[George Hill]

I do not feel the NRA has our best interests at heart.
I do not feel the NRA represents us.
I don't not feel the NRA wants to protect our gun rights as tenatiously as we want the defended.

I have an idea that can change this.

We change the leadership.

The NRA uses nominations and holds elections.

Let's nominate THR members and put them on the NRA board of directors. Let's take control of it, redirect it, and turn in into a fighting tool. Use it like a battering ram against the gates of the Capitol Building and on doors of the White House.

THR has 5,696 members. If we work hard, we can get a few people on the Board of Directors.

[12-34hom]

Whom from these ranks has the Bona Fides??

12-34hom.

[popbang]

I agree whole heartedly with you. Put up a name and lets give the board a right turn.

[Triad]

I agree, but I'm not sure we THR members could change things in the NRA. There's five thousand members here and what, four million people in the NRA?

[George Hill]

How many signatures does it take to make a nomination? 250?

[hansolo]

O.K. by me..........

Sadly, I must decline the post of President, but thanks for the support!

What about Jim March, Art Eatman, Oleg, Skunk, Tam, Runt of the Litter? If I left anyone out, I apologize. Let's call Mr. LaPierre and talk about a new(Non-French)last name for him.:banghead:


"Send lawyers, guns and money, yada, yada"

[Atticus]

I'm in. It seems to me that the NRA operates too much like a corporation than a lobbyist. The current NRA leadership's focus is on growth, income, clout and prestige - not gun rights.

[jsalcedo]

At least 30% of this board believes in some gun control.

Just look at the various poll's about what level of gun control THR members desire.

In my opinion the NRA has about the same demographic.

Many folks are in favor of mandated CHL class requirements, felons not having guns forever (even after paying debt to society) Enforcing all existing gun laws, etc....

The only thing that would make a big difference in the NRA leadership is a no compromise stance that supports all guns no matter how UN-PC. Also necessary is support of all peoples unalienable right to self defense and RKBA no matter how scary some aspects of that might be.

[Shooter 2.5]

http://www.nrawinningteam.com/bod/index.html

Is anyone on this board better at working to defeat gun control than the people at that link?

Did anyone on this board[other than me] vote for the Directors?

I remember this subject coming up once in a while and someone had the nerve or the honesty, I'm not sure which, where he said he wanted to "get at the money" of the NRA. Yeah sure. That's like robbing a bank and finding out the "money" is invested.

[George Hill]

You mean does anyone on this board have the nuts to fight for all our gun rights instead of being just some puppet?
If these guys are so strong... then hasn't the NRA gone on the attack? When have they ever taken the offensive? That have been playing "Tactical Withdrawl" since as long as I can remember. They give up one thing to temporarily protect something else. They gave up high cap mags. They would do it again this time too.

Well, I think some of up wouldn't want to do that. Instead they would fight for all of them. Even the black evil looking guns.

So, yeah... I thing ANYONE on this board would be better. I don't GIVE A DAMN what those slugs have on the resume. Some of them are good... granted. But others might as well be white flag waving Frenchmen. It's the LIMPIES that we want to get replaced.

[bigsapper]

Jim Scoutten. AR15.com has an ongoing campaign to get him elected to the BOD next year.

[Shooter 2.5]

Gee, I must have missed the news that said we had Second Amendment supporters in control of the Senate, Congress and the Presidency.

When did that happen?

[Zundfolge]

I've been sick of the NRA since they started this "no new gun laws, lets enforce the ones on the books" crap.

The NRA's primary job should be dismantling gun laws, not capitulating to the gun grabbers under the guise of preventing more gun control.

But the NRA's leadership is only half the problem. The rest of the problem are the "hunters & sportsmen" ... you know they guys who support banning handguns and "assault" rifles, just as long as they can still shoot their worthless 3 shot shotgun at clay disks or woodland creatures and think the 2nd amendment is only about punching holes in paper and killing bambi :banghead:

[4v50 Gary]

March forward with Jim March.

[Preacherman]

Don't forget the office of Chaplain to the NRA Board... :evil: :neener: :D

[geegee]

I agree, but I'm not sure we THR members could change things in the NRA. There's five thousand members here and what, four million people in the NRA?
Considering that, here's something to ponder. Does the active membership of THR more closely represent the opinions of the 75mm remaining gun owners in this country, or are those gun owners philosophically more closely aligned with the board members of the NRA? To look at it another way, are those 75mm or so gun owners choosing to remain dormant (not NRA members) because of the leadership of the NRA, and if there were a change to a more "activist" group of leaders (THR) would they then become motivated to join, and in doing so change the face of today's NRA? Exactly who are all these gun owners that choose to let the rest of us "carry their water", and what stops them from getting into the fight? geegee

[cpileri]

And after we self-elect a THRer to NRA leadership, how about we start doing the same for local politics!

Like, we find out what cities or towns, or even states, we have alot of members in; then pick an office to run him/her in, and follow through with 100% of the THR voter turn-out eligible to do so.

So lets take Montgomery County in MD (for example): we have what... 5 or 6 THRers here. OK, so the guy will have to run for a relatively uncontested office. But he'll get ALL SIX VOTES!

Hardy har har.

But seriously, in other places it could indeed work!
But we'd have to do something that gun owners have thus far been unable and/or unwilling to do:

ORGANIZE!!

C-

[MMcCall]

If the NRA actually did their jobs, and got existing legislation repealed, I think many of them think they'd be out of a job.. they're in justify-your-existence mode right now.

The way the legislative landscape is right now, there is NO REASON for the NRA not to be attacking on every front, using concerted effort to overwhelm the antis and further the 2A agenda. Unfortunately, they're more concerned about fundraising and sending out videos.

[only1asterisk]

Better that that, lets all move to the same town, establish residency, and elect ourselves a Sheriff, Mayor, Council etc.
We can't reach a common ground on gun control, much less any other issue. I like to idea of a NRA leadership with guts, but it's not going to happen. People that get elected are those that have broad appeal. Single-minded hardasses put people off, and only appeal to those that hold exactly the same views. What we need in NRA leadership is more single-minded hardasses and fewer crowd pleasers. My money says it will be a cold day in Hell.

David

[MicroBalrog]

One question here: Is there ONE THR member which supports the machinegun clause of 1986? Does that make any sense to anyone? So why is it there?

[FPrice]

George Hill.

Are you up to it?

[telewinz]

If the NRA isn't doing their job, what are they doing? I am only a member of the NRA for political reasons, they seem to have done a fairly good job thus far and they are feared by the anti-gunners. Bearing in mind that its not a perfect world, what group has a better pro-gun track record? If I can get more bang for my buck, I'll switch to a different pro-gun organization.

[redneck2]

so forgive my ignorance

but if the NRA is so lame, why did a majority of the senators and congressmen they targeted get voted out???

Any why do the libs fear the NRA more than any other organization...perhaps more than all others put together???

Looks like the "Crime Bill" is gonna sunset

It's easy to sit at the 'puter keys and rant and rave. We can barely get locals to show up for my congressman's rally, and he's big-time pro 2nd.

So........before you rant and rave.....there's 2 keys to success

time and money...how much have you given of either????? If we can get a stronger organization that's great, but looks to me like the NRA is the best thing we've got, and I'd hate to see it torn apart by a one-issue debate. Need to look at the bigger picture. YMMV

[MicroBalrog]

time and money...how much have you given of either?????

Not enough - you can never give enough.

But I have given quite a bit of my time.

And I don't have money.

[ralphtt]

". . . if the NRA is so lame, why did a majority of the senators and congressmen they targeted get voted out???"

Nothing is perfect, but IMHO the NRA is our best bet. I'm gonna' continue to support them until something better comes along.

[popbang]

I think some people are missing the point here. Just because the NRA is a big lobbying group and is effective on some issues doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make it better. Many members of the NRA are hunters, target shooters, or shotgun sport participants that aren’t as concerned about the right to carry. As a group, we as concerned responsible citizens should take back some semblance of leadership in the NRA. This is not slamming the group, but rather bringing it into line with our views. One person on the board isn’t going to make much difference, but one person can lead the argument on the board against support of legislation such as the 10 round magazine limits. An outspoken director can word things in a manner that may lead other members to support the concerns of handgun users. As members in the group shouldn’t we elect people to the board that share our concerns?

[MountainPeak]

I think the NRA has a pretty good record in recent elections. They have been aggressive in the fight to get rid of AWB. They aren't perfect, but they have been a positive force in the 2nd Amendment battles.

[Monte Harrison]

At least someone suggesting our own little version of the Free State Project is a different twist.
The bottom line is that TALKING about something is a helluva lot easier than DOING something. Take a look at the people on that board of directors (http://www.nrawinningteam.com/bod/index.html). The least qualified and dynamic person on that board is still a Rennaisance man compared to anyone I personally know. If there is anyone here with that level of commitment and experience, let them throw their hat in the ring, and I'll back them 100%. If not, then quit bitching to us and bitch at them (http://www.nrawinningteam.com/bod/index.html) instead.

[toro]

I think the NRA does a great job. I think you need someone famous to get the membership and money. Someone like Charlton Heston. They had the most members join during his time in office. You need name recongnition.

As far as this list having 5,000 members. Getting someone elected is pretty remote. Considering the last place board member was elected with 42,158 votes. The best known person who has been trying to get on the board is Neil Knox. He gets voted down almost every election. He is the one who bad mouths the NRA every chance he gets. I think that is why he can't get elected. Also, he is a radical and don't appeal to the regular members.

Toro

[owen]

I live in South Carolina. In South Carolina, the NRA "has no opinion" on pro-gun legislation proposed by the more successful (non-NRA) lobbying group. Several Legislators have made comments that behind closed doors, the NRA actually opposed many of the concealed carry reforms proposed by Grassroots South Carolina. The common feeling is that the NRA opposed the reforms, because they weren't originated by the NRA. As far as I can tell, the state NRA affiliate (Gun Owners of South Carolina) does NOTHING!!!

The NRA is piggybacking onto pro-gun lawsuits, and adding plaintiffs that basically sink the laswsuit on the spot. For instance, adding Ashcroft to the lawsuit against the city of Washington DC, created a defendant with inexhaustible resources. Why did they do that!!!??? But now the NRA can say they did something. Something is called sabotage, but they won't say that.

As effective as the NRA may be, the NRA has problems. The problems need to be addressed, but I have no expectation that the current leadership will make those changes.

I have 3 requirements of any NRA Board Member Candidate from THR.
1) The candidate must not be a rabid dog in demeanor. For Instance, I think Ted Nugent is a terrible representative of the American Gun Owner

2) The Candidate must beleive in and support going on the offensive and rolling back gun laws. Holding actions and compromise are not acceptable.

3) The Candidate must be willing to let non NRA orgs do their thing, without stepping on their toes. The must not have the Not Invented Here mentality.

Owen


PS Oh, and about all the politicians they "get elected". A lot of them aren't nearly as good as the NRA claims they are. When I lived in Mass, they recommended an openly antigun republican over a libertarian.

[Smoke]

So if someone from THR did get elected would you want him to push his own personal agenda (or THR's) or to do what the membership decided?

I think the NRA does a good job. What may help more than anything else is if they would educate their membership to vote religously in general elections, and to not be judgemental of others choice of shooting sports. (ie: IPSC vs. Clay games vs. Benchrest vs. SASS, ad nauseum)

WE have to stick together people.

[Quantrill]

I have been a member of the NRA since 1957. I would like to point out that the NRA has other responsibilities than RKBA. The RKBA is foremost on their agenda and they are the most feared and the largest RKBA organization. But they have ranges, they have matches, they keep the records and the classifications of all competitive shooters, they have instructors, they are actively involved in hunting etc. etc. There are certainly more radical groups (and I am glad that there are) but the NRA is the one that wields the big stick. And while there are 4 million members or such, only the 5 year members, life, endowment, benefactor etc. do the voting. How many THR members are of the classification that can vote in the NRA elections? Sure I would like to see more being done, but the finances can only go so far. Just my two cents. Quantrill

[Dan from MI]

The NRA is a mixed bag. They do some things great, and some things extremely poor. There is room for improvement.

I'm an NRA member(since 99 - 3 year, now EPL) working on a life membership(Easy Pay Life). Unfortunatly, I couldn't vote in the Board Elections. I'm looking at making a run in a few years, if I think I can pull it off. I have some campaign experience.

GOOD:

1. The 800 lb gorilla.
2. Knows how to get bills passed.
3. Can be the best friend around election time.
4. WINS.
5. Excellent training.
6. Can play the PR game very well. Wayne LaPierre is an excellent person for the talk-show circut. Represents our side well. Charlton Heston(Yes, I know is anti-gun past in 68) was a great speaker for the rallies. Ted Nugent does his part very well firing up the troops.


BAD

1. The 800 lb gorilla.
2. Some NRA reps on state level play games on endorsements. I know this firsthand. This is one of the WORST things they do. Mike Hanley(A bonifide GUN GRABBER) was given an A? He wasn't endorsed, but c'mon.
3. Wishy-Washy. Not aggressive enough. I don't expect overaggressiveness, but there's a time to fire.
4. Steps on other orgs toes, especially on the STATE level. This is the worst think that they do.
5. Oftentimes too REACTIVE, not PROACTIVE.


-------------------------------------------


The NRA is the best we got numberswise, and SAF is the best "pound for poind' we have. We need them both.

Now, I want to fix the bad with the NRA, especially with their state level crap with a couple of their deputy reps. Where's the plan. I'd love to see a Jim March run.

How can we get the 69, 234 votes required to win?

How I would do it?

1. Post candidacy online - webpage, email address for questions, etc. Call it "Joe Smith for NRA Board of Directors". List the credentials and platform there. Honest and Open.

2. Post candidacy on gun message boards, conservative political boards, libertarian political boards, and even liberal boards if pro-gun views are allowed there. Ones interested in the issue are more likely to vote.

3. Go to pro-gun rallies and shooting matches. Go to events like the Gun Rights Policy Conference, Camp Perry, the machine gun shoot in Kentucky(Damn! forgot the name), etc. The die hards vote.

4. Set up booths at gunshows accross the country. It's smaller numbers, but not everyone is online.

It may work, it may not work, but that would be my plan.

[George Hill]

I'm not looking for a nomination. That wasn't my intent.

I would be a poor choice for this calling. I'm far too salty for the likes of the NRA. I do not look that good in a suit either.
But If called, I'd serve.

I'm not bashing the NRA... I want it strengthened and bolstered. We have the Whitehouse, we have the Senate, and we have the House of Reps... We have the Government and yet we are still acting as if it was 4 years ago. We gotta PUSH OUR ADVANTAGE here because we might not have it for very long and GOD HELP US IN 2008 if Hillary wins. That will be the END of it. Push now... and push as far as we can. Enforce the existing laws?
ROLL THEM BACK!
What about Chicago's CAGE unit? Virginia's Project Exile... Zero Tollerance BS... Roll this crap back while we can.

[pytron]

I know at least five members of the NRA who are qualified to vote and do not frequent THR. They respect what I have to say and I could probably sway them to vote for a particular person. I would guess that many THR members also know NRA members who do not frequent THR.

As a seperate thought, perhaps we need a NRA BOD scorecard with candidate's ratings. Kind of like the ones GOA puts out.

-Pytron

[Cosmoline]

Know why I love the NRA?

BECAUSE OUR ENEMIES ARE SCARED TO DEATH OF IT! They hate it and fear it like no other group. Michael Moore has made it his personal crusade to destroy it. I'll start getting worried when they stop worrying about its power--about our power.

[ArMa]

I nominate Art Eatman or ... why not Oleg its his forums. I think they would both do a fine job, Oleg is very serious about rkba as most of us are but I think as the founder of the forum and a-human-right he would be a good representitive of all of our thoughts. As for Art, well Art is a Texan, need I say more? :D .

[KMKeller]

Frankly, I think Tamara would be the best choice, with Art running a close second. Both have a common sense approach to the issues at hand and have vast amouts of both intelligence and charisma... or something like that.:D

[willyjixx]

form a new group that will bolster the first beliefs that founded the NRA. second there needs to be a name change.

N-National
R-Rifle
A-Association.

all that sais to me just hearing it they believe in Rifles.

change it to a more broader name that gets point out that we are a group of responsible concerned citizens that believe in the support of all "Weapons" of self defense, all "Weapons" of hunting an of the RKBA an also of the Concealed Carry laws to law abiding citizens an also support collectors.

[ReadyontheRight]

-NRA
-JPFO
-GOA
- www.a-human-right.com
- www.flashbunny.org
- www.thehighroad.org
- www.ar15.com

Support and be an advocate for all of the above - plus anyone else who supports RKBA. Why choose just one?

And probably the most important:
-Ask ALL political candidates their stance on gun control
-Volunteer to help the good candidates
-RUN FOR POLITICAL OFFICE YOURSELF

[owen]

willyjixx,

the founding principles of the NRA had nothing to do with politics. It was a competition organization that was formed to encourage rifle marksmanship. The goal was to improve the performance of the american military, by having a large number of good shooters in the civilian population.

Found a new org, and get to the level of clout of the NRA? It will actually be easier to change the NRA from the inside. The NRA has piles of name recognition, gobs of members, and lots of politicos that owe favors.

"a group of responsible concerned citizens that believe in the support of all "Weapons" of self defense, all "Weapons" of hunting an of the RKBA an also of the Concealed Carry laws to law abiding citizens an also support collectors." is kinda long for a name, dontcha think? :D

[MicroBalrog]

Oleg for President!:D

[willyjixx]

owen :

Thanks for the history lesson! i did not know that about the NRA.... (no sarcasm i rally did appreciate it)



a group of responsible concerned citizens that believe in the support of all "Weapons" of self defense, all "Weapons" of hunting an of the RKBA an also of the Concealed Carry laws to law abiding citizens an also support collectors." is kinda long for a name, dontcha think?


yeah that is kinda long winded!

how bout


W.L.O.G.S.L.E'.A

we love out gund so leave em' alone:D

[ReadyontheRight]

Changing the NRA's name is a very bad idea. Inaccuracy is no reason to change a powerful brand.

Micro Soft - Quite a successful brand name, despite the name being comprised of two words with which no man wants to be associated.
Kodak - Uh - what exactly does that word mean? Oh yeah -- the world's most recognized brand name.
Coca-Cola - Two drugs. Are either of them still in the product? The world's second most recognized brand name.

HCI -- Changed their name. On their way to obscurity and inclusion only in "Trivial Pursuit - The 1990's". :D

[ReadyontheRight]

Know why I love the NRA? BECAUSE OUR ENEMIES ARE SCARED TO DEATH OF IT! They hate it and fear it like no other group.

Exactly.

As much as I love the concept, I don't get quite the response wearing my "Molon Labe" hat as I do my NRA hat.

The best response I've gotten so far from a complete stranger is "What...do we live in Texas now?"

To which I responded "Minnesota IS still the USA -- right?"

[telewinz]

I still don't know what's wrong with the NRA. It's track record is great and as cosmoline says "it's a much feared organization by our enemies". Over the decades their power and membership has grown, I can remember when they were still trying for 1 million members.

I won't support any fanatical group on any issue be it political or religious in nature. I don't think it's reasonable to expect perfection from any one person or group. The NRA has been a success because it has performed in a responsible manner and is respected. The NRA knows how to play the political game and is a master at it. They are the envy of more than a few special interest groups and their methods for success are often cited by the news media and political science instructors.

If their is a better pro-gun organization, please let me know.

[Dan from MI]

Another good group is Second Amendment Foundation. They fought the Ohio CCW and Emerson case in the courts, not to mention, put on GRPC each year.

http://www.saf.org

[Monkeyleg]

ReadyontheRight: "Micro Soft - Quite a successful brand name, despite the name being comprised of two words with which no man wants to be associated." :D :D

*************
"Kodak - Uh - what exactly does that word mean? Oh yeah -- the world's most recognized brand name."

From Archive Magazine: I recall, on one of my visits across the pond to the USA, hearing a little tale about one George Eastman (1854-1932) the US photographic inventor who introduced plates (1879), paper roll film (1884), celluloid film and camera (1888) and much more. Eastman needed a name for his company and new products and searched for something simple, easy to remember and rolls off the tongue whatever your native language.

Eastman came up with "KODAK" a purely made up word first registered as a trademark in 1888, and he later (1892) called his company Eastman Kodak Co. The name Kodak is now synonymous with anything photographic and recognised world wide and is a protected name.

The letter 'K' had always been a favourite of Eastman and he found it a strong, incisive sort of letter. He tried out a great number of combinations of letter that made words starting and ending with 'K'. The word Kodak was the end result which along with the distinctive yellow trade dress, which Eastman also selected, is one of the companies more valued assets.
***************

Now, as to the topic at hand, I think there's any number of TFL members and moderators who would do a fine job as hard-line NRA board members. Let's settle on one and get the ball rolling!

[Selfdfenz]

As a point of reference, I'm an NRA Lifer.
While they have done some things that PMO I think the NRA has done some great things, some remarkable things.

Imagine where we would be if there was no NRA.

If you really feel our rights as owners and users of firearms would be stronger today if there had been no NRA down through the years, I'd like to hear why. Ditto for the future.

I like GOA and JPFO but what have they DONE. Where's the beef!

Something about dividing your forces in the face of the enemy comes to mind. When the GOA and JPFO provide us with more that great opinion pieces I may have dollars for them but untill that day comes I'm sticking with the only result-producing organization I know of, and that is the NRA.
And yes I expect the NRA will PMO in the future but as long they keep moving forward and scare the BGs I will not give up on the organization.

OTOH, I also like the idea of taking no prisoners. I too wish the NRA would be a little less PR company sometimes and start taking a few more political scalpes from time to time. Regardless of the cost, if we/us/gun owners/the NRA could un-elect a Schumer once in a while it would do wonders for our cause.

Mr. Hill if you or one/some of the other THRers care to articulate a platform and run on a no-compromise RTKBA position you have my vote and support.


S-

[Matt G]

Good idea. I nominate George Hill for the Office of President of the NRA! :D

And while I'm doing things that might tick off a Mad Ogre, I'm moving this thread to Legal And Political, where I believe it belongs. (This being a mighty political topic, and all...)

--Matt.

[Alan Smithiee]

I'll second any nomination for Jim March.

NB (who can't even get the NRA to return calls or e-mails about range club memebership)

[Rembrandt]

...some of the comments here remind me of a teenager who wants to take his dads expensive sports car for a drive....no idea what his father went through to obtain it, the cost, or how it works...just knows he could drive it better than the old man.

Toughest thing to do is "overturn existing laws"....a far better tactic is to never let dumb ideas become law in the first place. Most of the bad laws originated at the local level or came from people who got put in office from your own localities. If you're not effective or active stopping this at the local level....what makes one think they can do a better job being elected to the NRA's board of directors?

Effective change starts at the bottom then goes up....not the other way around. Perhaps a few need to learn how to ride a bicycle before they get the keys to the car....grassroots success in local political campaigns, city councils, and state government will give you credibility to lead at a higher level....

I suspect most of the posters here are not even NRA Life Members, and have never participated in the election process...much less have an understanding of what the purpose of the NRA is...

[George Hill]

Jim March and Art Eatman.
You guys up to it?

Me? I don't know if I "qualify".

[WAGCEVP]

why not everybody on THR drop their NRA membership and join Gunowners of America......... Personally I think that's the only way to change NRA , at least it'll be the easiest

[Sarge]

The NRA is a political organization, just like the DNC or the RNC. They run on money, and money requires memberships and donations. A long run of affluence and practically guaranteed memberships have convinced them that the majority of the gun-owning public is more than willing to accept an ongoing series of 'reasonable restrictions' on firearms ownership.

They may be right. Those of us who take a hard line like 'no new gun laws, and repeal the bad ones' or insist on a national CCW are viewed as radicals by the appeasment crowd. I say that if you let the wolf eat your leg so he'll leave the rest of you alone, you won't be able to run or fight when when he gets hungry again tomorrow.

If you buy a membership, then it's your NRA. I have quit them before over their wishy-washy defense of my freedoms, and I have learned that I can sleep nights without a NRA card in my wallet. The way I see it, that money can be just as well spent on phone calls to my legislators, or on ammo to make new shooters out of non-shooters. That's just my opinion and nothing more.

I won't support a candidate or an organization who doesn't stick by the issues that are dear to me. If you're upset with the NRA, write them a letter and tell them to stuff it- then tell them why, and what it'll take to win back your membership. If they get enough letters things will change- because money is the bottom line with them, just like any other political organization.

[FPrice]

"Me? I don't know if I "qualify"."

Well, you raised the issue and made the charges. If you are willing to criticize as you have, then you should be willing to do what you say should be done.

[FPrice]

"why not everybody on THR drop their NRA membership and join Gunowners of America......... Personally I think that's the only way to change NRA , at least it'll be the easiest"

Ummm, and just how would that change things? How would another few thousand people make GOA the equivalent of an organization which has been in existance for over 125 years, has over 4,000,000 members, and is involved in almost all facets of gun ownership, safety, training, and competition?

I've never claimed that the NRA is perfect. Quite to the contrary I think that they have made some bad goofs over the past few years. To some people that is a reason to chuck the NRA out and try to start over with a relatively brand new organiaztion without the depth and strength of the NRA.

Sure sounds like a recipe for suicide to me.

My opinion (FWIW) is that every gun owner should be a member of at least three organizations as a MINIMUM! A national-level organization, your state organization, and a local range or gun club. Working from the bottom up you start by helping keep a local active and involved club working to get as many people shooting safely and influence local politicians. You support the state-wide organization to do the same at the state level. And you support AND participate in your national organization to the best of your ability.

Just because we are in the right does not mean that we are going to automatically win every fight and restore all of our rights overnight. It took us many years of inactivity and apathy to get this far. To expect to reverse this trend overnight is simply foolish.

[Shooter 2.5]

It's a shame politics has to be explained on a political/gun website.

The NRA is represented by four and a half million members. There are probably another million more members of other gun groups but activitists have multiple memberships.

The NRA does everything it can to vote in A rated politicians. They do this by introducing more people to the shooting sports and actively working in the offices of the candidates.

Once a candidate is elected the NRA does everytihing it can to remind the candidates that it was the NRA that worked in their offices to get them in office in the first place.

That gives us the votes to sunset the Assault Weapons Bill for instance. But we only have the vote in the House. We don't have them in the Senate or the Presidency.

If we can get more candidates elected, we can get more votes for a true majority in the Senate which we don't have.

If we can get more candidates elected, we can get the judges we need which we don't have.

In places like California, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Illinois, we don't have the votes, we don't have the candidates and we don't have the judges. We also don't have enough members who live in those areas.

"Taking over" the NRA does nothing. It doesn't change the numbers of members, elect more candidates or convince the candidates already in office to vote for the Second Amendment any more that what is happening now.

[Ala Dan]

a few THR names that come to mind that should
be on the NRA board are:

Stephen A. Camp

Perfessr

Standing Wolf

George Hill

Kaylee

Blueduck

Oleg

Preacherman

re1973

Robert In Oregon

Snowdog

and perhaps ME?

Wait a minute, I forgot Old Fuff, Tamara, and Tlhelmer

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[George Hill]

I've been thinking about this.
If I can run for it, I will. How long do you have to be a member? What are the requirements?

I'm up for it. I'll do it if you guys help me.

[AZTOY]

I can't vote let:banghead: . I have not been a member long a nuff.:rolleyes:



I like George's idea!!!

[HBK]

I'm with you on this. I trust some of the posters on here more than my elected reps or NRA people. I'll help however I can.

[Jim March]

Folks, by "qualified", George probably meant he hasn't been an NRA member long enough (5 years I think?) to be a voting member, and hence can't run for NRA office.

I'm definitely in that boat. 'Kay? Can't run.

While this rule may seem a pain, there's a very good reason for it: the group can't be "quickly taken over by the opposition". It would take years, enough time to work out a counter.

Now, of the various "non-NRA gunnie groups", SAF (and CCRKBA whenever they need to do overt politics) in my opinion is by far the most effective. Head an shoulders. They've funded things the NRA has later taken credit for. The recent Ohio legal victories were all funded by SAF. Alan Gottlieb, Dave Workman and Joe Waldron are some of the best in the biz.

[Rembrandt]

The length of time you have been a member has nothing to do with whether you can serve as an officer or director....only those with "Life Memberships" are able to hold office.

[Cory Steiner]

Run for office? Are you insane?
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/new_jersey/6138533.htm

[bigsapper]

NRA Bylaws Article VIII, Section 2.

Directors shall be elected from Lifetime members. Vacancies shall be made by the nominating committee through the petition process at the annual meeting.




The nominating process BEGINS each July. You may remember the pages in each July's American Rifleman another NRA magazines that have the details of candidates and offices. We have until July 2003 to get the ball rolling for Jim. That's a good thing since we can have his packet to NRA HQ before the rush. At that point our ducks should be in a row to move from nomination to election the next cycle.



You have to be a member for at least 5 STRAIGHT years to vote. If Jim has not renewed every year for the last five he will not be able to vote. He cannot be a board member without the life membership. His status will NOT be upgraded until his payments are complete.


These are some quotes from a thread on another board where action is being taken to get Jim Scoutten (host of American Shooter) nominated to the BOD.

HTH.

[Bigjake]

I'd vote for george. who better? we need someone like him. there are many other good choices on this board, but how many of them have the tact and voice he has? i like a-human-right, but its preaching to the choir. madogre.com is entertaining and has a huge reader base. who else can claim that here?

EDIT

shoot, why stop with the NRA? if this guy ran for pres i'd definatly vote for him.

http://www.madogre.com/Political%20Items/Presidential.htm

[gun-fucious]

Washington DC power brokering corrupts absolutely

[MicroBalrog]

Washington DC power brokering corrupts absolutely

Is Ron Paul corrupt?

[George Hill]

Well, then I don't qualify. Yet.

Anyone else?

[Ala Dan]

I've been a Life Member since September 9th, 1975!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[F4GIB]

The NRA Board HAD some real hard core Second Amendment advocates when the Neal Knox people were on the Board. Neal, however, didn't have the "killer instinct" to conduct a clean sweep and kept LaPierre and much of the old guard on the board while trying to build bridges.

LaPierre and company brought Charlton Heston in from nowhere to beat Neal Knox by 2 votes in the election for First V-P. Then they conducted a purge of every director who would not SWEAR FEALTY to LaPierre and began to move NRA into the "mainstream" of politics. In the mainstream groups are expected to give up rights for the good of the community. You and I lose but Wayne gets invited to all the "PC" Washington cocktail parties and gets to rub shoulders with the rich and famous (one of whom he'd sell his Mother to become).

The NRA power structure (in the Bylaws) has been changed to prevent there every being another "revolt of the members." The NRA management distrusts its own membership more than Democrat politicians do. Give your money directly to the non-NRA local organization the actualy does the work (which NRA takes credit for) at your state Legislature.

[Jim March]

Sigh. Well I ain't a life member, and it'll be quite a while before I can afford it. So that's out.

Not that I'd want it. I consider the California CCW fight more important right now.

[geegee]

You and I lose but Wayne gets invited to all the "PC" Washington cocktail parties and gets to rub shoulders with the rich and famous (one of whom he'd sell his Mother to become).
I have my own gripes with the NRA, and as to whether or not LaPierre is wanting to be one of the rich and famous I can't say, but to suggest that the chief spokesman of the NRA is getting invited to "all the PC Washington cocktail parties" seems (and certainly sounds) ridiculous. What "PC" anything or anyone, wants to be associated in anyway with the NRA?Sounds mutually exclusive to me. geegee