Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: This is not the NRA I want!

  1. #1
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalk...ckson5_44k.mov



    Where is the all or nothing Support of the 2nd? I realize this is just one man but he is a Board Member!


    Since I posted this I thought it fair that I now state that I was duped into believing that this Ranger was less than honest with his position on guns and was therefore not a solid gun supporter and should not serve on the Board of Directors of the NRA, regardless of my personal opinion of the Organizations positions that I differ on this man is not who the interview portrayed him to be, and I will say that I was wrong to post this interview with out fully getting the entire story, and I owe him an apology, so here on this Forum I apologize for jumping to the wrong conclusions and after hearing his comments on the interview setting the record straight, I now feel he is fully justified and Qualified to serve on the Board of Directors of the NRA, and he does not hold any negative views about weapons, ownership, use or the capacities thereof.

  2. #2
    Regular Member GreatWhiteLlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bothell, Washington, USA
    Posts
    287

    Post imported post

    With friends like that...
    "...our media are palace eunuchs gazing avidly at the harem of power and stroking their impotent pens in time to the rape of our liberties."
    -Sarah Hoyt

    "America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
    -Claire Wolfe

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
    Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
    1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
    2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings


    How long did it take him to get from "I support the 2a" to "..should only be in the hands of military and police.." ?!?!?!?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Well, don't you know? The 2nd amendment refers to the Right to Hunt. That's all. Why would anyone ever need a gun for anything but hunting? I mean, sure, we could try to let people own guns that don't have wooden stocks and barrels longer than 30 inches, but that might offend people. We need to just compromise so we can keep the Constitutional Right to Hunt.

    :NRA mode off:

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    Right to hunt, huh? Well, in that case, each of us only needs one bullet per gun.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran kimbercarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    hampton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    This is why I don't give them any money . I let them no on all the contribution forms I return to them that stuff like this is why they aren't getting my money and may not renew my membership.

    Not only do we have to fight the antigunners but we now have to fight the supposed pro gunners.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    Hrm. Maybe the major anti-gun organizations are becoming weaker simply because the major pro-gun orgs are now anti-gun enough. Sort of like the berlin wall: it came down because both sides grew similar enough...

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Then again... let me carry five or six .30-30 single-round pistols, and two or three single-barrel break-action sawed-off shotguns, and I don't think I'd mind too much a one-round-per-gun limit... Maybe OCing those would ease the masses...

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    KC,MO, ,
    Posts
    168

    Post imported post

    I find it odd that onthe website for his book has this line at the end.

    Lives the philosophy: "Say what you mean, mean what you say, and tell it like it is."

    http://www.oneranger.org/about.htm

    I think he was indead saying exactly what he meant.

    This guy needs to go............. This world needs all kinds of gun owners.The front lines in the fight to keep and expand on what guns we can have are no place for foolish comments such as his. The hunters have thier rightful place in the Gun debate but nowhere in the second ammendment is hunting mentioned. As soon as we insert it into the debate we allow all kinds of other intrusions as is common place by the anti's.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    I am a stout NRA member & supporter, but that guy needs to go. Once this leaks out to the rest of the NRA members he will surely not be re-elected to the board.

    What a bunch of BALONY he spewed out of his mouth. "Assault weapons" should only be in the hands of law enforcement? Law enforcement don't even use "Assault weapons" - they use select fire assault RIFLES like M-16's. Only need 5 rounds? If he used to be a law officer he is more stupid than a brick since the average amount of bullets fired in a gun fight by a police officer is around 15 if I recall correctly. Certainly more than 5. The whole thought that the 2nd amendment only protects hunting is in itself an insult to the 2nd amendment.

    He should go, and I plan to write the NRA to let them know. There is bound to be a bad apple in every bunch, we just need to weed out the bad apples when we find them. I would venture to guess that when he ran for election to the board he did not mention anything other than that he "supports the 2nd amendment" and that he is from Texas. If he had said any of the other garbage he would not have been elected.

    That said, the NRA is a great organization overall. Overall it is thanks to the NRA that we now have the "shall issue" CCW laws in the majority of our States. For that reason alone I'll be an NRA member for the rest of my life unless they were to start supporting the Brady bunch or the "not nearly a Million Moms" type groups.



  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    I did some further research & found the interview with joaquin jackson was from June 2005 more than 2 years ago, so it is possible he is not even an NRA board member any longer. I've sent an email to the NRA to request a current list of NRA board members or at least confirmation on whether or not he is one. Below is a link to the rest of the video clips about him:

    http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalk...ackson/bio.asp

  12. #12
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    swift wrote:
    I did some further research & found the interview with joaquin jackson was from June 2005 more than 2 years ago, so it is possible he is not even an NRA board member any longer. I've sent an email to the NRA to request a current list of NRA board members or at least confirmation on whether or not he is one. Below is a link to the rest of the video clips about him:

    http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalk...ackson/bio.asp
    Your NRA Magazine has a list of the Board Members in it, with mailing addresses.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    218

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    Then again... let me carry five or six .30-30 single-round pistols, and two or three single-barrel break-action sawed-off shotguns, and I don't think I'd mind too much a one-round-per-gun limit... Maybe OCing those would ease the masses...
    Maybe it was one guy with six guns...

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    Thanks Kelly.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    I had sent an E-mail to an NRA board member asking about this & apparently I was not the first. The NRA has already posted the below:

    http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=9899

    Recently, concerns have been raised in response to statements made by NRA Board Member Joaquin Jackson to Texas Monthly in 2005. We have received questions from NRA members who are seeking clarity as to NRA’s positions on the subject matter discussed in Mr. Jackson’s interview. To be clear, NRA supports the right of all law-abiding citizens to Keep and Bear Arms for all lawful purposes. We will continue, as we have in the past, to vigorously oppose any efforts to limit gun ownership by law-abiding citizens as an unconstitutional infringement on our Second Amendment freedoms. These efforts include opposition to any attempts to ban firearms, including firearms incorrectly referred to as "assault weapons", and any attempts to place arbitrary limits on magazine capacity. For more information on NRA's legislative efforts to protect and defend the Second Amendment, please visit www.NRAILA.org and www.Clintongunban.com.

    STATEMENT OF JOAQUIN JACKSON
    Recently, some misunderstandings have arisen about a news interview in which I participated a few years ago. After recently watching a tape of that interview, I understand the sincere concerns of many people, including dear friends of mine. And I am pleased and eager to clear up any confusion about my long held belief in the sanctity of the Second Amendment. In the interview, when asked about my views of “assault weapons,” I was talking about true assault weapons – fully automatic firearms. I was not speaking, in any way, about semiautomatic rifles. While the media may not understand this critical distinction, I take it very seriously. But, as a result, I understand how some people may mistakenly take my comments to mean that I support a ban on civilian ownership of semiautomatic firearms. Nothing could be further from the truth. And, unfortunately, the interview was cut short before I could fully explain my thoughts and beliefs. In fact, I am a proud owner of such rifles, as are millions of law-abiding Americans. And many Americans also enjoy owning fully automatic firearms, after being cleared by a background check and meeting the rigorous regulations to own such firearms. And these millions of lawful gun owners have every right – and a Second Amendment right – to own them. As a hunter, I take great pride in my marksmanship. Every hunter should practice to be skilled to take prey with a single shot, if possible. That represents ethical, humane, skilled hunting. In the interview several years ago, I spoke about this aspect of hunting and my belief that no hunter should take the field and rely upon high capacity magazines to take their prey. But that comment should never be mistaken as support for the outright banning of any ammunition magazines. In fact, such bans have been pursued over the years by state legislatures and the United States Congress and these magazine bans have always proven to be abject failures. Let me be very clear. As a retired Texas Ranger, during 36 years of law enforcement service, I was sworn to uphold the United States Constitution. As a longtime hunter and shooter, an NRA Board Member, and as an American – I believe the Second Amendment is a sacred right of all law-abiding Americans and, as I stated in the interview in question, I believe it is the Second Amendment that ensures all of our other rights handed down by our Founding Fathers. I have actively opposed gun bans and ammunition and magazine bans in the past, and I will continue to actively oppose such anti-gun schemes in the future. I appreciate my friends who have brought this misunderstanding to light, for it has provided me an opportunity to alleviate any doubts about my strong support for the NRA and our Second Amendment freedom. ####

    Read About It: Posted: 8/15/2007 3:22:01 PM

    Note: Many news sites archive stories after a short period of time. If the link above is expired please contact the site for information about accessing this story.

    MORE Copyright 2007, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.

  16. #16
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Part of the furor emanates from terminology: assault rifle....assault weapon....automatic....semi-automatic...fully automatic...AK...AR... rapid fire...magazines...high capacity magazines...clips...gun control...gun grabbing...gun regulation...infringement...

    Even the gun guys can't keep it all straight, much less the antis and media.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Well, I guess that says something for taking statements out of context... the gentleman in the interview seems to be more dedicated to 2A rights than the rest of the NRA.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    I would be willing to bet there are plenty ofhunters who would sell out our 2A rights for some sort of right to hunt guarantee. Plenty, perhaps even the majority of hunters do not care one whit about owning firearms as a right as long as it has minimal affect on their sport. Clay shooters are much the same way, although the percent apathy might be less there.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    Re-read the NRA (negotiate rights away) statement carefully.

    "NRA supports the right of all law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms for all lawful purposes."

    The key words here are "law-abiding" and "lawful." Who gets to determine the definition of these words? The NRA ? LOL.........you're screwed.
    Actually my interpretation of their intent when they say "lawful purposes" is anything that is not a criminal offense (ie Felony) - ie not pointing the gun at someone & saying "give me all your money"

    "Law-abiding citizens" means any non-felon. It's just their way of saying that they support gun rights for law-abiding citizens but don't want Felons to have guns which is contrary to what the Brady Bunch, the "Not Nearly a Million Moms", and the "any dumb way to prevent violence policy center" regularly say about the "evil gun lobby"

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    I'm pretty much tuned into what Mark is saying. That's why a long time ago I stopped calling myself a "law-abiding citizen" (a LACky) and started calling myself a "peacable citizen" (a PeCker?).

    Depending on what the law is (can you say you ALWAYS drive the speed limit?), I may or may not be "law-abiding", but I always strive to be peacable.

    The latter is moral, the former is just doing what you're told.

  21. #21
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    I'm pretty much tuned into what Mark is saying. That's why a long time ago I stopped calling myself a "law-abiding citizen" (a LACky) and started calling myself a "peacable citizen" (a PeCker?).

    Depending on what the law is (can you say you ALWAYS drive the speed limit?), I may or may not be "law-abiding", but I always strive to be peacable.

    The latter is moral, the former is just doing what you're told.
    Depends on the definition. If you want to define LAC as "obeys all laws at all times," then few people would be LACs. But that's a strained definition. It's silly, actually. It doesn't work.

    The term LAC is a good one because it communicates to most people what is being referred to--and what is not.And it communicates it in compact form.

    "Peaceable citizen" is vague, bland and somewhat artificial. Not too many people are 100% peacable either...so the same silly criticism of LAC would apply to PeCker.

    I suppose it is cute, though, when referring to residents of Green Bay, WI.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    I'm pretty much tuned into what Mark is saying. That's why a long time ago I stopped calling myself a "law-abiding citizen" (a LACky) and started calling myself a "peacable citizen" (a PeCker?).

    Depending on what the law is (can you say you ALWAYS drive the speed limit?), I may or may not be "law-abiding", but I always strive to be peacable.

    The latter is moral, the former is just doing what you're told.
    I hadn't really thought about that... I think I'll start referring to myself as a "peaceable citizen".

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    dumries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    321

    Post imported post

    Aside from Mr. Jacksons comments ( who is up for reelection next year, and I doubt he will be voted in ), most of the complaints with the NRA pertain to "the all or nothing attitude" and begging for money. All or nothing gets you a lot more ofNOTHING than it does ALL. Are you people under the impression that the NRA can walk into Congress,Make demands or threaten to walk out !I would think most of us here have been around long enough to know what kinda BS it takes to get something through Congress.

    Do you have CC in your state? Who helped you with that? Do you have to worry about getting sued by the family of some lowlife that you shot after he broke into your house and threatened your wife and daughter? NO, who helped you with that? Did the Governor of your state sign a bill saying that you would never be disarmed after a state of emergency is declared due to some type of disaster? Yes,Who helped you with that. Can you take your new gun home after a 20 minute background check or do you have to wait 5 to 7 days? Who helped you with that? All or nothing would still have you waiting a week! The list goes on and on and on, but I think I made my point.

    As far as asking for money is concerned, you pay annual membership dues of $35, for that you receive a monthly publication, insurance to help you or your familyout if you get killed or injuredwhen your hunting or at a shooting event,$1,000 in coverage to help replace or repair a lost, damaged or stolen firearm, oh,, and don't forget the hat. Thats a pretty good box of toys for $35.So if you don't think your going to get some letters asking for $50 to help pay for that stuffI listed in the previous paragraph, your pretty damn naive! If you don't want them to send you that stuff, pick up the phone, call them and tell them to stop sending it to you. Or you could just piss and moan and continue to enjoy your freedoms and rights that the NRA helps protect.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    dumries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    321

    Post imported post

    What have you done?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but personally I believe the "Negotiate Rights Away" acronym is not even close to a valid acronym for NRA. They helped convert many states from "may issue" or "probably won't issue" CCW states into "shall issue" states. They have also helped many states get Castle Doctrine to allow me to defend myself outside my home, and to protect us from family members of criminals. They have fought for the laws that make it a criminal offense to take away guns illegally like what was done after Katrina. That is only a partial list of proactive things they've done to GAIN ground on the 2nd Amendment just in the last 10 years. The list of gun control laws that the NRA has fought & buried in individual states & DC is practically endless.

    For me my small contribution of NRA dues is less than a couple of boxes of Ammo that I go through in a single hour at the range, and money well spent. I also support other gun rights organizations like the SAF as I believe the more groups there are fighting for our rights the better, but the NRA is one group I plan to always support as it is the 100 pound gorilla that most polititians recognize represents millions of voting Americans. For me NRA stands for National Rifle Association, and I'm proud to be a member.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •