I accept the excuse for "at that time." but here we are five years later, no mention no observance by the NRA of the ID,and zero push back. Meanwhile touting themselves as the "go to guys for our gun-rights" My point is there is some usefulness, but you have to watch the Org.'s to make sure they are speaking/working for you! to me I would rather things stayed the same than side step our constitutional process.
I saw on CNN This whole Gun grabbing stance has been "good" for the NRA to the tune of 250,000 new members. remember if the NRA is too successful, we won't feel like we need them. it benefits them to "appear busy"
Thanks Vegas Steve I will make sure you and Mac get copies of the pleadings etc.
I submit that if you haven't heard 'push back,' it is because you have NOT been in the discussions with the NRA in subsequent legislative sessions. Sorry, you are simply wrong in your allegations. Just because you have not heard anything, does NOT mean the NRA is either complicit, or ambivalent towards it. Seriously, it isn't the current available change. "Any Semi-auto" was available, and is now a reality. If you have the NVSCA in the mix as your personal bugaboo, get in touch with the NRA reps and ask them about it, as opposed to tossing out false allegations.
The subsequent session was spent mostly on Castle Doctrine. We got 'castle doctrine lite,' instead of what we wanted. But, if you truly feel that effort spent to remove the NVSCA from the ccw recognition statute will bear fruit, feel free to spearhead that effort. I don't think it will bear fruit. I do believe the NRA thinks that too. Sometimes, we don't get even what we are fighting for; much less what we think isn't capable of being won.
In the specific of the 2007 session and 237, the goal was to get recognition of other state permits, which we didn't have. In addition, we were working to get 'any revolver' and 'any semi-auto' for the NV CCW permits, instead of qualifying with each separate revolver and semi. We DID get recognition, and got pushed back to 'any revolver' and didn't get 'any semi-auto.' At that point, either we swallow the poison and get the recognition and 'any revolver,' or we pull the bill.
We got recognition and 'any revolver.' Hopefully we can eventually get rid of the NVSCA in that role of 'agree to recognition.' I fully agree that they should NOT have that role, and I am firm in my statement that the NRA also wants that. Now, the question remains, 'is time best spent getting them out of statute, or in some other place.' Neither we locally, nor the NRA, can spend time and money on all issues each year. I know locally, we would list our wants, and whittle them down to a list of 'think we can get progress on this year.' The NRA does that too.
Oh, the 'at that time,' isn't an excuse. It was the reality with Bernie in the Asm chair. If he didn't want it to the floor, it didn't get heard in committee. It WAS that totalitarian for him. Without the poison pill, which got stuck in there, likely directly from Frank Adams, I have no doubt that Bernie would have sat on it, by himself, or from pressure from Frank Adams. And then we would have had to wait 2 more years to introduce it again, if at all. Seriously.