Should NRA spend more money on magazine and TV?


April 10, 2006, 12:29 PM
I think they should. Their current magazine is a glance and toss. Reviews on ATV's and really boring stuff. They could draw more ads than just the "aw, hell we gotta put an ad in that rag" from the manufacturers. I also think it would draw more MEMBERS if the mag was better. Even if it went "sensational" like some of the other gun rags.
As for the TV show.....well..... I spose it's ....okaaaayyyyy
But sure not a commanding view. Looks like every segment was filmed in one take with a hesitant commentator.

My opinion is that the whole organization would end up with MORE money for RKBA stuff if it had a good cash flow from decent media releases.


If you enjoyed reading about "Should NRA spend more money on magazine and TV?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
April 10, 2006, 12:39 PM
They could try and do a TV show, but the only station that would probably run it is the OLN network or other similiar stations. Not sure how many new members it would get in that most of the watchers are probably already members.

As to their magazine, I do enjoy some of their articles. For the most part though, you are right in that it could use a little more.

The problem is the NRA spends a good portion of money in mailings to get the membership it has to contribute more. About a month or so ago, I did send in a donation. The amount I gave made me eligible for a free gift, which I have yet to get. The problem now is that since I've given, they've double the amount of mailings I get. Or so it seems.

Maybe spend a little less on mailings and a little more on the magazine.

April 10, 2006, 12:52 PM
They seem bent on "milking" rather than establishing a POWERHOUSE organization which requires making ....joining.... a priority rather than relying on CURRENT members.
The enemy is media-wise. We should be too.


April 10, 2006, 12:52 PM
I would kind of hope for more print advertising around cities, like billboards and full-page newspaper ads that highlight some of the better points of civilian firearm ownership (always stressing responsible handling and safety training for obvious reasons both politically and because I don't want to get shot in the face by an idiot).

I remember a few years ago on Sunset Blvd (not the musical) the antis had a giant billboard that said 800,000 people were killed by handgun violence in America since John Lennon was killed over his broken bloody glasses. There was no counter response...

Camp David
April 10, 2006, 01:02 PM
Should NRA spend more money on magazine and TV?

No. I know I make up the minority on this point but in my opinion the NRA should be spending its money on two things; 1) advancing the use of guns at the state level by purchasing land for hunting and ranges, and 2) defending our rights to use guns in self defense. Unfortunately I see the NRA's emphasis going completely to the latter and little to the former, where I would place primary emphasis. Yes I know the NRA is a big sponsor of ranges et al. (Camp Perry, etc.), however I believe the NRA needs to begin purchasing land so that future generations of hunters can hunt without being wealthy!
Do to the private ownership of land and increased posting of it, I see hunting in the United States as the most jeopardized profession and the guns of hunting also being jeopardized to the chosen few wealthy enough to pursue it with them.

What could the NRA do?

=> Work hand in hand with the National Park Service to assure that hunting is allowed on federal parks. Guess what? Hunting isn't currently on many federal parks! Why?

=> Work hand in hand with private landowners to open up land for public hunting.

=> Work hand in hand with large landowners (paper companies, et al.) to gain hunting rights to open land.

=>Purchase open land for hunting at the state level to be reserved for open hunting.

Due to private developers buying up land at ever-increasing rates, and private landowners posting land at every-increasing rates, open land for teaching the next generation of hunters is almost gone. Unless one is independantly wealthy or lives in a remote rural area, hunting is not possible today. The NRA can be a factor in the future of hunting if chooses to act now. Indeed, from the NRA's own charter of "promoting and encouraging rifle shooting" as well as hunting, the NRA today actually does very little to this end which benefits the actual hunter. While publishing "The American Hunter" might - in some minds - be a panacea to the hunters, in actuality the orgqanization needs to be a pioneer in saving our hunting lands and acting before said lands are gone.

Hunting and target shooting are the drivers of gun ownership, with personal protection rounding out the troika of the three reasons most buy a gun. Therefore the NRA needs to represent hunters by doing more than just throwing a bone our way; i.e., publishing "The American Hunter" . The NRA needs to step up to the plate of lands perservation for hunters and do it soon!

April 10, 2006, 01:15 PM
I watched the TV shows they have had in the past. They just kept running the same shows over and over again. So much so , that I quit watching.

Molon Labe
April 10, 2006, 01:28 PM
Should the NRA spend more money on magazines?Yes, especially M1A and AR-10 magazines. And then they should sell them at a reduced price to NRA members.

April 10, 2006, 01:29 PM
NRA can't buy land with the ....cooperation..... of any "agency." The agencies bend with the administrations. And it would end up a boondoggle as appropriations got cut after inception. And they sure can't afford to pay CASH for the land needed.

A more appropriate item might be an INSURANCE card for each member to present to landowners showing liability insurance for their actions while on the land. Or even a "range discount" card. I believe ranges would participate as they would get more volume use from the NRA members. You would be surprised how a mere DOLLAR discount adds usage. Simply list member ranges in the mag and see the shooters come.

But I still think that the horse belongs before the cart and the horse is the quality of the media that attracts the EYES and thence the money.

Make the publication a CAN'T MISS every month and it would draw both more advertising and more members.

It could even be sold at newsstands and bookstores if it had some popular content and that would draw funds even from NON members.


April 10, 2006, 01:36 PM




Camp David
April 10, 2006, 01:43 PM
NRA can't buy land with the ....cooperation..... of any "agency."

Appreciate your thoughts Topgun but the NRA could, in my opinion. Problem is it never tried! For example, the Small Business Administration (SBA) a small federal agency, routinely works with private associations to help purchase and start small businesses. Why? That's what the SBA is chartered to do, and private organizations that work with the SBA help it. Why can't the NRA do the same with federal agencies in the interest of hunting and land ownership? Respectfully, I don't agree with your boondoggle assessment as that is just a cop out... Recall the reasoning behind the start of the Department of the Interior (March 3, 1849) was to manage the give-away and/or hand out of western lands!

April 10, 2006, 01:47 PM
They need to stop trying to suck more money from their members.

And now, apparently, they're a DVD-of-the-month club. I got one in the mail from them, with an envelope to 'return it if I don't want it' or pay for it.

They can kiss my ***. I'm not returning it and not giving them a cent, because I DID NOT ORDER IT!

And next year, joining Gun Owners of New Hampshire instead, hell with NRA. I don't need more junkmail scams.

April 10, 2006, 02:17 PM
NRA dues cannot, by law, be used for lobbying. Like $20 or $25 from each member each year would be enough even if they could use it for lobbying.

Maybe if we donated more to the NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF they wouldn't have to work so hard to get the money to do the heavy political lifting. I know I need to give more.

Meanwhile, I get many more fundraising pleas from the two universities I attended than I do from the NRA. Maybe I should send my diplomas back. :D


April 10, 2006, 02:17 PM
A membership in the NRA is NOT a magazine subscription. The magazine is just an added bonus. Even if they discontinued the magazine, you should still be a proud and active member.

Yes, especially M1A and AR-10 magazines. And then they should sell them at a reduced price to NRA members.Careful, or you'll be having people call them "clips."

From the title of this thread, I though the question was, "should the NRA spend more on ADVERTISING." For PR, to get our message out there, absolutely.

April 10, 2006, 06:15 PM
A membership in the NRA is NOT a magazine subscription.

You're right. For the jillionth of a percent of the members who are members of forums and active in the good fight.

But for Joe Sixpak who spends 5-7 bucks on the Blacktical Pistol Digest, a hot magazine (book) would get his money in the organization too.

The problem with the NRA is that it has become a stodgy organization without much support or awareness in the younger crowd. Now before someone chimes in with "I'm only 13 and I'm a member" think of the other teenagers of the same age who don't even know what the NRA is.

Petersen Publishing has made a fortune off "Guns & Ammo" and so could the NRA make large amount off of ads and subscriptions.

And maybe then, someone could say "A great magazine is also a membership in the NRA."

Even the NRA knows this as they come out with decent mags every election to try to scoop up some new members. So it works. Now if they could just realize that they could ADD members all the time, they'd be on the right course.

April 10, 2006, 09:40 PM
One of the problems with the NRA advertizing is finding a venue, a LOT of media simply refuses to run NRA ad, or any pro gun ad at all.

April 10, 2006, 09:59 PM
The NRA needs to spend money on educating the masses.
If I were them, I'd take home full page ads in major newspapers and explain how guns work. It would only take one page.

They could explain the difference between semi and full auto.
Explain bolt-action, pump action, etc.
They could show the differences between popular cartridges.

April 10, 2006, 10:28 PM
"Educating" the masses is the shortest way to be completely ineffective.

Ask Kathleen Brown who ran for CA governor with a stupid PAMPHLET!

You ENTERTAIN the masses to get your point across.

April 10, 2006, 10:35 PM
The Clinton Administration had Hillary's best friend from college (appointed to head IRS surprisingly enough) audit the NRA many years to harrass them. They did this to all of their enemies. The real reason for the impeachment. The Paula Jones thing only became news near the end of it all.

If they hated the NRA this much, the NRA is doing something right!!!

April 10, 2006, 10:35 PM
The NRA .... HAS..... a venue. Its OWN magazine. A weak, boring, and dull mishmash of uninteresting and sparse articles which the NRA expects to use to draw members.
PRO gun organizations are woefully inept in reaching OUTSIDE the choir. Sure, the gun folks are pro-gun. But the JOB is to reach those "gun folks" who are NOT members and see no reason to join. Perhaps giving them a reason would benefit the organization.

April 10, 2006, 10:44 PM
I think the NRA should fund and train paramilitary death squads to terrorize California government officials. If the CIA can depose unfriendly governments, why cant we? I keed, I keed.

More seriously, the NRA should continue to support the shooting sports and help to foster a friendly legal and political environment for gun ownership and use. This means using the legal defense fund to help set good precedents and the NRA-ILA to get good laws passed.

My main gripe is that the NRA focuses on stupid stuff like forcing businesses to allow employees to carry, especially in places that arent public access anyway. They should be focusing on repealing gun control laws rather than making enemies of people that are normally allies.

April 10, 2006, 10:55 PM
I think its more up to the members to start speading the word on how great the NRA is. I do. I signed up another new member this past month. We need to start talking about why "you are the NRA". I do believe the media shuts them out of of the reasons for why the was created. But changing hearts and minds starts with US talking and winning over people we know one person at a time.

Their "Womens Outlook" has alot of gals at work thinking twice about how they "feel" about the Gun issue once they read old copies of my wife's.

April 10, 2006, 11:18 PM
No the NRA needs to be about getting new people shooting and lobbying. An advertisement won't sell someone on guns, getting them out to shoot off a few mags of .22 will, but it can be hard in alot of places to find places to shoot and people to teach. Thats where emphasis needs to be placed.

April 10, 2006, 11:26 PM
"The NRA .... HAS..... a venue. Its OWN magazine. A weak, boring, and dull mishmash of uninteresting and sparse articles which the NRA expects to use to draw members."

In point of fact, the NRA has FOUR magazines; each has a specific target audience. WHICH magazine are you complaining about and have you even LOOKED at any of the other three?

You also misstate the purpose of the magazines. They are not published "to draw members." They are published FOR members, tailored to specific interests of the majority of members, as a FRINGE BENEFIT of membership.

Sweeping statements about an unidentified publication with no examples and a misstatement of the magazine's premise. Great post........ :rolleyes:

April 11, 2006, 07:32 AM

April 11, 2006, 01:07 PM
As the gun industry, I shall capitulate and cease further calls for ACTION!

The NRA shall remain, as ever, a fading money hungry (but stodgy and "sot" in its ways) outfit. As are the members. Myself included. As witness here, any suggestion to change the public persona is met with the usual pro-gun mentality of idealism instead of attack.

We are destined to lose our guns. Everyone gets what they deserve and work for.

Molon Lavatory

April 11, 2006, 04:50 PM
The NRA meets a need and I think it would be foolish to dump them until something better is invented. Okay, so they're not perfect - vote - you have until the end of the month to get your NRA ballot in. Meanwhile, why not hedge your bets and also join other national and local organizations?


Henry Bowman
April 11, 2006, 04:58 PM
The enemy is media-wise. We should be too.Too often the enemy and the media are one in the same.:fire:

The role of print magazines is diminishing rapidly. The lead time is too long. If you look at THR once daily, there will not be any "news" in an NRA magazine or even TV program that you have not already heard.

April 12, 2006, 07:56 AM
I pass the magazines on to friends who might just read them and get interested enough to join the fight. That's one of the things about the variety of articles in the mags, there's a little something for everybody.


evan price
April 12, 2006, 11:43 PM
I am *not* an NRA member. I do not ever intend to be. My president is *NOT* Charlton Heston. I do not believe the NRA has the best interests of the second amendment at heart any more. They have a FEW programs that may be of interest however I feel they are too political and too interested in selling out the constitutionally guaranteed rights of US citizens in order to please the largest portion of their membership.

To quote someone more famous than I will ever be, 'What part of Shall not be infringed don't you understand?'

If you enjoyed reading about "Should NRA spend more money on magazine and TV?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!