17th Dist.-Calif.) and Robert L.F. Sikes (1st Dist.-Fla.) These bills would:
1. Impose a mandatory penalty for the carrying or use of a firearm, transported in interstate or foreign commerce, during the commission of certain crimes.
2. Place “destructive devices” (bombs, mines, grenades, crew-served military ordnance) under federal regulation.
3. Prohibit any licensed manufacturer or dealer from shipping any firearm to any person in any state in violation of the laws of that state.
4. Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate commerce by:
a) requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce.
b) providing for notification of local police of prospective sales. [this is gun registration, how is that working for ya, Hawaii?]
c) requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgment of notification to police
d) prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees
e) providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce.
f) increasing penalties for violation.
– Page 22 & 23 American Rifleman
On page 23, the NRA goes on record supporting firearms registration, a ban on “destructive devices,” police notification of sales, other registration schemes, waiting periods, age discrimination, and increasing penalties on gun owners.
Furthermore, for decades the liberal-progressive fake news industrial complex (AKA, the media) and the NRA have somehow sold the lie that the NRA is the only reason we still have a Second Amendment. Click here for access to the full issue of the March 1968 American Rifleman.
Gaslighting (gas·light·ing) 1: A form of psychological manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, making them question their own memory, perception, or sanity.
In part two of this article, I will analyze the NRA’s support for gun control post 1968. I will also discuss some of the things the organization does for the gun industry, and what members’ focus should be in order to save the organization.
I think most people on the blog know this stuff. They either don’t care and continue to support gun control and find a way to justify it in their head or they do care and don’t support the NRA.
A lot of people here do support the police state in favor of their definition to a “safe carry” and those who are allowed to carry. When the news of red flag laws hit andwhen the news of red flag laws hit and ttag covered it in some articles the comments sections we’re lit up by people who would hand their guns over rather than fight for our rights. They used excuses like “live to fight another day” and justified them with all kinds of workarounds to laws and hopeful legal battles playing out in their favor. It’s sad. Those of us who vocalized that we’d rather die than give up our guns are called keyboard warriors by these cowards. They’ve made their choice. now just sit back and watch them try to justify it in these comment sections, especially following this comment.
Apologies for the grammatical errors. On my phone.
It’s a common theme throughout history. Those too afraid to fight often disrespect those who are willing to fight, to cover for their own cowardice.
They’re quite similar to the “I support the second amendment, BUT..” types. Or also the mountains of people when speaking of any given war, say “Yeah, I was gonna join too, BUT…” also similar to the defeatist minded people who always state, “it’s too late. the time to fight was XX years ago!”, or the downright hateful ones who declare silliness like how “not a single American war was justified! America is just a big eBil conspiracy worse then Hitler!!!!”
To all them, I say: I suppose it’s easier to hide at home, and claim you’d be brave under different circumstances.
Obviously Gun Control is very enticing especially for politically inept history illiterates. A lot of well meaning people get/got sucked in by Gun Control including NRA leadership, some NRA members and others. That said it takes The Truth About Gun Control to fight Gun Control.
I cannot count the times I’ve heard gun owners separate themselves from firearms and magazines that were different from their beloved huntin rifles. That’s a problem but the larger problem is reading the omni directional rants below about the NRA and not one properly defined Gun Control by its history of rot.
Make no mistake about it…Any Gun Control zealot who sees such repeated NRA bashing on a Gun Forum leaves with a sht grin. Plus for Gun Control. Minus for the 2A.
Until those who complain the loudest about the NRA learn to define Gun Control as a History Confirmed agenda rooted in racism and genocide expect Gun Control to continue enticing a lot of well meaning people.
No, I don’t think so. This is the first time I’ve read an article that did more than just rant. This author provides a timeline with documented references. Before reading this, I was only aware of some of the NRA’s transgressions. Now I know more, and I can follow the author’s links to substantiate the claims.
This is far more than the “geez, the NRA sux” comments typically tossed into forums. Can’t wait for Part 2.
100% agree, I appreciate the effort being put into the argument.
ditto
We NRA skeptics have been getting flak for decades. We have uncomfortable news that isn’t good for NRA kool-ade drinkers’ self images, so they’d rather throw fits like toddlers. Writing a lot and being sincere are wastes of effort, it just gives the ignorant something to blow their noses in. And it shouldn’t be necessary, read the writing on the walls. So if you’ve read a comment of mine that’s just two lines of snark, good, it’s intentional.
It is a very a good article.
Exactly. I only knew some of this, but the parts I knew (1968 and bump stocks) was enough for at least 3 ppl I know to cancel memberships. Went to GOA
I have been an annual member for years and am paid through 2020, but unfortunately that is it for me and the NRA. The sad breakup of a 56 year relationship. The reality of the facts just out weigh the fantasy of the NRA protecting the 2A.
For some the awful truth of Negotiating Rights Away and their battle against Americans second amendment rights is a hard pill to swallow.
The truth is out there in records and testimony if one looks and it doesn’t speak well for the organization now or historically and the Anti gun crowd doesn’t realize that the NRA is their best friend.
For myself I spent a life time of support for the organization and about ten years back I came across some of the of the same damming documents the author presented.I looked even further and stopped being a willing sheep for the NRA and LaPiere to fleece and my funds went to GOA,SAF and my two state organizations.
Yet I have been called a NRA hater and am a member,what I would like to see is the NRA actually become a organization representing members and Americans 2 nd. amendment rights instead of aiding in the infringement of them.
Welcome to the outside. I’m glad your here. The fact that I’m the Original Party Fudd notwithstanding I’ve never been an NRA member. But I’m not here to lord it over anyone, the important thing is that real RKBA people get it right eventually, together.
The NRA/Franklin said nothing when the Americans it disarmed in 34 were enslaved and had their property stolen in 42. Nothing but scum.
Teaching the history of the 442nd and the others needs to be mandatory in all schools.
What should be taught is that it was 100%, straight down the line, a horror created by the Democrat party.
Or it prevented a horror. Or a series of horrors.
People make the argument that ‘no Japanese-American committed any acts of sabotage’–which just might be because the ones on the mainland were in secure camps, and the ones in Hawaii were closely watched under martial law–and conveniently forget that those who were NOT ‘Japanese-Americans,’ but were instead just ‘Japanese,’ DID commit acts of espionage until arrested along with the others. Imagine what a few ‘just Japanese’ might have been able to do in West Coast defense plants if left free. I can.
One could ALSO make the argument that the US was on the edge of hysteria at the beginning of the war, and that putting people who even LOOKED Japanese into camps might very well have saved their lives; ‘Jap Hunting Licenses’ weren’t just ‘jokes,’ and Americans knew full well that the Japanese were busily running bayonets through their sons overseas, beheading, starving, torturing, and beating them to death in their LITERAL Death Camps–that is, those who didn’t die on Death Marches before arriving.
Americans of the time didn’t feel very forgiving about those things, and didn’t differentiate between the Japanese killing their sons and husbands, after a surprise bombing attack on a Sunday morning, and those running the corner store.
Many Americans of the time wanted all Japanese dead, and that meant ALL of them.
At the end of the War, a poll of Americans revealed that a high percentage wanted more bombs dropped, many wanted every Japanese exterminated, and many wanted the Japanese homeland laid waste.
Revisionism is a fun thing for SJWs to pontificate upon decades later; What MATTERS was what was in the minds of Americans THEN, not now.
What MATTERS, @John in AK, is that they were AMERICANS.
Try your sentence again, without the prefix. Maybe the reason no Americans committed espionage, is because they were put in prison camps.
And maybe Americans are safer from those who would harm them, if they’d just allow themselves to be placed in prison camps.
Sometimes we have to give up a measure of safety (real or perceived) in order to ensure freedom.
Franklin failed that test, miserably.
So did you.
Thanks for this enlightenment. I had no idea they had actively worked against gun rights, at least up until they threw bump stocks under the bus.
Life member. I suppose I ought to throw that away and make sure they stop sending me that useless magazine. OTOH, I wouldn’t get my money back, and I haven’t sent them any additional money in ages. It’s been going elsewhere for some time.
I’m afraid your money is sunk cost, but don’t worry. You can take back some of your political capitol. I wouldn’t be surprised if the NRA inflates their membership numbers, but ideally by leaving you give them vote to broker and one less person to brag about.
For the 1934 hearings.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/NRA/NFA.htm
Who ever said the NRA is your friend. Doesnt know who their real enemies are. As a lifetime member. My money the last 3 years has been going to the GOA and will continue to until the entire board of the NRA resigns.
Here’s an idea – why don’t we, the members and supporters of the NRA steer them in the right direction and demand action for our dues? This is simple – if the NRA board wants to continue to exist they need to do a 180 and start listening to the members, especially those who have life memberships and have been funding NRA for decades. Just saying oh well, and quitting the NRA is not the solution – it is capitulation. Let’s establish the old relationship NRA originally had prior to 1900 – this isn’t rocket science. We as members can make this happen! We all need to deliver an ultimatum to NRA and the board with a simple message: We pay dues for you to do as we desire, not for you to help legislate gun ownership into being a thing of the past. If that does not change their motivations, then it is time to cut the purse strings off. Shut off the money and they no longer have jobs, and we stop them bargaining away our rights. This is so simple, yet no one has put it in these terms in the comments thus far. So here is what I am proposing:
Begin drafting a petition to the board of the NRA to cease and desist any and all activities that result in any measure or legislation that is counter to the provisions of the Second Amendment – period. Secondly, they are immediately to resist any gun control on behalf of the members of NRA and the public at large. This includes filing suits in federal courts against individuals and organizations promoting ending of individual gun rights and ownership, and lobbying efforts before Congress and the Senate to assure no further threats to the Second Amendment will be tolerated, not now, or in the future, and that this effort will continue for as long as the NRA exists as an organization.
I’ll sign it, and if that does not get their attention we the people can make it crystal clear to the NRA board how earnest we are on this subject by a coordinated cessation of paying any further dues on a given date to apply nationwide and you can be assured that WILL get their attention.
Besides, if it does not, no problem, we can support a different organization that will represent our rights and desires and the NRA will wither and die on the vine – which they will have earned by working against us instead of for us.
ever heard the old saying, fool me once shame on you. fool me twice shame on me? I never knew the NRA screwed us so badly, but FPC and GOA seem to be much better options nationally with countless local organizations.
Stages of Grief: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model
I’ll be sticking with SAF, Ohio Carry and Ohio Gun Owners from here on out. They’re at least fighting for Constitutional Carry and against Red Flag BULLSHIT here in The Buckeye State.
Dark days ahead for gunowners, unless their is a quick reorganization and activation of the gunowners in this country getting involved in our political process to advance and protect the 2nd Amendment and all of our Bill of Rights, minus the NRA. My membership is up in 2020 and I won’t renew it until that Scumbag, Wayne LaPierre (and his cohorts) are ousted.
I posted this before and I’ll post it again for what should’ve and could’ve happened with Pro-2nd Amendment Legislation in 2017 and 2018. 7 things here that the Gunowners in this Country have to push with grassroots efforts.
1) Hearing Protection Act
2) Further strengthening the PLCAA
3) Repealing Any Other Weapons (AOW’s), Short Barreled Rifles (SBR’s), and Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS’s) from the 1934 NFA
4) Removing Marijuana Use from the 1968 GCA as a permanent lifetime disqualifier from Gun Ownership (same as Domestic Violence, given that both are at minimum, Class A Misdemeanors)
5) Repealing the ban on interstate sales of Handguns from both the 1938 Federal Firearms Act (FFA) and 1968 Gun Control Act.
6) Make 2nd Amendment Rights Restoration recognized for non-violent felons at the Federal Level.
7) Remove the “Sporting Purposes Clause” from the 1968 Gun Control Act.
The more I look back at the 2017-2018 Legislative Sessions, it’s amazing that nothing happened. Looking at the NRA-ILA Website, seeing that the only “grassroots” setup they have is “CALL YOUR LEGISLATORS”, outdated crap from the 1990’s that is 20 years obsolete.
Looking at the Demographic and Electoral Shifts that the Country is going through, it’s just amazing to think that a “Pro-Gun” Organization like the NRA, never had workshops and civic participation conventions in every State and Territory across America.
That may have helped in turning the tide in our favor in Dark Blue States like New York, California, and New Jersey.
But what do I know. The NRA’s executives are living the high life, and I FORGOT……..They successfully lobbied to increase Trophy Hunting Opportunities in Africa…….I’m sure the FUDDs were very happy with that.
That was a great read, I picked up enough new info to justify my dropping financial support of the NRA.
We were sold down the river long before many of were even born.
And Trump is not our friend BTW……
I super glued my Meat Cleaver to my fingers, let’s see them pry that from my cold dead hands, Yee derrty basstads
Having had the opportunity in the past year to interact with several senior NRA officers about the NRA’s various entanglements with multiple state regulatory agencies I can assure you that their Deep State attitudes are firmly buttressed by a terminal case of NIH (not invented here) syndrome.
As a Life Member, I can’t overstate my disappointment or my conviction that we as members need to remove the current administration.
The revelation of fiscal improprieties and management malfeasance during the Annual Meeting in Indy was as egregious as any I have seen in my 47 year auditing/consulting career.
So – who is The Gun Psychiatrist? Reading from old magazine articles and taking quotes from the late 1800’s out of context and claiming irrefutable cites for accuracy is hardly enough to reach a decision.
If this guy (or girl) has a burr under his saddle about the NRA, and wants everyone else to jump off the same cliff, I would like to know who he, or she – is.
The Nunn V Georgia Case that was cited is the most important citation in this article though, and Carrie’s significant weight regarding the criticisms and historical analysis of the NRA and it’s past.
We constantly here from the anti-gun, Stalinist Left, that the Heller and McDonald decisions were “Gun-Lobby Activist Rulings”, and that the individual right ruling overturned “centuries of precedent regarding arms only for organized government militias”. The NRA fostered that talking point in supporting the 1934 National Firearms Act, and 1938 Federal Firearms Act.
Turns out, that the aforementioned talking point was BULLSHIT from the start, especially regarding Nunn v. Georgia. Not only did that case strike down a law that banned handguns, but it overturned that law in regards to it also banning FREE BLACKS from Gun Ownership. Ergo, the concept of a government being able to permanently ban a class of Citizens was struck down by a State Supreme Court as unconstitutional.
Remember also; Georgia was a SLAVE STATE. That Georgia State Supreme Court in the Nunn V. Georgia Ruling was Majority Democrat too.
@lugnut I am. Feel free to email me. [email protected]
If you are able, you may want to link the recent Washington Post investigative piece on NRA spending. It’s obviously biased (and *very* indignant that a charity org could *possibly* mis-spend, lol) but the actual meat of the article is legitimately factual and a veritable laundry list of obviously questionable relationships between the NRA and dozens of Board members who both profit from spending arrangements and oversee the financial audit committee mechanism. At best it’s a very unprofessional and poorly controlled system that wastes countless dollars as a result, and at worst we’re talking criminal graft by the keepers of the hen-house.
For some reason it was never posted to TTAG, despite being on Drudge Report for a couple days
It was a good article. Shed some light on things I did not know, but even without knowing, I did know what the NRA really was and always has been. A political party attempting to negotiate gun rights. There is no room for negotiation in “Shall not be infringed”.
Ignore all laws that infringe on our Second Amendment. If security forces working against our Constitution try to imprison you, shoot them. Same with politicians.This is what the Second Amendment was written for.
Some people don’t a have a cool real name like “Lugnut”;-)
Before asking the guy for more info; first ask yourself how much evidence would be necessary to disabuse you of your support…just in case he delivers. Old trick to keep yourself from doubling-down ad-infinitum in support of those who don’t deserve it.
How many gun restrictions would they have to support, how recently, etc.
This essay and all of your comments have convinced me not to renew my annual NRA membership. Instead, I will double-down on donations to GOA & SAF, as well as my state (PA) org. This is why I read TTAG. Also for the witty banter and sparkling reparte’.
Well, the quotes from the NRA’s own publication kind of put the lie to the concept that they’ve engaged in a tactical use of support/opposition to legislation, watering down where necessary and opposing where possible which is what many an old timer has argued to me. Though it is true that the public generally didn’t hold a favorable opinion of many firearms, notably handguns, for much of the period covered. OTOH, from another perspective the public wasn’t particularly hostile to them either so that argument may not hold water.
Personally, I’ll be interested to see Part 2 for a more modern look at what they’ve done since I can’t really hold what a bunch of (probably) dead folks did decades ago against the current organization (which has loads of other problems it would appear).
But then I have to ask myself other questions about other parts of the POTG/2A community as well. Questions that probably fall into the “no good answer” category. Ah, well, c’est la vie.
“Those dozen extensive quotes were taken out of context”
“Lies, and pictures of also-lies”
LOL
I never said either of those things.
I never said you did; an awful lot of duped apologists do, however.
“Personally, I’ll be interested to see Part 2 for a more modern look at what they’ve done since I can’t really hold what a bunch of (probably) dead folks did decades ago against the current organization (which has loads of other problems it would appear).”
I disagree, about the old dead folks. Now, it is not immediately *productive* to make an issue of ancient past acts, but it is certainly instructive when it comes to creating a complete picture. Digging up the old president and smacking him around won’t accomplish anything, but his actions definitely rippled for years, and he set a culture of Fuddery that persists to this day. If nothing else, it shows the modern NRA is the most ‘radical’ it’s ever been, and yet is STILL one of the most luke warm gun rights orgs that isn’t a crude front for Bloomberg. And that it still has a lot of evolving to do before it’s anywhere close to where we want it (my personal view is the best future for the org is to be ‘hijacked’ by ‘radicals’ rather than dissolved by the SEC or IRS after a major financial scandal)
Not to mention, just because ‘we wuz Fuddz’ was definitely true back in those oblivious, naiive days (just consider what kind of elitist busy-body tool would even join a “sportsmans’ advocacy group” back in the early days when guns & sport shooting were ubiquitous and gun control was either far away or non-existent –it’s not surprising they were a bunch of Moms Demand Action types) doesn’t absolve the org from the fact that this stance was in direct opposition to what their publicly claimed mission was. Their lobbying actions didn’t promote the sport or expand participation; they made it much harder and more expensive to own or use firearms, full stop. So when the same org, descended from the same old Fudds, says today that they are dedicated to promoting the sport and expanding participation, despite a consistent lobbying record that is mixed at best…
I don’t disagree that looking at the history and the damage that was caused is the only rational way to try to fix things in the present. That’s just plain rational.
I’m saying I’m not interested, as some folks would seem to be, in going all “original sin” on the organization. Like you said, digging up a corpse and slapping it around serves no useful purpose. As such I’m going to need more convincing before I agree to join the “burn it to the waterline and start over” crowd.
I see it as a reality-check; the NRA doesn’t do what it claims to, and never really has. That’s not to say it is unable & should be destroyed, but it sure needs to change from what it is currently to become what is needed.
The author is right that the NRA has helped erect a status quo where it profits from existing infringements while purporting to oppose them. That dichotomy has expressed itself in all manner of foolishness, from wasting billions on Ackerman to market the stupid Carry Guard faux-insurance scam, to submitting to irrelevant GOP interests for no reason at all (since it sure isn’t getting restrictions removed).
It’s important for us to realize that the NRA has not simply “strayed in recent years” or other such downplays, but is fundamentally broken & always has been. The first step in fixing it has got to be admitting that. There’s a huge group of gun owners out there –not all of them Fudds– who are so badly misled by NRA’s mish-mash they simply do not even know what “pro-gun” is at this point. These folks tend to think the NRA’s problems are minor or the result of a couple bad apples, when the org truly needs a complete overhaul at the national level, with a new charter. A new architecture more resistant to manipulation by power players, and more responsive to donors.
Judging today’s organization by the actions of the past is simply not appropriate. If we dug through the past (and not the distant past, I’m talking about within the last decade or so) we can find Jimmy Kimmell in blackface, for example. He would not do that today.
The world was a very different place pre-LaPierre. The NRA was not “the second amendment’s most ardent defender” because the second amendment wasn’t under constant assault. Things were just different. Hell, only about 20 years ago, you couldn’t even carry concealed in Texas.
Heck, Democrats used to also campaign by posting their NRA rating. It was a different world. 40 years ago congress used to pass bills, all of them bipartisan. Today votes are almost always 100% partisan, but it was not always that way.
It’s my recollection that the NRA’s lurch towards fear, gloom, doom started with Heston’s “cold dead hands” and grew exponentially under LaPierre until that’s really all the organization is anymore — threats and peril.
So what has today’s NRA done for gun rights? They spent their coffers to go all-in on Trump. They spent something like $30 million airing pro-trump, anti-Hillary ads. And Trump delivered Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, who may yet deliver the NY ruling we’re all waiting for.
Pre-LaPierre, concealed carry was illegal in nearly every state. Under LaPierre, concealed carry has been extended to all 50 states, more states are Constitutional carry than ever, the SCOTUS is majority conservative, Heller and MacDonald were issued, and NYSRPA may yet expand rights even further. Note, I’m not saying this happened BECAUSE of LaPierre, I’m pointing out that this all happened during his reign (so either he was pretty decent, or he was unable to hinder us as much as the article would have you believe).
Will the NRA deliver us ultimate victory forever? Of course not — that would (as the article points out) put them out of business. Just like the NAACP will never actually make progress against racism; who would pay them to fight “racists” if there weren’t any more racists? Same thing with the NRA.
BUT — look where we were 20 years ago, and look where we are now. The NRA didn’t hold back the expansion of gun rights. LaPierre didn’t get our rights stripped from us. Yes we lost bump stocks, yes there have been setbacks, but the overall picture is a far cry better today than it was 20 years ago.
This. Nailed it.
I’m old enough to remember when every mag-fed firearm arrived from the factory with a neutered 10rd capacity, and rifles had to have such obscenities as fixed stocks and oddball muzzlebrakes. Four things can be true at once:
1. The NRA of 1800’s-1980’s was no ardent 2A supporter;
2. they have some serious leadership and organizational issues;
3. they’ve recently set some inexplicably compromising policies such as on bump stocks;
4. they’re the only 800lb gorilla in the 2A lobby’s corner, having made some tremendous progress in the last 20yrs.
I’ll retain my life membership, also support other good organizations (GOA, SAF), vote as appropriate, and seek out more honest and 2A originalist leadership to correct course.
Now, Anner, you doubled nailed it.
Plain and simple, the NRA suxks.
Perhaps one of the best NRA articles
I have ever read. They are double dealing
gun traitors and little else. They have suckered
millions of firearm owners into believing they
are 2nd Amendment advocates.
They are a compromised organization and need
to go. Thank goodness I was not duped into joining
and funding them.
If you had your wish would be living with a federal ban on 11+ round mags and ammunition registration at the federal level.
“I’m old enough to remember when every mag-fed firearm arrived from the factory with a neutered 10rd capacity, and rifles had to have such obscenities as fixed stocks and oddball muzzlebrakes.”
Where was the NRA when this law passed an what was its official stance towards it?
If you were a bit older, you could remember times when you could have order a gun from magazine ad and have US Postal office deliver it to your door. Even guns like 20 mm anti tank cannons such as Lahti L39 and Solothurn S18/100.
I’m “sorta” with you Ted. We’d be screwed after Newtown without the NRA-warts & all. Got a year left on my membership. Will I renew?!? Dunno but I’m joining SAF and supporting MY chit state of ILLinois-ISRA & GSL.
I don’t know whether to be appalled at your lack of introspection or jealous. You blame events and people who are never going to agree with you but avoid taking responsibility for your own actions, ie buying in to the controlled opposition to gun control. If you act like a tool, someone will use you as one, they’ll tell you what you want you hear and find you something to blame when you don’t get what you want, apart from hot air.
Lol. Calling others who don’t 100% agree with u tools. You think bloomberg and his ilk aren’t enjoying this infighting and fanning the flames?
Ad, it was Pierre and the board of trustees
which caused the smoke and flames and not
this article nor the critics of the NRA.
Gasp! Bloomerg!? Oh no, not Bloomberg.
I don’t know if you’re that much of a pansy or stupid enough to think everyone else is but wake up. If you really care about guns, you’re in the cause with people with more balls than you. We’re going to take it away from the NRA and whatever happens, happens. Either way it’ll be awesome, get some wannabe RKBA people right in their sense of entitlement.
“…Pre-LaPierre, concealed carry was illegal in nearly every state. Under LaPierre, concealed carry has been extended to all 50 states..”
A certain restaurant massacre happened, that’s what started many of the States passing CCW laws. The country, or at least the more rural parts of America said “screw being a sitting duck” and pressured every lawmaker they could.
I was stationed at Ft. Hood at the time.
Michael Bloomberg must surely love all the NRA haters on this forum as he can sit back and watch the cheap skates that want to save $45 bucks destroy gun rights and the NRA without Bloomberg having to spend a dime of his own money. Its called divide and conquer and the uneducated fall for it each and every single time.
Yes that is just what we need a stilted and disingenuous anti-NRA rant by an author that will not even give us his or her name. If the NRA does not have the money to pay off our Congressional Prostitutes for the coming 2020 elections you will see how fast the anti-gun ax will fall on every gun right we now have.
The NRA is an organization of people and no they have not always made the right decisions but when you look back on how many times they saved our ass their successes far out number their failures. Even the much controversial assault rifle ban worked out for the best because in the end it did indeed sunset and the nay sayer’s who claimed it would never happen had to eat crow when things worked out just as the NRA planned. Yes it was not pleasant to wait all those years but the alternative would have been a ban that was permanent. Just one of the many times the NRA had rocks thrown at it but in the end triumphed for gun rights..
I am old enough to have lived through times that predated the 1968 gun control act and all the thousands of anti-gun bills since then so the author that wrote all this fking horseshit was probably not even born back then nor lived through all of those times when we almost lost everything if it had not been for the NRA coming in to fight for our rights at all levels Local , State and Federal. The Author goes back and cherry picks, distorts and out right lies about the NRA so perhaps he or she is actually working for Bloomberg because it seems so at least to me.
No I will not be dropping my membership and really the only thing you have to lose by by joining is a god damn measly $45.00. A lot of you probably spend more than that in one day playing golf. Brilliant save a few bucks today and lose a gun collection worth thousands. But when did many gun owners ever have any common sense.
If by “saved our asses” you mean pushed for gun laws, then yea, go ahead and give em your whole pension. Not gonna save your ass when those same politicians the NRA bribes end up seizing your assets because the money was simply just not enough anymore. So yea, I’ll keep my “measly” $45 and put it towards a round of golf lessons.
What!?!? So you’re some big NRA fan now? You can’t even troll right anymore. You must be going descending into madness.
“rant by an author that will not even give us his or her name.” – it says “Vlad Tepes” on your birth certificate no doubt?
Excellent point, Vic. This is more nonsense
from Vlad “the compromiser.” As a NRA
supporter, he lives in a cave, this is what
the NRA has done time and time again.
I’m almost positive this troll has decried the “radical NRA” like the most transparent cardboard cutout leftist in the past; sure is odd to see him singing their praises in order to garner attention. He’s just a human bot, programmed to react in a contentious manner, and poorly.
Do tell troll…does Bloomie pay you by the word?
I thought the bloomberg trolls were on salary, but for Vlad he must. Why else would every comment be 8 pages long?
I can give you the name of 5 pro 2a organizations that do more than the NRA ever has to get gun rights back. Maybe they would be worthy of $45……
In Part 2 or 3 or wherever this saga leads, I ask for your thoughts on who you recommend supporting given their actual, tangible contribution to 2A causes. I will send them my support.
Well please go ahead and do so…waiting for the 5.
Suicide of the West continues apace.
Most of the West is already dead or on life support. It only survives on in America and a few small enclaves scattered around here and there.
Nothing before 1977 Cincinnati Revolt matters. 1977 was the revolt that lead to the NRA becoming an actual 2A rights organization. Read Jeff Knox’s book. Before 1977 NRA was basically a sport shooting organization. Yes they made mistakes or were silent about gun laws passed after 1977 but I’d say they had growing pains and made mistakes. However the ILA has consistently lobbied and kept anti gun bills off the floor of the house & senate. That said I think LaPierre should go. I’ve held that view since the late 90’s when Jeff Knox failed to oust him. I’ve voted every year for people who will oust him. Personally I don’t trust an article that’s published anonymously.
You realize there was a counter-revolution in the 90s when Knox was forced out, and the NRA has steadily marched right back toward Fuddy sports & training advocacy ever since, right?
Knox was an anomaly in a *very* consistent pattern, which is what this article is showing. Ergo, we need to break that pattern again if the NRA is to be an asset to all gun owners, rather than blueblood trap shooters (see: most every gun owners’ association outside the US)
The NRA before the 1977 Cincinnati Revolt was a milquetoast hunter safety organization, whose leadership did not want to pick up the ball dropped by Congress in 1916 when it passed the National Defense Act and eviscerated the state militia concept in favor of an imperial federal military. That change allowed the eastern Establishment to partake in overseas quests for glory without any real domestic military organizations check to their power. And our great-grandfathers never challenged that fundamental constitutional change, so the execrable political classes got away with it.
After 1977, the NRA via a knowledgeable Neal Knox started the fight to preserve the original intent of the Second Amendment (2A) because no other organization stepped up to the plate to do so. NRA-ILA managed to get Congress to repeal certain sections of GCA68 in 1986, but lost on the Hughes Amendment. Editorials at that time quoted the NRA would fight to strike the Hughes Amendment down, but there hasn’t been any serious move to repeal it since then. ILA instead has been fighting hard to preserve semi-automatic firearms since 1989 because there are more of them in civilian hands, but there’s been no attempt to address the local military unit aspects of the 2A in a century, including the efficacy of Class 3 firearms for that mission.
Mr. Heller and the SAF managed to get a 2010 SCOTUS ruling saying handguns were constitutionally protected for self-defense reasons, the first of its kind. But it’s a tiny part of the overall 2A national defense concept. And nothing since the flawed (and suspect)1939 Miller decision on firearms designed for military use and their constitutionality. This is where we are today, so I am interested in what the author has to say post-1977 about the organization, ILA, and its work on behalf of the original 2A concept and our rights.
That’s where the real battle should be, including jurisdiction stripping via Congressional legislation SCOTUS’s power to rule on firearm issues at all. In fact, how can lawyers speak with any authority on military topics and what firearms would be useful for national and domestic defense? This should be decided by local military authorities, not a bunch of clueless jurists and clerks who have never served in the military. They’re just not qualified to render a decision on this topic, except to step aside and allow all weapons with a military utility to be constitutional.
Holy crap. I didn’t know any of this. Looking forward to part two.
“Holy crap. I didn’t know any of this. Looking forward to part two.”
What you are so enthralled about is Bloomberg written propaganda, designed to destroy the only organization that ever saved your ass from gun confiscation, only the uneducated would be fooled by this article. It stinks more than a rotting rat on the dock in Denmark. By the way the educated people in Denmark would not have to be told that this article is poorly written propaganda. In Denmark their schools actually educate people, this forum is living proof we do not educate our people. NO offense to you personally I am talking in generalities. Expect part two to be more distortions , lies and anti-NRA propaganda from an synonymous author on the payroll of Bloomberg.
You’ve posted similar arguments throughout this comment section but have yet to refute the objective content of the author. Please provide something beyond irrelevant metaphors and platitudes and I’ll start listening. I look forward to your formal retort published on TTAG (or TFB, or wherever you’d like).
Once again we are faced with an anti-NRA attack that fails to present any substantive attribution for any of its claims. From the frequency of these sorties and their apparent lack of journalistic research it is easy to assume this to be the work of provocateurs. The tactic does fit the standard practice of the socialist left and gives aid to our adversaries. I question the validity of the author as an actual sustaining member of the shooting community. The way this is written it looks as if the real name of the author, The Gun Psychiatrist, is Michael Bloomberg.
You tool, the author has LOADS of documentation, and from the NRA’s own publications, for chrissakes.
What do you got? An FFL, NRA trainer certificate, & a steady stream of hunters, buyers, & concealed carriers who are forced to do business with you?
Plus one, Barn. Flex, is a tool
from harbor freight.
Keep playing chess not checkers. MAGA. Praise Kek.
I move we portmanteau this refrain to “MAGAkekers” to save bandwidth
I second.
Good idea
Thank you sir for this well-documented article. I was well aware of the early twentieth-century failures of the NRA. And I was aware of their support for training requirements at the founding of the organization. That was an outgrowth from the poor Marksmanship of the Civil War soldiers. And I’m well-versed on the racist history of gun control. But it was a very big surprise to me to learn that at the same time they also supported laws restricting the of carry firearms. They supported required Carry Permits??? Wow.
Progressivism is an Insidious 19th century disease.
I will definitely archive this article and the documents. I’ll look forward to part 2.
BTW
Thank you for providing the definition of the term gaslighting. I noticed the news media have been using this term for at least the last eight years. It was as if they had discovered something new to them. Perhaps it was.
Excellent article. Wow ! Just Wow !
ok, after the Kennedy assassination they went with some gun control laws. but these days they do a lot for our rights. especially since they would not be around if we had no guns. they have been very busy opposing states who pass anti gun laws and got them overturned. ok, they goofed with the bumpstocks, but did anyone write them and say ” hey protect my rights to own this”? did anyone ever call them and tell them what they would like to see worked on? we now have more gun rights orgs and if they all work together we can get a lot done. but all this bashing and infighting, is just what the democrats ( communist by another name) want. and if you give into it, they are winning. they would love to see the NRA gone. because that is there strongest organization that opposes them and is in their way of their dream of the UNITED SOSICAIST STATES OF AMERIKA. and people like the writer of this article fall right into their hands. I will keep supporting them and if they goof, they will hear from me. and yes, maybe we can replace a few of them up in the top level . but let us stop bickering and do it.
The article just told you about half of what else the NRA has done wrong. But go ahead and ignore it. Mindless tribalism is your destiny. If Santa Clause magically gave you the ability to think critically, you sound like you’ve had a lot of the partisan kool-ade, it’s probably too late to do any good and would just cause you needless upset.
“ok, they goofed with the bumpstocks, but did anyone write them and say ” hey protect my rights to own this”? did anyone ever call them and tell them what they would like to see worked on?”
Yes. The NRA responded by changing the vote bylaws so incumbent leaders could not be realistically replaced by voters in the annual election.
“Lets just stop the bickering”
Hey, this ‘bickering’ got LaPierre scared enough to stop blowing thousands of members’ dues on suits and interns. Got Brownell to leave before he had to explain to a NYC judge why he had an exclusive 3.1 million dollar annual ammunition purchase contract with the same org he was highly influential in. Got Ollie North to GTFO of an orf he had no business speaking for in the first place. I’d say ‘bickering’ has been a hell of a lot more curative *already* than decades of helpless dissatisfaction or naiive apathy.
Writing and calling only do so much. It’s like a complaint form dropped in a box. Someone reads it, and throws it away. It’s time for the NRA to start doing what they exist for, and establish a zero tolerance policy. No compromise. Period. Call them and let em know, the rest of us show up in person.
Glenn, here in Maoisota, local firearm organizations,
of which we are members of two, turned away gun
hating legislation this year, without a single dollar offered
by the NRA.
They, IMHO, are worthless.
Very nicely done! Thank you for this article. Truth…
I see the gun hating crowd has succeeded in driving another wedge between gun owners. Their stated goal of dividing the NRA and thus weaken it, so as to defeat it seems to be taking hold. At a time when the firearms owning community, is under the most serious assault in the history of the United States, it is efforts such as yours which endangers us all. At a time when we should be joining the fight as a single body, some come along to further divide us. Divide and conquer. Works every time it’s tried.
” But …… but …… you Neeeed Us ”
What if I told you the N.R.A . is the B.A.T.F. ?
With one sentence I’d conclude that you are a moron.
Ron is correct
“I see the gun hating crowd has succeeded in driving another wedge between gun owners. Their stated goal of dividing the NRA and thus weaken it, so as to defeat it seems to be taking hold. At a time when the firearms owning community, is under the most serious assault in the history of the United States, it is efforts such as yours which endangers us all. At a time when we should be joining the fight as a single body, some come along to further divide us. Divide and conquer. Works every time it’s tried.”
Hey Ron do you really think you can educate a bunch of back woods, cheap skate Morons. They are the poster boys for our failed educational system. None of them would recognize propaganda if the author of this horseshit walked up and shot them in the foot with it. I am sure they will count their saved $45 for not joining the NRA before they go to bed at night counting their dollar bills jumping over a fence into the Democratic Party’s camp. The Out House gang are the best friends Bloomberg could ever have, its like taking candy from a baby only in this case its taking the guns of these idiots. I may open a scrap yard as I will be soon getting tons of scrap guns from the Democrats to melt down and laughing all the way to the bank.
Of course I could be wrong, maybe all these NRA haters are indeed working for Bloomberg its the only thing that would really explain this and their beloved article that put them into a feeding frenzy by vowing to eradicate the NRA.
Did you know the US didn’t allow women to vote? It’s true, you can look it up. They also treated some other people as property and deprived them of their fundamental rights. None of that matter today because things have changed. None of this article matters either.
The NRA was founded by a bunch of New Englanders to promote marksmanship. Daily use and carry wasn’t part of their lives in the cities, and they’d be referred to as Fudds today. Neither they nor any other organization at the time, was concerned about individual right to arms.
The modern NRA promotes concealed carry via lobbying and lawsuits. It isn’t fighting against constitutional carry or even talking disparagingly about it — it reports them as wins. The NRA has been the gold standard for training pretty much since its founding. It makes sense for states to have some requirements for a training syllabus, and using an established one is easier than coming up with one from scratch, like they do for many professional organizations. Many states now do accept military experience as sufficient for a license, despite having no relevance to a state’s peculiarities regarding use of lethal force or restricted areas. Did today’s NRA fight against those changes? I don’t care about policies and statements of people who have been off the board and dead for longer than most of us on TTAG have been alive.
Maybe the second part will be relevant. What about the apparent conflicts of interest, nepotism, and fiscal mismanagement of board members and executives?
so… the NRA is still FUDD’s. Rich FUDD’s.
I’ve supported the NRA for years and will do. But they need to clean house and that’s not negotiable. We could build up other orgs to make it’s place. We should be doing that anyway.
The anonymous author clearly is NOT a “staunch Second Amendment supporter,” evidenced by his own admission that he isn’t doing the bare minimum to support it.
Giving your money to a bunch of rich FUDDs who play politics and sell propaganda is the bare minimum? No wonder there are so many infringements on our 2A currently.
The reason why armed revolts were successful against the American state and local governments was because the civilian population had the same firepower as the corrupt government agents. Including civilian owned destructive devices.
How successful will you be if you only have bolt action rifles and break action shotguns against a corrupt government?
Athens TN revolt
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/athens.htm
Deacons for Defense and Justice
http://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/deacons-for-defense-and-justice.html
I am very disheartened by some of the responses to this article. Quitting the NRA does not help gun rights, in fact it hurts them. It allows those NRA members who are FUDDs, or “guns for me but not for thee” types run the show. Like it or not, the NRA is the 800lb gorilla of gun rights groups. If we want that gorilla to be fighting for us, then we need to actively shape its direction. That isn’t sending or refusing to send money. Talking with your checkbook is passive aggressive BS that doesn’t accomplish anything except your own internal sense of accomplishment. Write letters to current board members. Actively campaign for replacement board members.
There was once a NRA revolt in Cincinnati. It seems we need to fight another one.
In response to the article; I read it just as I might read the history of the USA. There are aspects of US history that are objectively evil. And I would be righteously pissed if some of those aspects were even suggested today. But that doesn’t make me want to revoke my citizenship, it makes me want to ensure that the attitudes and actions that allowed those negative aspects can never take root again. That can only happen by laboring to ensure that the USA is better than it ever was. The same is true for the NRA: fight for the direction you want it to take, or others will decide it for you.
Unfortunately, the NRA bylaws were changed to make another revolt practically impossible.
THE GUN FATHER—— WAYNE LAPIERRE WHO’S VERY NAME STRIKES FEAR AND PANIC INTO THE HEARTS OF THE ANTI-GUN FANATICS.
Even though this forum has been infiltrated with many Bloomberg operatives they will not cause the downfall of the NRA or its fearless leader Wayne Lapierre The coming 2020 elections will feel the iron IRON FIST of Wayne Lapierre as the Anti-gun Fanatics run in terror and seek cover and realize that with a legion of Congressional Prostitutes under Wayne’s thumb the corrupt American Election process will triumph once again and graft and money talk and bullshit walks when it comes to bending over the prostitutes of Congress and forcing them to defend the Second Amendment.
Wayne’s Legions will soon be on the march as they strike their drawn swords over their freedom shields with shouts of WAYNE! WAYNE! WAYNE! SHADES OF CAESER’S LEGIONS OF ROME. WAYNE HAS CROSSED THE POTOMAC AND MARCHES ON WASHINGTON. WE WHO ARE ABOUT TO “CONTRIBUTE” SALUTE YOU!!!!
SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM
Shut the fuck up. Nutjob.
“The Second Amendment and why we have it”
1) This is the center of the gun rights argument. Although I have strong support for the 2nd amendment, until a mutual agreement of definition is established, I can only accept the authors words as opinion rather than fact.
“INFRINGE In·fringe /in’frinj/ 1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another…..”
2) Dictionary definitions change over time as culture changes. It is not a matter of correct or incorrect but what is generally accepted. How would a dictionary of the time define a given word? I’m sure there could be argument in the difference in modern day definition. The author’s paraphrasing is even incorrect to the definition he is sighting.
“In short, fighting our way out of tyranny gave us the Constitution and Bill of Rights”
3) In Short ? That is the bulk of our history and the author thinks he can sum it up “in short” with 16 words. Don’t let the details spoil your party I guess.
This isn’t an untold story if you where around to see some of it play out nor is it an historical story of the NRA, I think a lot has gotten lost in the generations. To me this just reads like selective propaganda, couldn’t get through it.
What you get when you combine a bunch of very opinionated people, who have limited to no actually political involvement (and NO voting every 4 years is not politically active) and a gov’t school edumacation is the current whining anti NRA BS.
Combine minimal Soros troll effort and no expense and the SOBs are driving a wedge in to kill the ONLY organization in the US that the dem progtards fear. The dems don’t fear the Rep Party. The only organization they comes close would be an assembly of various “Right to Life” groups. GEt a FING CLUE BOYS.
Fund the GOA/etc or other sidenote but the elephant that is going to get the needle move is the NRA. Get your ass down to the local party meetings to either help direct the Rep or to usurp the Demtards. to the county conventions, district conventions, state conventions. Write the platforms, run for office. By them of the general election 90% of the thing is already done. AND STOP FING Whining.
I did most of that shit for decades. I put my money, my time, and even my life on the line. Negotiating Rights Away was, and is still, the biggest turd in the punch bowl. I will not drink it. No thank you.
The NRA was, is, and probably always shall be a Judas goat leading people to accept privileges in the place of the exercise of unalienable individual rights. It’s freaking dangerous to liberty. Supporting it is cutting your own throat slowly. Fuck the NRA.
Wow you jusy figure out anything run by ppl isn’t perfect? Congrats on reaching age 12.
Nice snark but completely irrelevant. Try harder next time.
Ad Astra says:
June 15, 2019 at 03:27
If you had your wish would be living with a federal ban on 11+ round mags and ammunition registration at the federal level.
Ad, not much of an accomplishment for American’s
largest pro-firearm organization.
There’s one group/person who has been saying ALL of this, for many years: Dudley Brown at RMGO/NAGR.
It’s why I joined RMGO 20 years ago – one of my close friends got elected to the Colorado legislature, solely on the gun issue.
The NRA fought him regularly, and he couldn’t believe it. He teamed up with Dudley, and beat up the NRA every chance he got.
Dudley’s main fault is that he has told the truth about the NRA so often that he sounds like a broken record, and has turned off all the FUDDs – who need to hear this.
But Dudley now also leads a national group that is bigger than everyone but the NRA. And they aren’t compromising one bit.
TTAG, please give us part 2 of this article. As someone who was initially fooled by the NRA, but who has been paying attention since the 1970’s and is now an EX NRA member, and a proud current member of Gun Owners of America, and the Tennessee Firearms Association, I believe the 2nd part of this article will go a long way toward helping to wake up those who have only recently become aware of the struggle for our God given, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.
Comments are closed.