• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Letter to Wayne LaPierre

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
The following is the letter I am sending to NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre. My stated purpose of posting this is not to cause NRA bashing but to show that even though I have problems with the organization, it is my belief it is much better to work from the inside rather than to sit outside their window and through rocks.

TBG


05/27/12

Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President
National Rifle Association 1
1250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax VA 22030

Mr LaPierre

I have just finished reading your article entitled “All In” in the June 2012 issue of the American Rifleman. In it you state “Sales of firearms and Right to Carry permit applications are skyrocketing.” I must say this phraseology angered me. It is NOT a “RIGHT TO CARRY” permit, but a Concealed Carry permit. There is a tremendous difference. The US constitution confirms that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right existing long before the Constitution. We do not need a permit to grant us the “Right to Carry”.

Here in NV we have an even more strongly worded constitution and it states in Article 1, Section 11, #1 Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use.

I have been a Life Member of the NRA for about 35 years give or take and I nearly resigned my membership some years ago when the NRA began to push for mandatory conceal permit issue instead of fighting for Constitutional Carry. It is quite clear to me that the NRA believes in what I call permission slips. Permits to do what the Constitution calls a fundamental right. It is quite clear that the NRA does at least in some degree believe in and work for firearm regulation and control against the benefit of its members and the community at large.

Because of this I stopped my financial support of the NRA ILA and now donate it to firearms rights organizations that I feel have a better stand on the right to keep and bear arms. I have kept my Life Membership in the NRA for the sole purpose of being able to vote and put in my 2 cents.

I am an active member of the open carry movement and Mr LaPierre it is my belief that in general the NRA has some real problems with support from this community. We don’t feel the NRA represents us.

Your comments and clarification would be appreciated.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
WOW! A response.

I have for the first time received a response from NRA/ILA. Trouble is, I didn't write the ILA. I wrote Wayne LaPierre about an article he wrote, see above.

It was a form letter that almost addressed what I wrote about. In it they took a lot of credit for things they really didn't do. Support they didn't give. It was full of half truths and outright false representations.

How sad.

TBG
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Any chance you could pdf the letter and post it?

I would have loved to but it looks like the wife’s hollerin' at the kids to clean things up worked too well. They tossed out some of my paperwork that one included.

They were saying how hard they have been working for constitutional carry. The one that struck me the hardest was IA where they said they sponsored and worked for it. The truth is as I understand if from buddies in IA (where I grew up) they had a Conceal Carry law they were pushing at the time and actively worked against constitutional carry.

TBG
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snip-- The one that struck me the hardest was IA where they said they sponsored and worked for it. The truth is as I understand if from buddies in IA (where I grew up) they had a Conceal Carry law they were pushing at the time and actively worked against constitutional carry.

TBG

That is my understanding of the situation in Iowa as well - never have felt that the NRA was a friend to open carry.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Waynes new commentary

I just read the new article he has in this month’s Rifleman. It is interesting that they are pushing the "All In" program to rid us of Obama and speak of the importance of it, which I agree. What I find interesting is that he nowhere endorses Romney. My opinion is that they would find it hard to come out and do so as he has a very bad 2A history as well.

This plays into to the old "the lesser of two evils" routine. I personally have done a lot of soul searching on this and have come to my own opinion that the lesser of two evils is still evil. I understand the importance of getting rid of Obama, but the change has to start somewhere. Voting for either side of the same coin is still voting for the coin.

We know that a vote for Obama would be a vote to end the 2A as we know it, as there will be nothing to stop him, as he will not be standing for election again. Romney? I can only assume by his history that he will go after the 2A as well but maybe not as hard.

Over the years we have voted ourselves into one hell of a predicament.

TBG
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I just read the new article he has in this month’s Rifleman. It is interesting that they are pushing the "All In" program to rid us of Obama and speak of the importance of it, which I agree. What I find interesting is that he nowhere endorses Romney. My opinion is that they would find it hard to come out and do so as he has a very bad 2A history as well.

This plays into to the old "the lesser of two evils" routine. I personally have done a lot of soul searching on this and have come to my own opinion that the lesser of two evils is still evil. I understand the importance of getting rid of Obama, but the change has to start somewhere. Voting for either side of the same coin is still voting for the coin.

We know that a vote for Obama would be a vote to end the 2A as we know it, as there will be nothing to stop him, as he will not be standing for election again. Romney? I can only assume by his history that he will go after the 2A as well but maybe not as hard.

Over the years we have voted ourselves into one hell of a predicament.

TBG

Try my math as a test.

Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv
 

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
Try my math as a test.

Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv

Grapeshot, I couldn't of said it better. Big Guy, I know how you feel. I'm 63 and have been around the block more than once. It took us about (25) years to go from guns, liberty, freedom and God(Reagan 1988) to Obama

The TEA Party (conservatives, independents, libertarians, moderate democrats) are the future. The President gets to nominate possibly (2) new lifetime judges and is the leader of the free world. The congress and Senate make the laws. There is NOT a majority in either house that is interested in curtailing any gun rights for law abiding citizens. Those who are come from VERY liberal cities that will always vote democratic.

Keep your powder dry. The future is Jindal(Louisanna governor), Rubio(Florida) Ryan(Mass) and the future conservative/TEA party types we elect. THEY, the Supreme Court and the military protect our freedoms.

That being said the NRA has always been about weapons in the HOME and youth rifle training. It has NEVER been about concealed carry and open carry. Those who believe they are, are delusional. Go back and read on the "Net the history of NRA over the last 30-40 years and you will see it. I am not anti NRA. Want to join, join. Don't want to, don't. I didn't. I do like their youth programs because the more kids that get introduced to rifles and shooting the more adults we get that are gun owners and pro liberty/freedom.

IMHO, the NRA is embarrassed about open carry. They get queasy because it sometimes gets attention that they feel is counter productive to THEIR agendas. I like you feel that open carry as it becomes more and more prevalent will be as common as the guy who wears a cell phone on his belt(me, I'm a dork), or a tool belt, or a water bottle. or a MACE container or a pager(remember those).

BG, I have always thought it would be fun to walk around with a cell phone and MACE on my left side, my S&W 38 on the right, a fanny pack on my rear, ostrich cowboy boots, NEON colored frame sunglasses and a dead rattlesnake attached to my belt between my left side and my zipper and see if anyone would notice I was wearing a
GUN !!!!!

NAVYBLUE


PS: For those of you that thought Obama/Holders's "Fast and Furious" was about tracking guns and to arrest gun runners, let me help. Bush had a similar program started out of Phoenix, BUT they used about 100 guns and arrested the runners BEFORE they got to Mexico. Obama/Holder flooded Mexico with over a 1,000 rifles. As a result at least one Border Agent is dead and around 200 Mexicans have been killed with those weapons. There intent was to flood cartels with the weapons, have many Mexicans die in the crossfire and then use that to get the hoplophobes in such a hysterical outrage that they convinced the undecided to join them in getting Congress to bring back the "assault" weapons ban. Back door gun control. REMEMBER that when you vote and educate your friends.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
As a former NRA member I believe the NRA has allegiance only to NRA. I congratulate you on your well worded letter. I have nothing against CC, but it p*sses me off that states link open carry to permits, or allow only CC. It is time for NRA to stand behind the constitution, not just use it as a means to make money without actually backing it.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Try my math as a test.

Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv

I do understand what you're saying and have struggled with it. I am indeed concerned about the courts and the congress but here is the problem with that. If we vote for the lesser of 2 evils we simply continue down the same slippery slope that has led us to where we are now. At some point a line has to be drawn and we have to take a stand. Will it be hard now, yes, but much harder in the future. To put it off any longer we risk never getting our country back. This is no doubt the worst time in the history of our Republic. Going back many years, and we could debate how long, our freedoms and our way of life have been systematically changed. Each time we vote for the lesser of two evils the result is that the next time we get an even a worse choice of evils to choose from and on it goes.. It is a revolution and we who are trying to stop it are not the revolutionaries but the patriots. I, and there are many like me, have drawn our line. Romney is the other side of the same coin as Obama. They may have slightly different methods of getting there but ultimately the end goal is the same among which is the abolition of the second amendment. Putting off what we need to do to make a change only puts it off on our children and grandchildren. I want for my children the America I was promised when I was a kid.

It is quite possible that the best thing to happen is for Obama to win a second term. WHOOOOA! you say. Consider this. Maybe we have to reach bottom before we can muster the resolve as a people to rise up and take back what is ours. Maybe we can show that though we won't win this time, the future is indeed ours. If we don't have a good showing, the sheep will not join us in the future. It has to start sometime. Let it be now.

Even though there is a significant number of us, more and more all the time, I still think that Obama is out and that Romney is the anointed one. The question is does he win and feel confident that he can continue the Bush/Obama policies, or will he know he has a fight on his hands. I want him to be real uncomfortable. If I'm wrong and Obama wins, but we make a strong showing, he is going to be real uncomfortable.

None of us can be sure of the future. We just do what our life’s experiences and our common sense tell us.

TBG
 

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
I do understand what you're saying and have struggled with it. I am indeed concerned about the courts and the congress but here is the problem with that. If we vote for the lesser of 2 evils we simply continue down the same slippery slope that has led us to where we are now. At some point a line has to be drawn and we have to take a stand. Will it be hard now, yes, but much harder in the future. To put it off any longer we risk never getting our country back. This is no doubt the worst time in the history of our Republic. Going back many years, and we could debate how long, our freedoms and our way of life have been systematically changed. Each time we vote for the lesser of two evils the result is that the next time we get an even a worse choice of evils to choose from and on it goes.. It is a revolution and we who are trying to stop it are not the revolutionaries but the patriots. I, and there are many like me, have drawn our line. Romney is the other side of the same coin as Obama. They may have slightly different methods of getting there but ultimately the end goal is the same among which is the abolition of the second amendment. Putting off what we need to do to make a change only puts it off on our children and grandchildren. I want for my children the America I was promised when I was a kid.

It is quite possible that the best thing to happen is for Obama to win a second term. WHOOOOA! you say. Consider this. Maybe we have to reach bottom before we can muster the resolve as a people to rise up and take back what is ours. Maybe we can show that though we won't win this time, the future is indeed ours. If we don't have a good showing, the sheep will not join us in the future. It has to start sometime. Let it be now.

Even though there is a significant number of us, more and more all the time, I still think that Obama is out and that Romney is the anointed one. The question is does he win and feel confident that he can continue the Bush/Obama policies, or will he know he has a fight on his hands. I want him to be real uncomfortable. If I'm wrong and Obama wins, but we make a strong showing, he is going to be real uncomfortable.

None of us can be sure of the future. We just do what our life’s experiences and our common sense tell us.

TBG

BG,

My degree is in Economics. I read financial news for about (2) hours a day. I'm retired , I have the time. Trust me we have hit bottom. The Supreme Court is the only ones who can stop Obama or Romney if he gets out of hand. The Supreme Court dealt the anti gunners a serious blow with Heller vs D.C. and hopefully the death of Obamacare. Those judges who decided Heller were appointed by Republicans. With Romney, we have a chance to appoint (1) MAYBE (2) LIFETIME judges. That will go a long way to helping stem the tide of government over reach and hopefully reverse some onerous laws.

I am no fan of Romney. I am so far right wing, I make Rush Limbaugh and The John Birch Society look like liberals. You DON"T ever want to know my solutions to illegal immigration, city crime, welfare, Congressional/Senate/White House security leaks, MS-13/drug cartels and government workers. All my solutions are legal within the law but most politicians are spineless and can't make the tough decisions. Newt Gingrich and Santorum are moderates compared to me. That being said I am willing to let Romney be President while we continue to elect more patriots/TEA party people to Congress and the Senate.

There are only (4) things I love. My God, my country, my Constitution and my extended family. For those things I will use my vote AND my gun to defend until my death.

NAVYBLUE
 
Last edited:

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
BG,

My degree is in Economics. I read financial news for about (2) hours a day. I'm retired , I have the time. Trust me we have hit bottom. The Supreme Court is the only ones who can stop Obama or Romney if he gets out of hand. The Supreme Court dealt the anti gunners a serious blow with Heller vs D.C. and hopefully the death of Obamacare. Those judges who decided Heller were appointed by Republicans. With Romney, we have a chance to appoint (1) MAYBE (2) LIFETIME judges. That will go a long way to helping stem the tide of government over reach and hopefully reverse some onerous laws.

I am no fan of Romney. I am so far right wing, I make Rush Limbaugh and The John Birch Society look like liberals. You DON"T ever want to know my solutions to illegal immigration, city crime, welfare, Congressional/Senate/White House security leaks, MS-13/drug cartels and government workers. All my solutions are legal within the law but most politicians are spineless and can't make the tough decisions. Newt Gingrich and Santorum are moderates compared to me. That being said I am willing to let Romney be President while we continue to elect more patriots/TEA party people to Congress and the Senate.

There are only (4) things I love. My God, my country, my Constitution and my extended family. For those things I will use my vote AND my gun to defend until my death.

NAVYBLUE

Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need. After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

As far as Congress goes, they have already acquiesed power to the Executive Branch.

I too spend hours poring over the events of the day and researching history. Obama or Romney will still answer to the same people. In order to understand what is going on today, you have to go back and look at history. Look at why things are happening and who is behind them and why.

As I said before, I think Romney will be the next president. My instincts tell me that’s not a good thing, but I truly & sincerely hope to hell you're right. Supporting the lesser of two evils again is like the old definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

The answer to everything that has happened up to now and is happening today, or is planned for the future is about two things, power and control.

TBG
 
Last edited:

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need. After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

As far as Congress goes, they have already acquiesed power to the Executive Branch.

I too spend hours poring over the events of the day and researching history. Obama or Romney will still answer to the same people. In order to understand what is going on today, you have to go back and look at history. Look at why things are happening and who is behind them and why.

As I said before, I think Romney will be the next president. My instincts tell me that’s not a good thing, but I truly & sincerely hope to hell you're right. Supporting the lesser of two evils again is like the old definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

The answer to everything that has happened up to now and is happening today, or is planned for the future is about two things, power and control.

TBG

Your quote "After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

I assume you are talking about Justice Kennedy. Reagan's mistake was listening to John Sununu, former governor of Maine. Justice Kennedy WAS a conservative judge UNTIL he got appointed by President Ford at the urging of GOVERNOR Reagan, to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals probably one of the most liberal in the country. He got turned to the dark side and became more of a LIBERTARIAN on social issues. Reagan attempted to appoint Bork but the Democrat controlled House and Senate killed that as well as Justice Ginsburg so we got Kenenedy with 97-0 vote. The below site offers a retrospective on Kennedy. He does vote more with the conservatives thatn the liberals, that why they consider him the swing vote.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/18/justice-anthony-kennedy-libertarian

I don't consider it the the lesser of two evils. I consider it choosing between an anti American, anti capitalism Socialist and a socially moderate/fiscally conservative Republican. In the words of one of my heroes,




"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death"! --Patrick Henry March 23,1775

I don't get that with Barack Hussein Obama


NAVYBLUE
 
Top