Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 63

Thread: Will not renew membership

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bluefield, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    100

    Will not renew membership

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule




    ---Moderator Comment: please keep in mind --

    (12) NO BASHING OF OTHER GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Regardless of how convinced you are that another gun rights organization is not doing their job, this is not the place to air those concerns unless they are specifically related to an anti-open carry position taken by that organization. All other rants against other gun rights groups will be deleted or the thread locked.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    When two candidates are equally pro-gun (not really possible), one who votes based on gun-rights should vote for the candidate who is most likely to vote for pro-gun leadership. It doesn't matter if most of the members of the House are pro-gun, Pelosi would never allow any gun legislation of any significance even come up.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    I never renewed mine for a long time now and have given money to other groups, I have gone over why i refute them as a group i could ever support them. It has gotten heated so I wont ruin a good thread with the NRA is this or that but I have lost all respect for them and stunts they pull in the name of gun rights.
    Last edited by zack991; 10-06-2010 at 08:37 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member DontTreadOnMeVa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    132
    Yea, I would rather support groups like the VCDL and the GOA.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    The NRA Debacle

    I have to admit, this has been a struggle for me. I am far from a shill for the NRA, and I even wrote them a very blunt letter a few weeks ago all but promising that my renewal was on hold until they decided on their much publicized possibility of a Reid endorsement.

    After some thought, I think our "problem" is that we have had the luxury in the past of having candidates for whom the NRA endorsement tended to correlate very highly with our other values of interest. It used to be that the NRA endorsement would also indicate that the candidates' other social, economic and moral values tended to match our own.

    In more recent times, and in what one must view as a very good development, holders of pro-gun views have expanded to include candidates that may not necessarily match our other values so closely!

    The NRA has always claimed to be a one-issue organization. And yes, they also tend to look out for themselves (DISCLOSE Act), but what competent organization doesn't? If the NRA were to suddenly start to advocate for other social or economic issues, they would undoubtedly lose support from some members, and their core message would be diluted.

    Thank goodness, the Senate had to vote on the recent SCOTUS appointments. That gave the NRA a valid excuse to not endorse Reid and the other lock-step Democrat Senators. With the House of Representatives, even though the same thing happens with the Leadership, the party-line votes are not as well publicized, so it's harder to give a concrete reason to withhold endorsement, especially in violation of a well-known incumbent-support criteria that has been in place for years.

    Like it or not, pro-gun Democrats have saved the country from the full anti-gun wrath of President Obama and his Justice Department. If the NRA were to throw those Democrats under the bus, there would be no benefit for future Democrats to even consider a pro-gun position. And that would be a disaster.

    The learning curve is on us, to evaluate candidates beyond the NRA endorsement, or lack thereof. Despite our collective passion, I suspect very few of us are truly one-issue voters. We've always had to pick candidates based on their total package. We're discovering that the NRA endorsement may not be the broad indicator that it once was.

    I think it's so important, I'll say it again: It is a huge testament to the advance of the pro-gun agenda that we have NRA-endorsed candidates with such diverse views on other issues. As hard as it is to digest, this is the best thing that could happen.

    JMHO.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    519

    I support many second amendment groups

    I support VCDL, GOA, Second Amendment Foundation and others. None of them have 4 million members, however. Indeed, I doubt all of them combined have 4 million members. We're all entitled to an opinion and we all make up our own minds as to which organizations we support. I've been a member of the NRA and there have been times when I've not renewed. One thing is certain, however. While members may or may not have influence over the organization, non-members have zero influence.

  7. #7
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    The NRA Debacle, Part II

    In an election where the Democratic candidates are running as hard and fast as they can away from the current administration, my premise that the NRA-endorsements have typically indicated the more conservative candidate is well supported by the great pride these Democrats are taking in trumpeting these decisions. Harry Reid is all but shouting that the NRA even considered endorsing him.

    The job we (and perhaps the NRA) have to do is to make a concerted effort to educate the voters that the NRA is indeed a one-issue organization, and that candidates have a plate full of positions, which must be thoroughly evaluated before casting that vote.

    In fact, it would be a great PR campaign for the NRA to make a big deal out of this... the very fact that their one issue is ever increasingly crossing social and economic boundaries is a testament to the success of their work.

    TFred

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Rule number (27)

    No Bashing people who wear brown flip flops.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Bashing = telling the truth about any Elite/Statist who has granted only-one status to someone on this forum.

    Hmm, I wear brown flip-flops, maybe that's the problem....

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503
    I will not be renewing my NRA membership this year, this is because their preference towards a "permitting" system. Our oppurtunity is coming in Wisconsin and we want to solely remove the concealed carry ban, not implement a new government beaurocrocy to run our rights. I'll probobly spend the money I would have spent with the NRA with Wisconsincarry inc. and a different national gun rights group like GOA.

  11. #11
    Regular Member HeroHog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Shreveport, LA
    Posts
    653
    Do what my wife and I have done for the last 3 years, join for free as Associate Members. It supports them as they support us and will let you join those organizations that Insist you be an NRA member 1st!
    Speedy: LOCAL League Sec/Treasurer, Information Officer
    AKA: Hero Hog, Dr. Speed, "The Brass Mangler" and "That fat, old, balding, Grey-bearded gimpy guy"

    I don't have NEAR enough ammo on hand. `nuff said.

    NRA Life Member, LSA, USN-DAV

    "Stay safe..." - Paul "Skidmark" Henick, RIP

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    I'll be staying an NRA member since they have done well in the supreme court. I will not be getting the life membership I thought about a few years ago though. I'm looking at GOA for a possible life membership.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I'll be staying an NRA member since they have done well in the supreme court.

    If you're referring to Heller and McDonald, those were both SAF cases. NRA refused to join in the Heller case and was given 10 minutes of SAF time in McDonald because they'd filed a similar case.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
    If you're referring to Heller and McDonald, those were both SAF cases. NRA refused to join in the Heller case and was given 10 minutes of SAF time in McDonald because they'd filed a similar case.
    I do now. They seem like a decent organization.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I do now. They seem like a decent organization.
    Hellar almost lost the case because of the NRA. They have done great things for gun owners but of recent are playing games with our rights.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Viera, Florida, USA
    Posts
    73
    The NRA is the most powerful/feared lobby in Washington. You might not think they're always doing the right thing, but you can be damn sure they know more about what they're doing than you do.

    I've been a Life Member since 1976 and I'm an Endowment Member now. I send the ILA money every few months.

  17. #17
    Regular Member dukenukum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    Hellar almost lost the case because of the NRA. They have done great things for gun owners but of recent are playing games with our rights.
    Didn't heart about this please tell more and cite proof.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    Hellar almost lost the case because of the NRA. They have done great things for gun owners but of recent are playing games with our rights.

    Cite Please! I'm pretty familiar with Heller and McDonald, but I never heard about this. If it's true I'd like to know more.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  19. #19
    Regular Member Funtimes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
    Posts
    48
    Alan was not happy with the NRA's interuption in Heller. They took 10 minutes of his oral argument time to argue something he felt was already understood and didn't warrant discussion during his alotted time.

    The plaintiffs felt that the NRA was encroaching on their case. If you fought to bring a case to the Supreme Court, would you want a lobbyist -- litigating what your case?

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Funtimes View Post
    Alan was not happy with the NRA's interuption in Heller. They took 10 minutes of his oral argument time to argue something he felt was already understood and didn't warrant discussion during his allotted time.

    The plaintiffs felt that the NRA was encroaching on their case. If you fought to bring a case to the Supreme Court, would you want a lobbyist -- litigating what your case?
    This actually happened in McDonald. The NRA didn't even want to TOUCH Heller and refused to support the case. That's how the SAF became involved. SAF was the leading NATIONAL org. on both cases.
    Last edited by Bookman; 10-26-2010 at 06:44 AM.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
    This actually happened in McDonald. The NRA didn't even want to TOUCH Heller and refused to support the case. That's how the SAF became involved. SAF was the leading NATIONAL org. on both cases.
    The Cato Institute brought Heller, the Second Amendment Foundation had nothing to do with it.

    The Second Amendment Foundation used the same attorney, Alan Gura, to argue McDonald.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    The Cato Institute brought Heller, the Second Amendment Foundation had nothing to do with it.

    The Second Amendment Foundation used the same attorney, Alan Gura, to argue McDonald.
    Cite?

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Cite?
    You can look at the wikipedia pages for the Heller and McDonald cases, or google to your heart's content. Look at the original federal court filings for each case read up on who vetted plaintiffs and funded the cases.

    I could write a book on this and not be done citing how it all happened. Don't just beg for people to "cite". I could cite reputable looking sources that will tell you that little green men made the pyramids and populated the earth.

    If you are sufficiently intrigued on a topic of interest, go forth an study the topic. It sure is a lot more easy now that we have the internet than it was even 15 years ago. I will cite obscure details and where statistics are derived from but this is well beyond.

    Cite that Patton had a feud with General Montgomery... It's not a sentence in a book, it is a history lesson betrayed the attention that it is due if one were to only make mention that it happened and move on.

    How the Heller and McDonald cases came to be is too important to simply cite in a footnote.

  24. #24
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    More than you'd ever want to know can be found starting here:

    http://www.scotuswiki.com

    TFred

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    Hellar almost lost the case because of the NRA. They have done great things for gun owners but of recent are playing games with our rights.
    Quote Originally Posted by dukenukum View Post
    Didn't heart about this please tell more and cite proof.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
    Cite Please! I'm pretty familiar with Heller and McDonald, but I never heard about this. If it's true I'd like to know more.
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    The Cato Institute brought Heller, the Second Amendment Foundation had nothing to do with it.

    The Second Amendment Foundation used the same attorney, Alan Gura, to argue McDonald.
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Cite?
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    You can look at the wikipedia pages for the Heller and McDonald cases, or google to your heart's content. Look at the original federal court filings for each case read up on who vetted plaintiffs and funded the cases.

    I could write a book on this and not be done citing how it all happened. Don't just beg for people to "cite". I could cite reputable looking sources that will tell you that little green men made the pyramids and populated the earth.

    If you are sufficiently intrigued on a topic of interest, go forth an study the topic. It sure is a lot more easy now that we have the internet than it was even 15 years ago. I will cite obscure details and where statistics are derived from but this is well beyond.

    Cite that Patton had a feud with General Montgomery... It's not a sentence in a book, it is a history lesson betrayed the attention that it is due if one were to only make mention that it happened and move on.

    How the Heller and McDonald cases came to be is too important to simply cite in a footnote.
    When one makes a very specific assertion, one should post a very specific citation when challenged.

    Asking the challenger to do his own research or citing a general reference such as a wiki adds zero credibility to the assertions. Indeed, it subtracts credibility.

    I challenge the two posters who made the very specific assertions to post very specific citations to back up those assertions.

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
  •