Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 61

Thread: Damn, the NRA sure is SQUARE sometimes…..

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Casper, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    185

    Post imported post

    Damn, the NRA sure is SQUARE sometimes…..
    http://www.libertarianpunk.com/2010/...ure-is-square/

    Article about how the NRA doesn't mention open carry in their article about Brady Campaign trying to ban Open Carry in Starbucks.

    MWD
    ===
    (I tried to post this in "Open carry in the news", guess I haven't been here long enough....is almost a year long enough? Well, to be fair, the article is not about open carry in the news. It's about open carry NOT in the news when it should be in the news!)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    The NRA cannot allow the passage/expansion/liberalization of open carry of weapons by legally armed citizens because the organization and many of its subscribers depend on the income from their sale of exceptions to infringements on the RKABA.

    NRA training counselors teach that class fees are a pedagogical tool to inculcate deeper the lessons of the NRA.

    The NRA is an Emperor with no clothes, its subscribing sycophants are chamberlains carrying its chamberpots and the BCPGV its best commensal.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Casper, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    185

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    The NRA cannot allow the passage/expansion/liberalization of open carry of weapons by legally armed citizens because the organization and many of its subscribers depend on the income from their sale of exceptions to infringements on the RKABA.
    You nailed it, Doug. Very succinct.

    MWD

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,627

    Post imported post

    It appears that the NRA is afraid of its own shadow.

    Were they to support OC and it would gain more acceptance faster - I think their membership roll would swell accordingly.

    Everybody needs knowledge of the respective laws in their state and all need training; many will still want to carry concealed. Therefore an even greater opportunity for instructors than now exists.

    The NRA is missing the boat, missing a great opportunity.

    I might even renew my expired membership if they embraced OC.........well that and a few other things. :quirky

    Yata hey


    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  5. #5
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    I'm an NRA member. Honestly I believe they support Concealed Carry via permits the "right to carry" because many of the officials and the organization itself generates a LOT of income from certification and training courses. Why would you put your cash cow out to pasture? It could also be said theh are representing the majority of their members by following ccw-only.

    However, if they had a large insurgence of pro-OC members, it is quite possible that could change.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    demnogis wrote:
    However, if they had a large insurgence of pro-OC members, it is quite possible that could change.
    Annual membership for five years is required for the privilege of voting or life membership.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , Montana, USA
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post


    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Basic wrote:

    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right? It is a lawsuit to overturn a handgun ban.


    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Lemme fix that for you.

    wrightme wrote:
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right?
    You do realize they horned in on McDonald v. Chicago, right?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Do you further understand that Morton Grove, IL repealed their handgun ban to settle the NRA v Morton Grove lawsuit?

    Those are but two examples of the NRA fighting for specific handgun Rights. There are more.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    Lemme fix that for you.

    wrightme wrote:
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right?
    You do realize they horned in on McDonald v. Chicago, right?
    No, I do not "realize" it. You must understand that they filed separately, right?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , Montana, USA
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:

    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right? It is a lawsuit to overturn a handgun ban.




    I know that the Second Amendment Foundation is involved with the Chicago lawsuit as well as the District of Columbia, California and many more. How many legal actions are the NRA involved with to defend the rights of American citizens? At least the SAF isn’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and jump in the ring.


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Basic wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:

    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right? It is a lawsuit to overturn a handgun ban.




    I know that the Second Amendment Foundation is involved with the Chicago lawsuit as well as the District of Columbia, California and many more. How many legal actions are the NRA involved with to defend the rights of American citizens? At least the SAF isn’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and jump in the ring.
    The NRA filed lawsuits as follows specifically to attempt to get handgun bans lifted:

    NRA v Chicago & Oak Park

    NRA v. Evanston

    and NRA v. SFHA
    Morton Grove settled, repealing their long-standing handgun ban. SFHA settled, allowing the residents of the housing project to own firearms. NRA V Chicago was merged with McDonald v. Chicago by the SCOTUS to hear.

    Those are just the ones that I am currently aware of. Others here may not like the NRA, but it would be at least fair to present it honestly.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , Montana, USA
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:

    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right? It is a lawsuit to overturn a handgun ban.




    I know that the Second Amendment Foundation is involved with the Chicago lawsuit as well as the District of Columbia, California and many more. How many legal actions are the NRA involved with to defend the rights of American citizens? At least the SAF isn’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and jump in the ring.
    The NRA filed lawsuits as follows specifically to attempt to get handgun bans lifted:

    NRA v Chicago & Oak Park

    NRA v. Evanston

    and NRA v. SFHA
    Morton Grove settled, repealing their long-standing handgun ban. SFHA settled, allowing the residents of the housing project to own firearms. NRA V Chicago was merged with McDonald v. Chicago by the SCOTUS to hear.

    Those are just the ones that I am currently aware of. Others here may not like the NRA, but it would be at least fair to present it honestly.
    That still doesn't win me over to support the NRA. As stated above, they lost any chance of me ever giving them supportwhen they caved to the Brady bunch to start with. I have no respect for them what so every. you have the right to support them if you choose to do so, I choose not to.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Basic wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:
    wrightme wrote:
    Basic wrote:

    People should keep in mind that the NRA stands for National RIFLE Association. They are under no obligation to lobby or fight for the rights of HANDGUN owners. I never thought much of the NRA before Brady and after they showed their hand during Brady 1, I certainly do not think much of them now. Until the members of the NRA start slinging their rifles over their shoulders and walking down main street with them in a manner of open display, they will never support the efforts of the American people to open carry anything. All the NRA cares about is protecting there right to hunt with a single shot bolt action rifle or shotgun.

    For a better recommendation of a group to support financially that is better suited to defend the rights of all firearms owners, I feel the Second Amendment Foundation would be a better choice. http://www.saf.org/
    You do realize they are on McDonald v. Chicago, right? It is a lawsuit to overturn a handgun ban.




    I know that the Second Amendment Foundation is involved with the Chicago lawsuit as well as the District of Columbia, California and many more. How many legal actions are the NRA involved with to defend the rights of American citizens? At least the SAF isn’t afraid to roll up their sleeves and jump in the ring.
    The NRA filed lawsuits as follows specifically to attempt to get handgun bans lifted:

    NRA v Chicago & Oak Park

    NRA v. Evanston

    and NRA v. SFHA
    Morton Grove settled, repealing their long-standing handgun ban. SFHA settled, allowing the residents of the housing project to own firearms. NRA V Chicago was merged with McDonald v. Chicago by the SCOTUS to hear.

    Those are just the ones that I am currently aware of. Others here may not like the NRA, but it would be at least fair to present it honestly.
    That still doesn't win me over to support the NRA. As stated above, they lost any chance of me ever giving them supportwhen they caved to the Brady bunch to start with. I have no respect for them what so every. you have the right to support them if you choose to do so, I choose not to.
    And that is your choice. My main point is that others should at least be honest about what the NRA does support. In this case, they are supporting handgun owners on multiple fronts.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    The NRA cannot allow the passage/expansion/liberalization of open carry of weapons by legally armed citizens because the organization and many of its subscribers depend on the income from their sale of exceptions to infringements on the RKABA.

    NRA training counselors teach that class fees are a pedagogical tool to inculcate deeper the lessons of the NRA.

    The NRA is an Emperor with no clothes, its subscribing sycophants are chamberlains carrying its chamberpots and the BCPGV its best commensal.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    The NRA cannot allow the passage/expansion/liberalization of open carry of weapons by legally armed citizens because the organization and many of its subscribers depend on the income from their sale of exceptions to infringements on the RKABA.

    NRA training counselors teach that class fees are a pedagogical tool to inculcate deeper the lessons of the NRA.

    The NRA is an Emperor with no clothes, its subscribing sycophants are chamberlains carrying its chamberpots and the BCPGV its best commensal.
    I am curious as to what mental gymnastics are required for you to rationalize your PoV when the NRA publicly denounces Open Carry bans?

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/40078.html

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5560



    Thursday, March 11, 2010

    On Tuesday, March 9, during a City Council work session, City attorney Kyle Smith and Police Chief Ron Miller proposed banning the open carrying of firearms in Topeka. In 2007, the city council repealed its ban on the open carry of firearms, so it’s unclear why these officials have now proposed reinstituting such an ordinance. Since then, there have been no instances of unlawfulness or violence regarding open carry. The claims and "what ifs" stated by the opponents are unfounded and not supported by any research or facts. They are simply using scare tactics to push more stringent gun restrictions on the citizens of Topeka. Please contact your City Council member and urge him or her not to consider this anti-gun proposal.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  18. #18
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    885

    Post imported post

    Sure would be nice if some of you folks put down your pitchforks and pointed sticks for a minute.

    Up front... no, the NRA is not really the best friend gunowners ever had. Their political arm stinks in many ways...

    That said, I am a Certified NRA firearms instructor for one, and one reason only. They have the best nationwide, affordable and recognized program available to teach NEW gun owners how to safely use their property and, potentially, use them for self defense. Not perfect, by any means, but that's what is available. Many people would get NO training at all otherwise.

    As an NRA instructor, my sole purpose is to find and help train those who would probably otherwise be unsafe gun owners. It is not a "business" and I take in nothing beyond expenses. Oh, and I've spent more than $2,000. in the last three years on my own training and equipment, with more going out for class materials and support supplies.

    The basic pistol class is all that is required to apply for a CC "permit" here in Wyoming, and information is available in class to assist them if this is what they want, but it is certainly not pushed or even encouraged. If the "permit" went away tomorrow, I would not have any trouble filling my classes afterwards.

    Let's not tar everyone with the same brush, folks. Yes, there are some who live off the "permit" and would be very unhappy to see it go away. But not all NRA instructors fit that particular straight jacket. Thanks
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    That may be so Mama, but there's a difference between instructors that apply for the certification, and the NRA corporate board.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    I am curious as to what mental gymnastics are required for you to rationalize your PoV when the NRA publicly denounces Open Carry bans?
    I denounce Bightme, the NRA, and unions as chamberlains to the Emperor, the Obamination. Impressive, isn't it?

  21. #21
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    885

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    That may be so Mama, but there's a difference between instructors that apply for the certification, and the NRA corporate board.
    Which "certification?" Instructor's cert. or the CC "permit?"

    I think I was clear that I'm not happy with the NRA political arm. And if someone can name an alternative nationwide, affordable, all volunteer training program, recognized almost everywhere... I'm all for it.
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    MamaLiberty wrote:
    Which "certification?" Instructor's cert. or the CC "permit?"

    I think I was clear that I'm not happy with the NRA political arm. And if someone can name an alternative nationwide, affordable, all volunteer training program, recognized almost everywhere... I'm all for it.
    To answer your question.....

    MamaLiberty wrote:
    That said, I am a Certified NRA firearms instructor.....
    That part.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  23. #23
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    885

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    MamaLiberty wrote:
    That said, I am a Certified NRA firearms instructor.....
    That part.
    Ok, so do you have a particular problem with the instructor's certification? I'm still confused. There is obviously a difference... what's the point?
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    MamaLiberty wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    MamaLiberty wrote:
    That said, I am a Certified NRA firearms instructor.
    That part.
    Ok, so do you have a particular problem with the instructor's certification? I'm still confused. There is obviously a difference... what's the point?
    Did your training counselor charge you a fee? Were you taught that a student's fees are essential pedagogy? Do you teach students as an essential certification on their way to exercise the RKABA?

  25. #25
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    885

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    Did your training counselor charge you a fee?
    [/quote]

    Of course. He has expenses too. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

    Were you taught that a student's fees are essential pedagogy?
    I have no idea what you mean by this. Student fees cover expenses, range fees, teaching materials, etc.

    Do you teach students as an essential certification on their way to exercise the RKABA?
    Absolutely not. I don't know any NRA instructor who does, and it is certainly not a part of the NRA materials. I teach students how to handle their guns safely, understand the legal and moral implications of self defense, and help them develop tactical skills to become effective self defenders. I also advise them to continue their training in more advanced schools if they wish to increase those skills.

    If they choose to carry without that information and practice, that's their problem.
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •