NRA Membership


PDA






bluehen59
February 18, 2008, 07:54 PM
I am a life member of the NRA, I am extremely proud to be so and it enriches my experience exercising my 2nd Amendment right in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Two of my closest friends, who are big gun guys like myself are not NRA members and always shy away and make excuses every time I bring up the subject of becoming a member. One friend is concerned about the price of a basic membership, yet spends the money on AK/SKS supplies every time he has change in his pocket. What can I say to convince them the benefits of NRA membership?

If you enjoyed reading about "NRA Membership" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RugerBob
February 18, 2008, 08:00 PM
I believe its only 10 bucks with out the magazine script. They do protect the 2nd, and have a louder voice and better lawyers. Its a requirement at our gun club just to be a member. I've only been a member 5 years now, and with politics the way they are and all the shootings that have been going on , we need our 2nd protected, Tell them 'its a good investment'.

strat81
February 18, 2008, 08:38 PM
I think the magazine alone is worth the yearly cost.

TexasRifleman
February 18, 2008, 09:06 PM
What can I say to convince them the benefits of NRA membership?

Print out a copy of the brief on Heller. No it's not the greatest thing ever put to paper and probably not the best written of the bunch, but it does show their position.

Then print out a copy of HR1022 or similar legislation.

That AK and SKS will be Verboten under that.

There's only so much you can do. If he's a real good friend buy his first year membership for him then give him so much hell and guilt he pays for the renewal.

That's worked for me once or twice LOL.

Robert Hairless
February 18, 2008, 11:17 PM
Those two close friends of yours aren't "big gun guys" like you. They are freeloaders who depend upon everyone else to pay the way for them to own firearms and shoot. I'm sure that their "principles" prevent them from joining the NRA. Freeloading is a principle for many people. I stopped having either sympathy or concern for freeloading gun owners a long time ago.

Friends try to carry their own weight and some of yours too. They don't want their friends to carry them.

Shinken
February 18, 2008, 11:46 PM
I myself am conflicted over this subject. On one hand I do believe that the NRA is the best voice we have on fighting gun control. But on the other hand, I feel reserved after having read of their aggressive in getting members to renew/donate (some people have said it is a bit too aggressive), but even beyond that it is the NRA's stance with minorities in the nation, or at least some articles I read. Now let me say up front, these are hear-say things and that is why I am conflicted. I am trying to educate myself as much as possible and trying to avoid the agendas of other people and organizations. I am so happy to find civilized discussion such as this one...

CC

Mndless
February 18, 2008, 11:57 PM
My first post.... err ok... 2nd or 3rd... mayber 4th... but... on the subject of the NRA... hmmm

K...put asside the issue of assault weapons..

put asside the issue of guns...

put asside the issue of the right to of the individual to keep and bear arms...

put asside the issue of the right to carry...err ... k... we'll hold that...

The NRA is the single loudest voice for the people who think the 2nd amendment still means anything. Do we have a right to free speach? Do you believe the people have a right to keep legal weapons in your home? Then support the NRA..

Any other argument is playing into the hands of the anti-gun croud...

Now... back to the right to carry... geezz...

When the founding fathers took quill to ink... do you really think they thought we, as the average american citizen, would have to take a gun safety class... submit our mug shot, finger prints and qualifying weapons score for approval, before we were could "carry" a weapon??!!....

Sorry... not an argument for this thread.... but... please feel free to welcome me to the forum!!! :)

Shinken
February 19, 2008, 12:00 AM
Good point Mndless.

CC

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 19, 2008, 12:12 AM
I joined the NRA today(well yesterday actually). :)

Mndless
February 19, 2008, 12:19 AM
Thanks... but...

I forgot to mension McCain-Feingold... Our "conservative" presidential nominee... who is the single largest cause of limiting our 2nd amendment rights...

Concerned about the 2nd amendment? Look no further than the current republican front runner?.... seriously concerned about constitutional rights and taxations without reprisentation??? we have no good choices... geezzz.. think I read somethting about that and the boston tea party.. maybe not...but... just for yucks...

The recently passed economic incentive package puts money in the hands of the average american citizen! right?? except that anyone earning more than 150k is not eligigable for this "incentive."... interesting... if you look at the data from the 2006 tax year... 90% of the federal income taxes were paid by the top 40% of wage earners.... why would those who are paying the bulk of the taxes, not to "eligible" for a tax refund??? could that be taxation without representation?? kind of feels that way...

Just curious?? Those who didn't pay taxes are getting a check... those who pay a "lot" of taxes... the .gov's say... sorry.. you are not eligible for a tax refund...

All is lost... we have already reached the tipping point... socialism is our destinany... "Luke.... I am your father..."....

post #4... good start!! :)

Robert Hairless
February 19, 2008, 01:37 AM
shinken:

I myself am conflicted over this subject. On one hand I do believe that the NRA is the best voice we have on fighting gun control. But on the other hand, I feel reserved after having read of their aggressive in getting members to renew/donate (some people have said it is a bit too aggressive), but even beyond that it is the NRA's stance with minorities in the nation, or at least some articles I read. Now let me say up front, these are hear-say things and that is why I am conflicted. I am trying to educate myself as much as possible and trying to avoid the agendas of other people and organizations. I am so happy to find civilized discussion such as this one...

The NRA does solicit renewal memberships. I don't know any membership organization that doesn't. Do you?

The NRA does also solicit donations to the NRA/ILA. Federal law prohibits use of membership dues for lobbying or other political purposes, so the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action (the NRA/ILA) is the affiliated organization that works to support Second Amendment activities. But federal law prohibits any of the membership dues from going to the NRA/ILA, so donations from NRA members are among the ways it must raise money.

I don't know what you've heard about those requests being "too aggressive." The NRA doesn't send armbreakers to your home. It sends mail. Tear it up if you don't want it: surely you get junk mail from other sources and have been able to discard it. Use the very same technique with unwanted mail from the NRA. It works. It's also possible to e-mail, call, or write the NRA to opt out of those solicitations. If any of the NRA or NRA/ILA mail is so aggressive that it tries to take over your home and force you into the streets, shoot it: you're a gun owner, your home is your castle, and you needn't allow yourself to be beaten about by overly aggressive mail.

My wife and I respond to every one of them with a donations. We want to support the only effective national organization that helps us to keep and use our firearms. We also recognize that a great many gun owners prefer to let other people carry them, so we try to compensate at least a little for a few of the freeloaders--or, if you prefer, some of the "highly principled gun owners who have excellent reasons for not sullying their hands or souls with the NRA."

Whatever you've heard about "the NRA's stance with minorities" concerns me greatly. I'm an NRA Life Member and if there was an orientation session in which we were instructed to discriminate against anyone I was not informed. I hate it that I'm always the last person to get the word about such things. I haven't discriminated against anyone in decades, and I hope that no one expects me to catch up on all that missed discrimination at this point. I'm just too old to do that. Did your sources explain what minorities I and other NRA members are supposed to discriminate against or is it some blanket kind of discrimination? Some of my friends who are NRA members include Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and Muslims, and I wonder which minorities they're supposed to discriminate against at the NRA's behest.

I guess I shouldn't feel too bad about not knowing that the NRA has a disturbing stance on minorities. Roy Innis evidently didn't get the word either: he was elected to the NRA Board of Directors for 2002-2005. As National Director for CORE (the Congress of Racial Equality) he's supposed to know about such things. Sandy Frohmann, a female Jewish lawyer, just finished her three year term as President of the NRA. I'd expect her to be more in touch than I am. Robert Reynolds, in this forum as mrreynolds, obviously is flat out of touch: he's a Harlem resident in New York City, an NRA recruiter, and operates a nice web site that solicits membership to the NRA (http://smallarmz.info/). He's so good at it that my guess is he'll own the NRA by the time he reaches my age.

The NRA doesn't ask anyone's race, religion, national origin, or other minority indicators or seem to pay attention to such things before or after anyone joins.

I doubt that anyone has asked you whether you belong to some minority group or other, and I doubt even more that anyone cares. The NRA is an organization for gun owners and people interested in firearms and Second Amendment rights.

How about joining the NRA now. You can make an effective statement in support of minorities by joining through Robert Reynolds' web site: http://smallarmz.info/. Strike a blow for minority rights! Just click the menu item labeled "JOIN THE NRA NOW."

Shinken
February 19, 2008, 09:30 AM
LOL Robert Hairless, all points well made (and taken). Like I said, whatever I have read regarding negative issues about the NRA I have taken with a grain of salt since I am sure there are many people with different agendas out there. To be honest with you, deep in my heart, I always suspected and felt exactly what you voiced. So here I come NRA... you are getting a new member. :D

CC

PS: Just finished applying. Thanks all.

SlipperyShooter
February 19, 2008, 01:26 PM
I appreciate just getting the NRA-ILA alerts about legislative activity on both a national and a state level.

I figure being notified about things that will impact my RTKABA is worth my $10 dues in and of itself (I don't get the magazine).

Robert Hairless
February 20, 2008, 12:11 AM
Welcome, Shinken, glad to have you with us.

Now doesn't it make you feel all warm inside to know that you've given both Carolyn McCarthy and Sarah Brady heartburn? :)

Pat-inCO
February 21, 2008, 05:04 PM
If, like me, you read the monthly magazine in the first day or so, once you read it, why not alternate between your two friends and give them that month's issue? When they can take their time and read what the NRA says, at least every other month, I think you'll have an easier time of it. :D

Robert Hairless
February 21, 2008, 05:41 PM
If, like me, you read the monthly magazine in the first day or so, once you read it, why not alternate between your two friends and give them that month's issue? When they can take their time and read what the NRA says, at least every other month, I think you'll have an easier time of it.

What a good idea!

Years ago I skipped over the articles that didn't interest me, especially in The American Rifleman. Then I began to wonder what I might have been missing, if anything, so I began reading them too just to see what interested other people. After a while that became one of my favorite occupations because I started to learn things I never knew and wouldn't have sought out on my own.

Airman193SOS
February 21, 2008, 06:30 PM
Those two close friends of yours aren't "big gun guys" like you. They are freeloaders who depend upon everyone else to pay the way for them to own firearms and shoot. I'm sure that their "principles" prevent them from joining the NRA. Freeloading is a principle for many people. I stopped having either sympathy or concern for freeloading gun owners a long time ago.

Friends try to carry their own weight and some of yours too. They don't want their friends to carry them.

:rolleyes:

So much for taking the high road. I have my reasons, which are none of your concern, that I don't join the NRA. Your assertions are reprehensible.

Signed,

Freeloader

TexasRifleman
February 21, 2008, 06:39 PM
I have my reasons, which are none of your concern, that I don't join the NRA

Well maybe the fact that you can't explain your reasons makes people wonder.

Did Wayne LaPierre kick your dog or something?

chemist308
February 21, 2008, 06:51 PM
I see you're in Pennsylvania. Well go here http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0760&pn=0881 and print out PA HB0760, which has been succesfully blocked. Then print out some of our other anti gun bills (PA House Bills) that are still hanging out there. That'll wake him up. Tell him even if he won't join NRA for some reason, there is always GOA and JFPO. Tell him it's an investment and it's about the same price as a brick of 22LR shells. Tell him to trade his Outdoor Life subscription for American Hunter if he has to...

Vonderek
February 21, 2008, 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Hairless
Those two close friends of yours aren't "big gun guys" like you. They are freeloaders who depend upon everyone else to pay the way for them to own firearms and shoot. I'm sure that their "principles" prevent them from joining the NRA. Freeloading is a principle for many people. I stopped having either sympathy or concern for freeloading gun owners a long time ago.

Friends try to carry their own weight and some of yours too. They don't want their friends to carry them.


So much for taking the high road. I have my reasons, which are none of your concern, that I don't join the NRA. Your assertions are reprehensible.

Signed,

Freeloader

I'm totally in agreement with Robert Hairless on this. Most gunowners I know personally have no interest in joining any organization to protect their rights. They don't want to spend the money to join but are happy to buy the latest and greatest blaster. Or they don't want to be ostracized by their circle of non-gunny friends when the "dark secret" gets out that they are affiliated with the NRA. Whatever your opinion of the NRA is, they are the most effective lobby existent in the never ending battle between those who would like to assign the 2nd Amendment to the trash heap and the rest of us. It's great to join other organizations like GOA & JFPO but the truth is that their reach & impact is a fraction of NRA's. I believe that without the NRA's efforts, we would have long ago totally lost our ability to enjoy the ownership of our firearms and the ability to effectively defend ourselves. I've never joined anything else in my adult life but am happy to be an NRA Life Member and take pride in my organization.

True...other's reasons to not join don't concern me. I really don't care. Hopefully, those who are not members are members elsewhere and/or make the effort to personally contact their representatives in government. However, I know in many or most instances, this is not the case.

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 21, 2008, 06:58 PM
Well maybe the fact that you can't explain your reasons makes people wonder.

Did Wayne LaPierre kick your dog or something?

His reasons are his own. He doesn't owe anyone an explanation as to why he doesn't spend his money on something we want him to.

orionengnr
February 21, 2008, 07:18 PM
Robert Hairless--


You have my vote for Post of the Week. :)

AZAndy
February 21, 2008, 07:25 PM
I enjoyed joining the NRA so much that I joined the GOA and the SAF, too. With Mr. Hairless around, I knew I had to. :-) Were there a "Joe-Bob's House of Gun Lobbying," I'd have to join that one too...

Of the three, the NRA membership card is by far the coolest. GOA doesn't even put your name on it, fer gossakes. ;-)

TexasRifleman
February 21, 2008, 07:28 PM
His reasons are his own. He doesn't owe anyone an explanation as to why he doesn't spend his money on something we want him to.

He's the one that decided to post in a thread on the NRA, he's the one that brought it up.

If he can make a post with no content other than to say "he has his reasons" then I can certainly ask what they are.

Airman193SOS
February 21, 2008, 07:38 PM
He's the one that decided to post in a thread on the NRA, he's the one that brought it up.

If he can make a post with no content other than to say "he has his reasons" then I can certainly ask what they are.

You can ask, but you ignored the rest of it. Let me repeat it for you: they are none of your concern.

What I resent is this characterization that people like me are riding your coattails. Nothing could be further from the truth. I guess by your rationale all Texans that own guns are nutballs, and since I asserted it it simply must be true.

Such accusations are counterproductive and holier-than-thou, and have no place in a reasoned discussion.

For that matter, had Mr. Hairless not made such a condescending statement, I would never have posted anything in this thread. Isn't it enough to say that you think that everybody should join the NRA? That's what I came here for, to be convinced to re-join. Instead, I face the scorn of people who should know better than to scorn anyone who even remotely supports them.

The High Road, indeed.

TexasRifleman
February 21, 2008, 07:42 PM
What I resent is this characterization that people like me are riding your coattails.

The reality is that if you are NOT a member of any pro Second Amendment group then you ARE riding on the coattails of others.

If not NRA then GOA, SAF, pick any of them.

If you're not a member of any of them, you're a freeloader.

If you ARE a member of one of the others, then maybe a post to RH saying that not being a member of NRA doesn't make you a freeloader since there are other groups.

As a fan of "reasoned discussion" (your term) the argument that NRA is not the only group would much more reasoned than the post you made.

So, you won't tell us why not the NRA but how about this question:

What pro 2A national organization DO you support if any?

If the answer is none, well that tells a lot just on it's own wouldn't you say?

Sapanther
February 21, 2008, 09:01 PM
I am not/ Will not join the NRA for one simple reason. Any orginization that calls me unpatriotic for not being a member obviously doesn't WANT me as a member. Calling someone a freeloader doesn't make them one. You can call me a giraffe but my legs are a bit too short for it to be true.

The fact of the matter is, you can do more good on your own than sending 10 bucks a year to some group that will label you with as many adjetives as they can if you don't follow the line 100% of the way. Take for example, the Heller brief mentioned, and remember one little fact. It wasn't the NRA that got Heller to SCOTUS. It was one small group of people working for their own rights that got it there.

Do NOT try to use verbaly coerce me in to joining any orginization. I will only snap at the .org and at you.


ETA: Oh and happy first post to me.

Fburgtx
February 21, 2008, 09:08 PM
"They are none of your concern." Perhaps if you gave your reason, we'd show a little more sympathy. Frankly, it is my concern. I'm spending my hard-earned money to help protect YOUR rights.

Based on your sig, I'm guessing you were/are in the Air Force??? If so, I appreciate your service. If the US was in desperate need of recruits for a war, a draft was in place, and I refused to go for reasons that were "none of your concern", wouldn't you be angry?? If you are a "conscientious objector" when it comes to joining the NRA, just say so!

Did you send any e-mails/letters to your local reps last year?? Any letters to the editor?? If you won't join the NRA, give us some idea of what you've done to help the Second amendment other than participating in an internet forum.

Airman193SOS
February 21, 2008, 09:38 PM
"They are none of your concern." Perhaps if you gave your reason, we'd show a little more sympathy. Frankly, it is my concern. I'm spending my hard-earned money to help protect YOUR rights.

No, you're spending it out of self-interest. If you buy a gun, do you tell me that you bought it for me? No? Same same. If I do something of value for myself, must I tell you that you must as well because you also benefit from it? This is akin to union proselytizing, and about as distasteful.

Based on your sig, I'm guessing you were/are in the Air Force??? If so, I appreciate your service. If the US was in desperate need of recruits for a war, a draft was in place, and I refused to go for reasons that were "none of your concern", wouldn't you be angry?? If you are a "conscientious objector" when it comes to joining the NRA, just say so!

Why would I be mad? Nobody compelled me to join, I did so of my own free will. What motivates people to join up is, in fact, "none of my concern". And why should I express my reasons to people who are keen upon attacking others? That will just give you a specific reason to get irrationally angry.

Boy, this is a real wake-up call. For a group of people that believe that "need" need not be justified, you're asking me for justification on the pettiest of pretenses? I'm disappointed, that's what I am.

Did you send any e-mails/letters to your local reps last year?? Any letters to the editor?? If you won't join the NRA, give us some idea of what you've done to help the Second amendment other than participating in an internet forum.

Yes, yes, and yes. Thank you for approving of me, I guess.

What a shame this thread is. Name calling and aspersions abound. Why couldn't it have been about why people should join, rather than name-calling and coercion by guilt? You're being your own worst enemy, and I'm sorry to see that.

Fburgtx
February 21, 2008, 10:25 PM
Self-interest?? No.

I joined the NRA so that some day my kids and grand-kids will be able to have the same rights I have now. I did it so YOUR kids and grand-kids will have the same rights. I DID NOT spend my hard earned money on an NRA life membership for the cap or the stickers or the jacket. I could just have easily spent that money on a new AR a couple of CZ pistols.

When politicians want to know whether or not they should vote for/against a law affecting old folks, the membership numbers of the AARP are on their mind. The same goes for gun rights and the NRA. If the NRA had 40 million members instead of 4 million, we wouldn't be dealing with much of the bad legislation that we're seeing. Politicians wouldn't even waste their time with it.

If pointing out something so obvious is somehow trying to "guilt" you into something, then I don't know what else to say...

WayneConrad
February 21, 2008, 11:03 PM
Want to add:

This is not a one-front war.

You can join the NRA. And another organization. And another. And another.

You can even join organizations with overlapping goals. Even organizations with somewhat conflicting goals. Even if they sometimes fight.

Especially consider joining both local and national organizations. The membership cards won't burst into flames when they come into contact with each other in your wallet.

ArfinGreebly
February 22, 2008, 12:18 AM
How about Enlightened Self Interest?

I believe it is in my own best interest for this country to remain free.

I believe it is in my own best interest for my grandchildren and their grandchildren to live in a free country, with their basic civil rights intact.

I believe it is in my own best interest for every man, woman, and child in this country to be properly armed and trained in the use of arms.

I believe it is in my own best interest for families to hunt together, to shoot together, for schools to have shooting teams.

I believe it is in my best interest for women of all sizes and ages to be able to defend themselves. I believe the same for men.

I am just your fundamentally selfish jerk who wants EVERYONE to be armed and capable of taking care of himself.

It is, after all, in my best interest.

I am the NRA.

And will be for the duration.

mljdeckard
February 22, 2008, 01:13 AM
If every gun owner in America joined the NRA, they would have the resources to set gun control back to pre-miller.

I will remind all service members, that they join for free. And I will also remind service members that they get 15% off from Brownell's online. Brownell's has an option to donate cash to the NRA on theor online order form. I donated the difference of the discount to the NRA.

You know what? I WANT the NRA to use every sneaky method they can think of to generate revenue, whether it be aggressive retention tactics, front-loaded insurance offers, or shameless sponsors. The more money they have to fight with, the more they will be able to do to oppose those who wish to take my guns away. It's only junkmail.

guntotinguy
February 22, 2008, 02:42 AM
Being new here,also a recent member of the NRA (my wife and I both) and also we own 4 AK's too!We joined (the NRA) because its a 'solid voice' for many on the 2nd amendment rights and other issues,but also its a 'known voice' (per public access).


just my .02,good to meet you all!

Robert Hairless
February 22, 2008, 04:46 AM
Airman193SOS:

So much for taking the high road. I have my reasons, which are none of your concern, that I don't join the NRA. Your assertions are reprehensible.

Signed,

Freeloader

Of course you have your reasons, and I bet they are darned good reasons too. I've never met a freeloader who didn't have really, really good reasons for being one. The highest toned freeloaders are those who freeload out of some principle or other. Lower in the pecking order are those who freeload because of a grievance. You're a truly distinguished freeloader because you combine both reasons: you're a freeloader because you want to be persuaded, enticed, lured, and perhaps even seduced to join and instead you've seen my opinion that people like you are freeloaders. So I've both transgressed your principle that I have some obligation to stroke your ego and created a grievance by insulting you. I am the reason why you do not belong to the NRA. It's all my fault. Now I must live forever after with the guilt of being responsible for you not rejoining the NRA. My heart will ache forever. Have pity on me.

I suppose you've realized that that I'm laughing at you while I type this message. You joined this thread with the dual aims of identifying yourself as a freeloader and complaining that it's "reprehensible" for anyone to identify you as a freeloader. I don't understand the sense in joining a thread to make a fool of yourself while arguing--badly--that you don't like being thought a fool, but you're so impassioned about it all that I do think it's funny.

I agree with you, though, that your reasons for your odd behavior are not anyone else's business. But I must inform you that my reasons for considering you a freeloader and contemptible are overwhelming and incontrovertible. So my reasons demolish all of your principles, grievances, and other sad rationalization. Of course you understand that my reasons are not any of your business.

What I resent is this characterization that people like me are riding your coattails. Nothing could be further from the truth. I guess by your rationale all Texans that own guns are nutballs, and since I asserted it it simply must be true.

Such accusations are counterproductive and holier-than-thou, and have no place in a reasoned discussion.

For that matter, had Mr. Hairless not made such a condescending statement, I would never have posted anything in this thread. Isn't it enough to say that you think that everybody should join the NRA? That's what I came here for, to be convinced to re-join. Instead, I face the scorn of people who should know better than to scorn anyone who even remotely supports them.

The High Road, indeed.

I'm not sure whether a duck resents being called a "duck" but how else to name a creature that looks like one, waddles like one, quacks like one, and emits the pungent aroma of one? I can't bring myself to call such an animal a "lion" even if its little duck brain suffers delusions of superiority, virtue, and pride. It's a duck just as you are a freeloader.

I don't understand why you resent being called a "freeloader" when you identify yourself as one, but you are indeed riding on my coattails and those of every other NRA member because you do not carry your share of the burden for protecting your own ability to own firearms. We carry that burden for you without any help from you. You don't care. You even had the gall to discuss opening a gun shop in Pennsylvania while everyone else funds the activities that attempt to protect those activities. You are a freeloader who has the thought of becoming a professional freeloader.

As for your claim "That's what I came here for, to be convinced to re-join," do you really believe that's why you joined this thread? Are you sure you really want to maintain that you expected people here to write you the same explanations you can find on the NRA web site, on numerous other web sites, in various publications, and in a great many other message threads in this forum from the time of its beginning? You know the word "reprehensible" but you can't get widely available information and you expect people to believe that you entered this thread on an innocent quest for enlightenment. Do you believe your own nonsense?

Earlier in this thread someone did express honest concerns and I addressed them directly and at great length. There was an honest man, not a duck pretending to be a lion. You didn't join this thread for honest reasons. You joined it to quack at people who are carrying you.

Go talk to the duck and stop pecking at people who do the work from which you benefit.

JKimball
February 22, 2008, 05:46 AM
the freeloaders--or, if you prefer, some of the "highly principled gun owners who have excellent reasons for not sullying their hands or souls with the NRA."


If the NRA had 40 million members instead of 4 million

I think membership probably would be closer to 40 million if there were no reason for gun owners to feel like they were sullying their hands or their souls with the NRA.

Like Airman193SOS, I'm still a freeloader, trying to convince myself to join the NRA. The first time I got a letter from the NRA "inviting" (read "DEMANDING") me to join, it made my blood boil. I was just a teenager, but I was disgusted with the tone of Wayne's letter and his lack of respect towards me. Why anybody would think that the best way to get gun owners to sign on to something is by pushing them around or trying to scare them into giving money is beyond me. We tend to be a group that doesn't respond well to that. How about a little reasoning and good will, and not the irrational, emotion and hysteria that is so common amongst the gun control crowd? His multi-page letters can be summed up in one little line, "Give me your money now, or you will lose your guns, you little *bleep*!"

Having said that, let me give my thoughts in answer to the OP's question:
What can I say to convince them the benefits of NRA membership?

There are a couple things that I've learned about the NRA that may help persuade me to join in spite of the lousy letters:
1. They aren't just involved with lobbying, but they do a lot to actually promote shooting sports in general. I think that is worthwhile and should be emphasized more. From what I understand, that was their original reason for being organized.
2. I was glad to learn about the distinction between the NRA and the ILA and their sources of funding as Robert Hairless pointed out. I would see all the "benefits" that I really didn't care about - hats, magazines, etc. and wonder how much of my annual membership dollars would actually be left to fight the fight on Capitol Hill. At least now I know that none of it was going there in the first place.

Robert Hairless,

I appreciate what you've said, but I think you were wrong about at least one thing:
I haven't discriminated against anyone in decades...

I think your first post made it pretty clear that you discriminate against gun owners that aren't members of the NRA:

Those two close friends of yours aren't "big gun guys" like you. They are freeloaders who depend upon everyone else to pay the way for them to own firearms and shoot. .... I stopped having either sympathy or concern for freeloading gun owners a long time ago.


Not saying you don't have a right to discriminate, but you must admit it is discrimination.

Wow, and regarding your latest post to Airman, I applaud you, you did Wayne proud. :barf:

Pa.Bill
February 22, 2008, 08:15 AM
Well....................
Reading all the above, I feel, not everyone should be a member of the NRA.
Another personal choice in life.

~BEST~

TexasRifleman
February 22, 2008, 09:16 AM
I think membership probably would be closer to 40 million if there were no reason for gun owners to feel like they were sullying their hands or their souls with the NRA.

Ahh, another from the "high moral ground" eh?

So we can assume by your comment here that you are indeed a member and regular contributor to another national pro 2A group like SAF?

I mean, since you're not a freeloader and it's just the NRA you disagree with you are still contributing to the ongoing fights right?

If you are, then you are in a position where you can stand up and say that though you disagree with the NRA you believe in the fight, and we can debate NRA vs WHOEVER as gentlemen. If not, then the "freeloader" term still stands.

I noticed in his ramblings Airman refused to answer that very direct question, will you?

Bowfishrp
February 22, 2008, 09:20 AM
I am the NRA!

There is NOTHING that I can do as a citizen of this great country other than VOTE, pray, and teach my children how to shoot and respect weapons. Why would I not join the NRA if they can help protect my gun rights and the rights for my kids? SOMEONE has to fight obamama and all those liberal communists!

Armed Citizen is the best page in the whole magazine!

JKimball
February 22, 2008, 01:05 PM
I noticed in his ramblings Airman refused to answer that very direct question, will you?

TexasRifleman,

Reread my post. I already acknowledged I'm a freeloader, at least, according to your and Robert's definition. And if you reread this thread, you will see which group is looking down their noses at which. Why would I want to join a group that treats me like I'm a worthless piece of dog do-do if I'm not giving them my money? You and Robert aren't helping the cause here.

NGIB
February 22, 2008, 01:25 PM
While I don't agree with everything the NRA says and does, I joined as we gun owners MUST have a voice that can be heard. Personally I was upset that the NRA failed to back HB 915 here in Georgia that would have went a long way towards fixing our goofy carry laws. They chose instead to push HB 89 which only addressed parking lots. Even Wayne L. came here to show support.

So yeah, I'm a bit miffed at what they did recently in my home state; however, I'm smart enough to know that they have the strongest voice in America for gun owners. I also belong to georgiacarry.org and I also frequently contact my local representatives. If we don't get involved and stay involved, our rights will continue to erode.

Bottom line: NRA does indeed piss me off at times but they do more good than harm...

JKimball
February 22, 2008, 01:36 PM
There is NOTHING that I can do as a citizen of this great country other than VOTE, pray, and teach my children how to shoot and respect weapons.

This is the kind of attitude that the NRA can encourage with their propaganda. There are in fact other things that you can do.

Relying on the NRA to protect your gun rights is like relying on the police to protect you. That's what they are there for, that's what you pay them for, and that's what they're good at, but having them there shouldn't be an excuse to neglect your personal responsibility to take action.

TexasRifleman
February 22, 2008, 02:17 PM
Why would I want to join a group that treats me like I'm a worthless piece of dog do-do if I'm not giving them my money? You and Robert aren't helping the cause here.

If you don't help ANY group already I don't see what damage can be done by calling you out on it.

If you're happy to do nothing, there's little anyone can say to change that.

RH is defending NRA specifically, I'm just asking you to help ANY organization of your choosing but even that is too much to ask apparently.

So if that's not meeting just about anyone's definition of freeloader I am not sure what would.

You've got a good excuse against NRA, fine. So you're going to say now that SAF and GOA have also offended you somehow and your morals wont allow you to contribute to them either?

You do know what that sounds like right?

Relying on the NRA to protect your gun rights is like relying on the police to protect you

OK fine then. What have YOU done that DIRECTLY impacts the Second Amendment fight?

JKimball
February 22, 2008, 03:31 PM
I don't see what damage can be done by calling you out on it.

OK, lets be honest, you didn't call me out on it, I called myself out on it. And this is a thread in activism about how to encourage people to join the NRA, so I'm saying don't try to use guilt trips and name calling to get people to join. There are plenty of good reasons without going there, and when Wayne or you or RH say that I'm a 2nd class gun owning citizen, or worse, because I'm not giving a few dollars to this or that organization you should know that you are in fact doing damage to your own cause, whether you see it or not.

I'll PM you about the remainder of your questions, as I believe to answer them here would be veering off topic, and that goes against the purpose of the Activism forum.

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 22, 2008, 04:21 PM
If you want your gun rights, but are not doing anything to actively keep them, you are a freeloader. And that doesn't have anything to do with any official organization.

So I ask, NRA, GOA, and all that totally aside, those of you who refuse to join one of those organizations, what exactly are you doing politically to keep your gun rights? How many letters to congress-critters did you write?


And since when are your personal feelings and emotions more important that keeping our rights??

graybeard321
February 22, 2008, 05:13 PM
Have your friends go to the NRA site and go check out the state legislation and click on PA and have them check out all the good things the NRA has down for them. If they still refuss to join, find someone else to shoot with.

mljdeckard
February 22, 2008, 07:28 PM
It is like having a team of 100 people in a fight. The opposition to this team is very formidable. But the team divides itself. 10 of them are in the front, constantly fighting back those who wish to take guns away from the other 90. But the other 90 still stay in the back, saying things like, "I don't like how you fight. You are pressuring me. I'm busy with other things. You're doing the fighting so apparently I don't have to. You are asking too much of me. I think there are other teams that fight better." But at the same time, the 90 are very much enjoying the protection that the ten who are fighting provide, believing that this protection will always be there, and that the ten who are fighting will win every time.

If the ten are doing an ok job as-is, HOW MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE WOULD THEY BE IF THE OTHER 90 DID THEIR SHARE?

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 22, 2008, 07:48 PM
Great analogy mljdeckard. Also, people who aren't in the fight really have no right to critique how that fight is being wager. If those other 90s joined, then they would have a large say in changing the way things are done.

If you don't like the NRA, why not join and try to influence them to do things in a way you see as better? Change comes from within. There are 80 million+ gun owners, and only 4 million are in the NRA. If just 5 million more of that remaining 76 million joined, their voice inside the NRA would over rule that of the current 4 million.


Simply put; don't like the way the NRA does things? Come on in and try your hand at the wheel. But you can't drive from outside.

Airman193SOS
February 22, 2008, 08:53 PM
See, THAT is the kind of argument I expected to find here. Dammit, I spend every waking moment (which my wife can attest to) arguing about guns, to the point that she, a gun-control advocate and an ardent Democrat, agrees with me. She attributes this to the fact that I argue from reason and not emotion. I don't make it "us vs. them", I let the argument stand on its own merits and use my influence to cause change. It's slow, sure, but it's one of those things that creates converts for life.

Ah, screw it. I didn't want to get into this, because insults usually come my way, but so be it. Here are the reasons why I let my NRA membership lapse (quoted from a PM that I sent to Titus, a fine man who offered to pay for my membership):

1) I don't care for the apocalyptic discourse that they engage in. I can get past that, were it not for...

2) They tried to derail DC v. Heller for reasons that baffle me. That's what cost them my money.

3) I don't feel that they are the best organization for protecting my rights, merely the biggest.

4) I get this name-calling nonsense all the time, and since the members are also representatives of the organization they belong to it reflects very poorly upon said organization.

You can argue my "freeloader" status all you want to (incidentally, my signing of my post earlier as "Freeloader" was sarcastic, which was entirely ignored and was taken as fact), because I'm done here. If I do opt to join the NRA again, it will be in spite of this thread, rather than because of it.

mljdeckard
February 22, 2008, 08:57 PM
Still basking in the protection they provide.

Ragnar Danneskjold
February 22, 2008, 09:02 PM
Lawmakers listen to groups. The bigger, the more they listen. The NRA is a group. They bigger they are, the more lawmakers will listen.

Airman, you're still putting your own indignation over the bargaining power of a bigger NRA. You would rather hold onto your spite towards the NRA than swallow it and just help out even if you were wronged. You say you argue out of reason and not emotion. Yet you are acting emotionally by withholding your support from the fight in favor of standing alone and offended.


If it were me, I would support the guy who has the best chance of beating my enemies, even if I am personally offended by that guy. The guy in question is the NRA, and the enemies are the gun grabbers. Isn't helping defeat the lobbying power of the Brady's and other gun grabbers more important that your own indignation?

Robert Hairless
February 22, 2008, 11:19 PM
JKimball:

Robert Hairless,

I appreciate what you've said, but I think you were wrong about at least one thing:

Originally Posted by Robert Hairless
I haven't discriminated against anyone in decades...

I think your first post made it pretty clear that you discriminate against gun owners that aren't members of the NRA:


Originally Posted by Robert Hairless
Those two close friends of yours aren't "big gun guys" like you. They are freeloaders who depend upon everyone else to pay the way for them to own firearms and shoot. .... I stopped having either sympathy or concern for freeloading gun owners a long time ago.

Not saying you don't have a right to discriminate, but you must admit it is discrimination.

Wow, and regarding your latest post to Airman, I applaud you, you did Wayne proud.

Are you intentionally twisting the word "discrimination" or is it that you just don't know what the word means in this context or how to use it properly? In other words, are you a manipulative person or merely ignorant?

My low opinion of freeloaders is not discrimination. It is a low opinion of freeloaders. I haven't withheld anything from them because they refuse to carry their own weight. In fact I am among the 5% of gun owners who carry the other 95%--including you and the Airman. And that's the problem: I have no choice. If I and other NRA members don't carry you two, and others like you, we will be steamrollered by anti-gun forces along with you.

So is your refusal to carry your share of the burden for protecting your Second Amendment rights discrimination against those of us who do it for you or only your decision to let other people carry you?

And are you discriminating against me because I reject your position or are you discriminating against gun owners because you steadfastly refuse to support your own Second Amendment rights effectively out of some "principle" or "grievance" of your own?

The obvious solution that should make all of us happy is to see if there is some way we can focus our money, time, and energy on protecting our own rights while you, Airman, and others like you are left to your own devices. My current thinking is to suggest that all NRA/ILA lobbying and political action be clearly designated so that it affects only NRA members. Then you, Airman, and others like you can hold your heads high and say, with justifiable pride, that you have refused to benefit from the NRA or its members and we can applaud your independence. Don't you agree?

As a start, may I suggest that you, Airman, and every other CWP holder who is not an NRA member but has taken a required training course from an NRA certified instructor turn in your permits immediately. Take a bold stand for your principles. Tell your state that you will not comply with such a requirement even if it means you can't legally carry a concealed weapon.

VPLthrneck
February 22, 2008, 11:21 PM
From what others here mentioned about the renewal request, well I can tell you from experience that the NRA is the least bothersome of groups when it comes to renewing. I dropped my membership in the late '90s for several years, and I don't recall getting much stuff from them after a couple of unreplied to mailings. Now if you want groups that don't get the hint until you send them nasty grams try the NRCC and NRSC (National Rep. Congressional and Senatorial Comittess resp.)

But taurusowner makes a great point about the lobbying effects that the NRA provides. If the NRA wasn't effective at what it does, then the mainstream media wouldn't bash them like they do, and the U.N. wouldn't make an issue about their classification as a NGO (non-gov't org). Their are several things that each of us can do to the same effect, but large groups get attention. That is the reason I belong to the Heritage Foundation and the NRA (just got my Life-Member card in the mail yesterday!).

So if your friends don't wish to join then ask them this: What are you willing to do for our cause? I heard Mark Levin ask a guy that on his Wednesday program. The guy was complaining about McCain getting the nomination,etc. SO Levin barked at him about what he's done for conservatism (write letters, call offices, attend events, suport different groups) and the guy hadn't done squat. SO ask your friends who are on the fence about joining the NRA or other like-minded orgs and ask what they've done. But, I'm sure you already know the answer.

BTW: here's the link to my blog page with the letters I sent to McCain and the GOP. Feel free to borrow my ideas and GET INVOLVED!

http://web.mac.com/marine2531/Site/Blog/Blog.html

Robert Hairless
February 22, 2008, 11:29 PM
There are an estimated 80 million gun owners in the United States.

About 4 million of them are members of the NRA. That's about 5% of the gun owners in this country.

So 4 million gun owners give basic support to the NRA's ongoing services and actions that attempt to protect the Second Amendment rights of all 80 million gun owners. That's 5% of the gun owners in this country who carry the other 95%.

If my arithmetic is correct, each NRA member carries part of the burden for himself/herself and for 19 other gun owners.

Here in this thread I see that some of those 19 other gun owners not only want me to carry them but get really angry when I say they are freeloaders.

The solution is simple: find someone nicer to carry you, someone who appreciates the privilege and honor of it. I don't.

There are so many really nice NRA members who will carry you without asking you to get off and walk on your own two feet. Find one of them and jump on his or her back in addition to the 19 he or she is already carrying. Or trade off with someone who will take your place on my back without being nasty, spiteful, and ungrateful about it.

JKimball
February 23, 2008, 05:46 AM
Robert,

Thanks for all you do for the cause. I really should join the NRA.

You should know though, that the attitude you have shown here, which is pretty much a direct reflection of LaPierre's propaganda, does drive gun owners from the NRA, and may in fact be a significant part of the reason that the NRA is only 5% of gun owners.

I'll send you a PM to address the off topic issues.

cornman
February 23, 2008, 09:46 AM
I am not a supporter of fearmongers or greed.

http://www.amazon.com/Ricochet-Confessions-Lobbyist-Richard-Feldman/dp/0471679283

TexasRifleman
February 23, 2008, 10:15 AM
I am not a supporter of fearmongers or greed.

So I have to ask, did you actually read the book?

AirForceShooter
February 23, 2008, 10:42 AM
Robert Hairless:
Thank you for making the distinction between the NRA and the NRA-ILA.
I regularly make contributions to the ILA. I like heavy weight lobbists on my side working the congress and making big time threats.
I am not a member of the NRA.
It's that simple.

AFS

Robert Hairless
February 23, 2008, 01:22 PM
TexasRifleman:

I am not a supporter of fearmongers or greed.

So I have to ask, did you actually read the book?

Hey, play fair guy. Next thing you'll be asking if people understand what they read and evaluate it intelligently. If your tests keep escalating they will reach dizzying heights. The man read the Amazon ad, which should be enough for anyone.

JKimball sent me a private message to demonstrate that he is a great supporter of our Second Amendment rights:

Would it interest you to know that if I were paid for the time I spend promoting RKBA and reimbursed for the cost of ammunition to introduce people to shooting I would have enough money to pay for a lifetime NRA membership every year, and probably more than one?

Hotcha. JKimball shoots a lot, takes people shooting, and spends his money on ammunition so he carries his weight in the fight for Second Amendment rights. He has thoughts that he should be paid for his shooting time. What's the payscale nowadays for people who go to the range and shoot with others?

If you know, I'd also be interested in the payscale for breathing. I have been doing that all my life, and if I can't get paid for doing it I'd at least like to get a humanitarian award or two.

We are surrounded by the fiercest fighters for Second Amendment rights in this country. There's a guy who is persuading his wife that it's okay for him to shoot, another guy who shoots a lot of ammunition, and a guy who knows that the NRA is a scam because a book said so.

With people like that in the forefront of this battle, people like Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Carolyn McCarthy don't stand a chance. In fact I'd put Airman, JKimball, and Cornman in the same league as Carolyn McCarthy any day.

Heavy hitters here. Real sharp too.

JKimball
February 23, 2008, 03:42 PM
JKimball sent me a private message
It is a neat feature. You should learn how to use it.

So do you think you are fighting on the front lines for the RKBA cause when you go around beating on individual activists because they aren't paying Wayne's salary?

KYraj
February 24, 2008, 11:37 AM
What Robert Hairless said. In spades.

I have my own shooting range on 60 acres. I invite many people to come over and shoot any time they want. I also have many over to hunt. The only requirement is that they are members of the NRA. The only exception to this policy is for new shooters. However, they will be exposed to NRA proaganda.

Robo_Railer
February 24, 2008, 01:41 PM
Count me back in the "paying 5%." I just signed up on the NRA Web site last night, after a long time away. As a disabled veteran, I thought I'd go for the Distinguished Life Membership, with the EPL plan.
We can all be as "pro-2A" as we want, but without some visible entity actually doing something to fend off the gun-grabbers, it's all in vain. For me, that entity is the NRA, as the umbrella for all the affiliated local and state organizations. They're the "megaphone" that we all speak through.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v636/Doug_C_Maine/Smileycons/bullhorn.gif" . . .SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

You, too, can say "I'm the NRA." (https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?CampaignID=nranews) :cool:

Border
February 24, 2008, 02:40 PM
I upgraded to Life Member recently though I really couldn't afford it. I believe it important enough that I will even cut back on shooting to make it work if i have too! I have yet to hear a cogent argument against joining the NRA and prior to reading this post just guilt-tripped my friend to re-upping! :)

Robert Hairless
February 24, 2008, 03:14 PM
JKimball:

It is a neat feature. You should learn how to use it.

So do you think you are fighting on the front lines for the RKBA cause when you go around beating on individual activists because they aren't paying Wayne's salary?

But aren't you discriminating against everyone else when you send me private messages? And of course you discriminate against me when you sent private messages to me without my invitation or consent. Shame on you for practicing such widespread discrimination. I choose not to tolerate your discrimination by accepting your private messages. Silly boy.

You have an unnatural obsession with Wayne LaPierre. You're evidently much more focused on him than on anything useful, such as our right to keep and bear arms. From your constant reference to Wayne LaPierre by his first name only I suspect that either you must know him personally or there's an anger in you that focuses on him so intensely that he has taken on some unhealthy significance for you. If it's the result of a thwarted passion try sending him flowers or candy for his birthday, but please stop troubling me with your unhealthy obsession. I don't know the man and couldn't intervene for you even if I wanted to. Either ask him for a date and deal with his response or get over it and find a new love.

But you have no right to comment on whether Wayne LaPierre earns his salary or on anything else about the NRA because you don't pay for any of it. Get the point. You have no say in how I spend my money. People who live on handouts and free lunches are ungrateful and laughable when they complain about the quality of what they get for free. If you don't like it, either shut up or stop taking it. Pay your own way in life. Get a job and do the work. Stop being a bum.

That's a small part of my own irritation with freeloaders. You don't pay your own way but you whine and complain and dig and poke at the people who carry you. You're obviously unhappy with the way the NRA and its members are serving you. So find someone else to lug your dead weight around in a manner more suited to the style of life you desire. If you don't like diving in my dumpster, look for another dumpster. At least stop being so noisy about it.

You're distracting the people who carry you and trying to discourage others from helping bear your burden. That's another reason why I'm irritated by freeloaders such as you. You're not awfully bright about how you do it. Your goal should be to get as many other people as possible to help carry you. Instead of actively discouraging people from joining the NRA you should be encouraging as many people as possible to become members. That way you get more and more responsible people to take up your slack. Instead you try to drive them away. You can't even understand that the fewer of us there to carrr you, the closer you come to losing your ability to own guns and shoot them.

It's in your own interest as a freeloader to stop hurting the people who carry you. Without us you might have to confront the need to carry yourself and recognize at last that you can't do it by yourself. The anti gun forces are not going to be impressed when you say "But I shot a lot of ammunition yesterday. A whole lot. And I took some people shooting too. And shot enough to pay for an NRA Life Membership." They are smarter than you are, and not nearly as nice as I am.

As for my driving away potential NRA members by my attitude .... Leapin' lizards, Sandy, the mechanism is really deranged. You can't really believe that I'm talking about a social club or a tea dance here, or that I'm trying to recruit you or anyone else into a fraternity. I am expressing my thoughts, beliefs, and feelings about about destructive and self-destructive behavior with respect to Second Amendment rights.

This thread is in a way one of the funniest I've ever seen on any gun forum because my negative comments have been about a kind of person, not about anyone in particular. I hadn't singled out you, the Airman guy whose wife thinks now thinks it's okay for him to shoot because he's so logical, or the Cornman who read an ad for a book, or anyone else. But there's no shortage of volunteers for inclusion in that group of people for whom I have great contempt. You're coming out of the woodwork demanding to be recognized so that you can rail at me for holding you in contempt. You're all trying to justify your contemptibility with your quirky little principles and grievances, as if they mattered to me in the least. They don't. I have no interest in Wayne LaPierre other than that he does an effective job of what I need done to protect and further my Second Amendment rights, and that's why I belong to and support the NRA. They work, and they work better for me than you do with your peculiar attempts at sophistry. They matter to me. You don't.

It's up to you to change your behavior or live with its consequences. I'm well aware that I don't have the personality to plead with you or anyone else to do what's right and in your own interest as well as mine, and I'm far too old and unmotivated to change myself to please you. If I knew how to please you, I risk becoming you. There isn't any you in me. And that, I suspect, is what you find most irritating and unsettling.

In any confrontation in which something vital is at stake, the kinds of people I'd want around me are people like me, TexasRifleman, and some others here. No matter how much ammunition you shoot I don't want you next to me or--horrors!--behind me where I can't see what you're doing at all times. You don't think right. Go help the other side.

I am the NRA. So are others here. You aren't. Go away and stop whining that we shouldn't be either. We're not like you.

stubob2517
February 24, 2008, 04:52 PM
I was a member of the NRA in the 80s and early 90s and quit because of what I felt was the unreasonable stance of Mr. LaPierre and the NRA with their 'give them an inch and they'll take a mile, the sky is falling attitude' and if we don't take action NOW gun ownership as we know it is over. I guess both of our opinions were somewhat born out during AWB; we didn't lose all of our rights but it was a dark period for our freedoms as Americans.

I don't know if it is purely a matter of with age comes wisdom or that I have seen more threats to our freedoms recently during an administration I never would thought would have done so, but I have re-joined the NRA.

I know that I have opened the door for receiving constant requests for donations and the pressure of feeling that simply being a member is not doing enough to support the cause. Even when I left the NRA, and through to today, I have been a personal advocate for gun rights and have taken every opportunity that presented itself to discuss gun ownership, freedom, and the right we all have to protect ourselves from harm with people in support of 2A, those without opinion, and with antis.

I know that I am opening myself to get flamed here but with regards to Airman and BH (who has written some of the most succinct and thoughtful emails on the subject I have ever seen) I can best give my thoughts this way:

In 2003 I was active duty military; E-9, USN, EOD (bomb disposal). When Natilie Maines of the Dixie Chicks made her statement about being embarrassed that George Bush was from Texas and the group was demonized I was preparing to go to Iraq. Many of my friends and co-workers destroyed their Dixie Chicks CDs and vowed never to listen to them again, radio stations across the country pulled them from their playlists and the group was ostracized by many of their fans. I did not agree with what was said especially since the country was at war and there was a good chance that our enemies would use the statement as a propaganda tool against our country.

It was my feeling that even though I disagreed with their words, they were doing nothing more than using their First Amendment rights; something that many good Americans had fought and died for. It must be remembered that even though the FA gives us the right to say what we feel, with that right comes responsibility and the Dixie Chicks paid through their pocket books for what was said. I stood, and still stand, by their right to say it.

If Airman doesn't want to say why he doesn't want to join the NRA, that is his business and HIS business alone. If you are discussing gun rights with an anti is the first move you make to attack his stance as completely unreasonable and attempt to belittle what he believes in, or is it to try and determine WHY he feels that way and attempt, with the use of logic to show why he should feel otherwise?


I move that it is the antis who first say that OUR stance is completely unreasonable and belittle what we believe, and that attacking Arrman in the manner most have done here, many have stooped to the logical level of our opponents. I would like to think that most of us are above that. THR, remember?

Just my thoughts. I have donned my Kevlar and proximity gear; standing by for incoming.

JKimball
February 24, 2008, 05:54 PM
Robert, I think you have misunderstood me.

I apologize if anybody has taken my comments as an attempt to discourage people from joining the NRA. That is not my intent. I think if you look back at my posts you will see that I was making suggestions about how to reach more people more effectively. I haven't been trying to bad-mouth the NRA. That's probably why I keep referring to Wayne LaPierre. He is really the only contact I've had with the NRA, and I recognize that although I'm not real impressed with him, I know the NRA is made up of people I respect. Although I must admit Robert is making me second guess myself there by parroting Wayne's attitude and techniques to the T.

But you do make a good point that I should butt out. I'm not a member and I have distracted too much from this thread as it is.

Buttermilk
February 25, 2008, 03:40 PM
I'm a recently upgraded life member!! I'm so proud of that fact, I can't sit still!! I've been wanting this since I was 12 years old! That's a little over 40 years ago. This is great!! I can't be all the places Wayne LaPierre can be and I can't say as gracefully and tactfully what he can say. I can say,,,,,, that I like having him as my mouthpiece. Let 'er rip Wayne!!!!!!!!! You're doing a fine job!!!!!
I will also say that IMHO, what they are saying has been right on and the antis have been beaten at their game and now they are doing an end run and going for our ammo. I want and need the NRA watching my back and letting me know what is going on!! I want the NRA influencing Gun and Hunter Safety education!! If the NRA hadn't been doing that, I would have never survived my career as a Game Warden. When you are in the field daily with hundreds of guns constantly around you, you really appreciate the NRA and everything it does for its' members and the freeloaders. Yes, the freeloaders get benefits without having to pay for them.
I like the fact that as a member of the NRA, I have a voice and it is heard through Wayne LaPierre, Chris Cox, and all their associates.I like the job they are doing for me.
I like the fact that with my miniscule yearly membership fees, I have $1,000.00 worth of insurance on my guns.
I like the fact that I can go to the Friends of the NRA banquets and get a list and get to meet all the corporate sponsors of my area. That list of sponsors saves me so much time when it comes time for me to make a purchase and I know that my purchases will help keep a fellow gun owner and enthusiast in business and not be funding some antis' efforts against me and my familys' liberties.
I like the fact that now and when I am dead and buried, that the NRA has fought for and held on to mine and my familys' liberties.
You speaking against MY NRA???? Back off Buster!!! You really don't want to go there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 05:57 PM
I am not a NRA member for a couple of reasons. I dont agree with some of there polices. I don't think they pay enough attention to CA were i live. And some of the Bad stigma around the NRA has kept me at bay.

So i did the sensible thing i joined an organization that better suited my tastes. Which i have proudly displayed in my sig from the day i joined. Also i am active in calling the governor and such when the times require it. I dont believe every one needs to join the NRA in fact i hope all gun owners dont join it. I believe that if every gun owner join different ones and spread out there that would be more of a good effect. As others have said the NRA is not a pro everything gun related, but other organizations will and do cover what the NRA misses.

Having said that i have also taken for free around 12 on my friends shooting, for the first time in there lives! (thats most of my friends right now and about half are girls) I get a big kick out of doing this. And have decided that i want teach more people how to shoot and to become a better teacher. I am going to get a NRA instructor cert (pistol)so that i will have access to teach more people and to do a better job of it. Of course this means i will be a NRA member, i wont lose any sleep over it but i would not recommend NRA as a first choice to supporting the 2nd.


ps yes i know that you do not "have" to be a NRA member to get the NRA cert. but if i have the cert it seems odd not getting the membership. I am weird like that.

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 06:12 PM
I don't think they pay enough attention to CA were i live.

http://www.stopsanfranban.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=10468

You mean like last month when the California State Court of Appeals overturned the San Fran handgun ban?

In 2005 when NRA filed an injunction to halt the ban in the first place?

There's no telling how much money NRA pissed off over this San Francisco train wreck and that's not enough?
NRA spent 3 years and Lord knows how much money out there over this one issue.

What exactly would make you feel the love?

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:21 PM
Yes they fought on that issue but there have been many in the past they skip over.

Also you dont think that California Rifle And Pistol Association had nothing to do with it?


On some issues NRA and California Rifle And Pistol Association join together to fight. WHICH IS GREAT! I HAVE NO COMPLAINTS But there are some issues were California Rifle And Pistol Association is fighting it with out the help of the NRA. Also the California Rifle And Pistol Association sends me a book ever month about whats happening in CA and how best to be active in the out come.




I get this from the California Rifle And Pistol Association

full-time salaried legislative advocate (lobbyist) in Sacramento, the CRPA fights adverse firearms legislation and advances laws that will protect your rights.

Counsel for Litigation and Local Affairs files appropriate litigation against the state or cities that pass unconstitutional or illegal ill-conceived gun control laws, monitors local legislative efforts, and mobilizes CRPA's resources to oppose those efforts as necessary.

The CRPA's monthly publication, The Firing Line, keeps its members abreast of current legislative and shooting news, as well as offering a public forum so members can express their views in print.

a copy of Know Your California Gun Laws and
It's a Matter of Safety and Frequently Asked Questions Booklet

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 06:24 PM
Also you dont think that California Rifle And Pistol Association had nothing to do with it?


That's not the point. The point is that one issue took massive amounts of money to fight, from all involved.

I'd be willing to bet that as far as state issues go that one cost more than any other state issue NRA has been involved in other than the New Orleans mess.

I can't think of a single state/city fight where NRA has spent MORE money or time than the San Fran ban.

So though you may not feel like NRA does enough in California, fact is they probably do more with their resources out there than in any other state.

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:27 PM
Taken from CRPA website they explain it better

Doesn't NRA do all this?
No, not alone, while the NRA is active in California, almost every pro-gun effort in the state is a joint project between CRPA and NRA. And CRPA accomplishes many state and local projects beyond the NRA's efforts. The major difference is... while CRPA is committed to lobby and work on state and local litigation laws and legislation, the NRA is focusing on federal and national litigation laws and legislation. Together we have a tried and proven check and balance system. But, it takes both the CRPA and NRA to be the watch dogs and mutually make the right things happen. Take the advice of Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice-President of NRA and join CRPA today!


Hay i have listened to the NRA on what to join. btw i just found that out and think its funny. But no your wrong the CRPA does ALOT more for me in CA which has some of the worst laws. Not to mention i like there ethics better.


plus they have done this

Legislative Victories:

Bill - AB9 (Cardoza, D-Merced)
Title - Gun Safe Tax Credit
Purpose - Would have given a tax credit to gun safe buyers, but also would have registered owners of firearms by
creating a list of those using the gun safe tax credit.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

Bill - AB17 (Jackson, D-Santa Barbara)
Title - Repeal of State Control of Firearms Laws
Purpose - To repeal state preemption over local firearm laws so that county and city governments could each enact
their own separate and different firearm laws.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

Bill - AB22(Lowenthal, D-LongBeach
Title - Ban on Home Based Firearms Dealers
Purpose - To do away with home based firearms dealers by making it illegal for local governments to issue them
business licenses.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill causing it to become stalled until it died on file.

Bill - AB35 (Shelly, D-San Francisco/SB52 (Scott, D-Altadena)
Title - Handgun Registration and Owner Licensing
Purpose - To require handgun buyers to register all currently owned unregistered handguns and to re-register
those already registered, to pay an annual handgun registration fee for each, and to require buyers to first obtain
a license. This was all proposed under the guise of "safety." Had these bills passed in this form, there no doubt
would have been follow up legislation to extend them to all handgun owners, and possibly to all owners of rifles and
shotguns, as well.
CRPA Action - Opposed both bills resulting in them being cut back to just revising California's already existing safety
testing program, and increasing and expanding the fees being charged. In the revised form, the bills passed on a bare
minimum vote and were signed by the Governor.

Bill - AB273 (Scott, D- Altadena)
Title - Licensing of Handguns Buyers
Purpose - To require a state issue license to buy a handgun and the registration of all handguns already owned.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

Bill - AB566 (Koretz, D-West Hollywood)
Title - "Assault Weapon" Buy Back
Purpose - To use taxpayer money to establish and fund a state "assault weapon" buyback program.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bill – AB602, AB992 (Koretz, D-West Hollywood)/ (Ridley-Thomas, D-Los Angeles)
Title – Ammo Tax
Purpose – To change ammunition buyers a “fee” to pay for the expenses of gun shot victims. The “fee” would be ten cents per round or per individual primer component.
CRPA Action – Opposed both bills until they were defeated.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bill - AB1010 (Cardenas, D-Sylmar)
Title - Ban on Raffling Firearms
Purpose - To prohibit the raffle or free drawing of any firearm, firearm part, ammunition or ammunition component
at sportsmen's fund-raising dinners or other activities.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

Bill - AB1097 (Romero, D-Los Angeles)
Title - Gun Show Restrictions
Purpose - To place so many restrictions on gun shows that it would be virtually impossible for them to continue to operate.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was re-written to include only reasonable and acceptable new requirements
for gun shows.

Bill - AB1204 (Villaraigosa, D-Los Angeles)
Title - Increased Bans on Firearms Possession
Purpose - To make it illegal for any person to possess a firearm who has been convicted of almost any misdemeanor
within the last ten years.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was dropped by its author.

Bill - AB1219 (Frommer, D-Los Angeles)
Title - Mandatory "Smart Gun" Technology
Purpose - To mandate that all handgun manufacturers selling handguns in California equip them with currently
non-existent "Smartgun" technology that would allow only the owner or designated user of a handgun to fire it.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill causing it to become stalled until it died on file.

Bill - AB1607 (Shelley, D-San Francisco)
Title - Licensing of Handgun Buyers
Purpose - To require a state issued license to buy a handgun and the registration of all handguns already owned.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was dropped by the author.

Bill - AB1717 (Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys)
Title - Ballistic Testing
Purpose - To require costly and time consuming ballistic fingerprinting and record keeping of all handguns sold.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was amended to require only a study of ballistic finger printing technology.

Bill - AB2068 (Steinberg, D-Sacramento)
Title - Child Mental Health
Purpose - Among other things, to allow the questioning of children by school officials about the presence of firearms
in their homes and neighborhoods.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until the firearms questioning provision was removed.

Bill - AB2222 - (Koretz, D-West Hollywood)
Title - Ban on .50 Caliber Centerfire Rifles and Prohibition on Specified Rifle Ammunition
Purpose - To ban .50 caliber centerfire rifle and to prohibit .50 and smaller caliber ammunition that can penetrate armor.
The term "armor" was not defined for purposes of the bill, thus allowing an interpretation that could ban most hunting and
competition ammunition regardless of caliber.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.
Bill – AB2858 (Ridley-Thomas, D-Los Angeles)
Title – Ammunition Tax
Purpose – To tax (charge a “fee”) ammunition purchases at a rate of 10% and handgun purchases at a rate of 5%. The money thus raised would pay for medical treatment of uninsured persons having firearms related injuries and to support a huge bureaucracy to administer the program.
CRPA Action – Opposed the bill until it was defeated.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bill – SB35 (Scott, D-Altadena)
Title – Ballistic Identification
Purpose – To mandate that "ballistic identifier" information be stored digitally for all firearms sold by dealers on and after January 1, 2005. Because of government studies showing such a system to be impractical as proposed, the bill is in the process of being amended.
CRPA Action – Opposed the bill until it was defeated. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bill - SB510 (Scott, D-Altadena)
Title - Loaded Chamber Indicators
Purpose - To reguire that all semiautomatic firearms have loaded chamber indicators that allegedly would prevent
accidental discharge injuries.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it became stalled and was later rewritten to focus on airport secuity. Neutral
as amended.

Bill - SB950 (Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga)
Title - Illegal Firearms Possession
Purpose - To establish a computerized list of perosns lawfully prohibitied from possessing a firear, and to allow
recently prohibited persons to sell or transfer theri firearms to another person instead of having them confiscated
and dewtroyed without compensation by law enforecment.
CRPA Action - Supported the bill until it was passed and signed into law.

Bill – SB1140 (Scott, D-Altadena)
Title – Firearms Storage
Purpose – To revise the "criminal storage" of firearm laws. To apply to both loaded and unloaded firearms and in debate parental consent as a legal defense.
CRPA Action – Opposed the bill until it was vetoed by the Governor.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bill – SB1152 (Scott, D-Altadena)
Title – Ammunition Buyer Registration
Purpose – To require buyers of handguns ammunition to register at the time of purchase and to provide a thumbprint or hunting license number in the retailers registration book.
CRPA Action – Opposed the bill until it was vetoed by the Governor.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bill - SB1212 (Perata, D-Alameda)
Title - Product Liability: Firearms
Purpose - To allow product liability lawsuits against the manufacturers of firearms and ammunition for injuries
resulting from the criminal and careless use of their non-defective products.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was dropped by its author.
Bill - SB1496 (Solis, D-El Monte)
Title - To establish a state sponsored firearms "buyback" program and an advertising campaign against the ownership
of firearms.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

Bill – SB 1733 (Speier, D- Hillsborough)
Title – Gun Show Ban
Purpose – To ban gun shows at the Cow Palace in San Mateo County (Daly City).
CRPA Action – Opposed the bill until it was defeated.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bill - SCA12 (Perata, D-Alameda)
Title - Ammunition and Reloading Component Tax
Purpose - To pay for the operation of hispital emergency rooms and trauma cneters by taxing ammunition at a rate
of 5 cents per loaded round and 5 cents per individual reloading component.
CRPA Action - Opposed the bill until it was dropped by the author.

Litigation Victories:

Lawsuit - Harrot v. Kings County
Issue - Which firearms does the California Department of Justice refer to under the 1991 Amendments to the 1989
"Assault Weapon" Control Act?
Ruling - The ruling handed down on June 28, 2001 states that the DOJ must give notice of specifically what firearms
are AK or AR "series" guns. Eliminates confusion over AK and AR "series" guns.
CRPA Involvement - Filed an amicus brief in the case.

Lawsuit - McGee v. LAPD
Issue - Illegal firearms property seizures by the Los Angeles Police Department.
Ruling - LA City ordered to change policies and LAPD ordered to pay attorney's fees to CRPA and NRA.
CRPA Involvement - Filed suit in conjunction with the NRA.

Lawsuit - CRPA v. Compton
Issue - City of Compton's failure to produce documents relating to the issuance of concealed weapons permits
requested by CRPA through a Public Records Act Request.
Ruling - City ordered to pay attorney's fees and to produce the requested documents.
CRPA Involvement - Filed suit.

Lawsuit - CRPA v. Santa Barbara County
Issue - Santa Barbara County's failure to produce documents relating to the issuance of concealed weapons
permits requested by CRPA through a Public Records Act Request.
Ruling - County ordered to pay attorney's fees and to produce the requested documents.
CRPA Involvement: Filed Suit

Lawsuit - CRPA v. San Francisco
Issue - Legality of local "assault weapon" ordinance.
Ruling - City repealed the ordinance.
CRPA Involvement: Lead plaintiff

Issues: Preemption of local "AW" ordinance by state laws.

Status: Won. Challenge to the City and County of San Francisco's municipal "assault weapon" ordinances as preempted by state "assault weapon" law. Ordinance repealed in response to suit!

CITY OF LOS ANGELES

Issues: Preemption of local LA "AW" ordinance by state laws.

Status: Won. Challenge to the City of Los Angeles municipal "assault weapon" law as preempted by the state "assault weapon" law. Ordinance repealed in response to suit! Attorney's fees reimbursement motion filed December 22, 2003. Case is stayed by stipulation pending an opinion in an unrelated Cal Supreme Court decision on the fee recovery issue. In December 2004, the California Supreme Court reached its decisions in two cases addressing the "catalyst theory" for recovering attorneys' fees. The Court upheld the catalyst theory in California, although it has been rejected in federal courts. As a practical matter, this means that when an ordinance is challenged, if the city repeals the ordinance rather than litigate the matter, attorneys' fees are recoverable. Our motion to collect fees now goes back to the trial court where we can rely on the new California Supreme Court's decision to support our position.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

Issues: Challenge to local ban on .50 caliber firearms.

Status: Contra Costa County passed fifty caliber ban ordinance effective May 6, 2004. Preliminary Injunction motion filed by June, 2004. Hearing set by court for November 4, 2004. Ordinance became effective May 6th. Judge Vaughn Walker assigned (good news). Status of case uncertain in light of AB 50 taking effect 1/1/05. County appears to be repealing the ordinance. Case may be modified to challenge L. A. or S. F. ordinances, which are similar to Contra Costa County ordinance. Contra Costa repealed its ordinance rather than litigate this matter once the state passed AB 50, the statewide ban on possession on .50 caliber BMG firearms. Although the state law is significantly narrower than this county ordinance was, the County no doubt saw the passage of AB 50 as an opportunity to withdraw from this contentions fight.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

MODESTO SCHOOL BOARD

Issues:Propriety of closing down a gun range on school campus.

Status: School district failed to comply with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) before voting to demolish gun range on campus. Prevailed on appeal! Judgment entered February 4, 2004. The school must now reimburse fees since ACE prevailed. Fee reimbursement motion filed August 16, 2004. Litigating fee request.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONEJO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Issues: School district violated plaintiff's First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment rights, and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Status: Plaintiff, diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome, was suspended for five days and transferred to another school after stating during class: "my dad has a gun." Disciplined for this "threat." Mediation completed on June 29, 2004, case settled favorably.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

SAN JUAN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Issues: First Amendment Issue

Status: Sporting Clubs T-shirt banned from High School because of dress code prohibiting any depiction of weapons. Defendants' response pending. School District modified dress code in response to our demand.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Election Victories:

The defeat of David Roberti in the L.A. City 2nd Council District primary election was a great win for self-defense
civil rights. Roberti, the father of California's 1989 "assault weapon" law, was the odds on favorite to make it into
the run-off. As in the Feuer race.
CRPA Involvement - CRPA worked with NRA to get out the votes that beat Roberti in this election. Moderate
candidate Tom LaBonge went on to defeat leftist Beth Garfield!

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

The defeat of Mike Feuer in his race for the City Attorney 's Office in Los Angeles.
CRPA Involvement - CRPA worked with NRA to mount an aggressive get out the vote program which included
mailing absentee voter registration forms to members of both organizations eligible to vote in the City of Los Angeles.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

CRPA members and grassroots activists achieved some remarkable results at the local level in California this past election day. In races where CRPA selected a candidate; CRPA worked with grassroots gun-owners and CRPA members locally. CRPA selected candidates were elected in 60% of local races.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

In Richmond, CRPA members and the grassroots activists of West Contra Costa were successful in their goal of defeating Andrés Soto in his bid for a seat on the Richmond City Council. An intense campaign helped inform Richmond area voters of the atrocious record of this freedom-hating individual. Soto has been focused on restricting law-abiding gun-owners for nearly a decade and has worked in close coordination with the gun ban lobby. For years they've attempted, unsuccessfully, to ban gun shows from the Contra Costa County Fairgrounds. Most recently, this individual pushed the County Supervisors to ban the sale of .50 caliber rifles and ammunition throughout Contra Costa County. With 5 Richmond City Council positions open, Soto finished 6th.

Local Government Victories:

LONG BEACH .50 CAL BAN

Defeated at second reading! Defeating the Long Beach .50 caliber ban proposal was an extraordinary success. Though the City Council passed the ordinance with a few votes to spare, the City decided against the ordinance on the second reading (we were informed that this is the first time this has ever been done in Long Beach) to avoid litigation.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

"ASSAULT WEAPON" ORDINANCE REPEALS

Initially there were nine municipal "assault weapons" ordinances. As a result of our campaign for repeal, there are now no municipalities with "assault ordinances" remaining on the books.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

"SATURDAY NIGHT SPECIAL" ORDINANCE REPEALS

Initially there were 56 municipal "SNS" ordinances. As a result of our campaign for repeal, there are now only nine municipalities with "SNS" ordinances remaining on the books. None are being enforced. Los Angeles and San Francisco have already indicated they are repealing theirs. Once that is done, the rest will follow.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 06:32 PM
Again, what exactly is your point? No one says NRA did it alone.

What I said was your state and all the crazy crap your legislators cook up takes more resources from NRA than any other state.

It's always a massive fight in California, and still an area where real progress is made, yet you state that NRA doesn't do ENOUGH for you in California and so you're not willing to join?

That's just ridiculous. Your state gets more NRA money for local fights than anyone else, in addition to all the fighting at the Federal level.

You may have other reasons for not wanting to join the NRA but you cannot in all honesty claim it's because NRA doesn't do enough at the State/Local level in California.

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:34 PM
and

TRIGGER LOCK ORDINANCE REPEALS

Initially there were 34 municipal "trigger lock" ordinances. As a result of our campaign for repeal, there are now only 13 municipalities with "trigger lock" ordinances remaining on the books. None are being enforced.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Legislative Victory - "Saturday Night Special" Handgun Ban Ordinances Repealed.
Where - Alameda, Albany, Baldwin Park, Bell Gardens, Belmont, Berkeley, Beverly Hills, Compton, Daly City,
El Cerrito, Fremont, Half Moon Bay, Hayward, Huntington Park, Inglewood, Montebellow, Monterey Park, Norwalk,
Pco Rivera, Piedmont, Pinole, Pleasanton, Pomona, Richmond Rohnert Park, Sacramento, San Carlos, San Mateo,
San Pablo, San Rafael, Tiburon, Walnut, Walnut Creek, West Covina, West Hollywood, Los Angeles County,
Sacramento (December 12, 2000), Marin County, San Mateo, San Anseimo and Union City have all either repealed
or are repealing and de-publishing their ordinances.

Compulsory Storage or Trigger Lock Mandates Defeated or Repealed
Where - San Carlos, San Rafael, Layfayette, Fremont, National City, San Mateo, and Marin County, San Anselmo,
Oceanside, Beverly Hills.

One Gun a Month Ordinance Defeated
Where - West Hollywood

Waiting Period Extension Defeated
Where - Santa Monica

Background Check Provisions Repealed
Where - Santa Monica

Local Assault Weapon Bans Repealed.
Where - Stockton, Berkeley, Santa Monica, Pleasanton and several other cities.

FFL Dealer Banishment Ordinances Defeated or Repealed
Where - Glendale, and many cities in Orange and Fresno Counties

Hunting Bans/Discharge Prohibitions Defeated or Repealed
Where - Lake County and American City

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________



CRPA's Listing of Past Achievements:



Jan 2004: CRPA launches statewide public service gun safety campaign.
Dec 2003: CRPA helps defeat a Long Beach proposal that would have banned the sale of .50 caliber firearms
in the city.

Aug 2003: In response to a CRPA pre-litigation demand for repeal of its trigger lock ordinance, Contra Costa
County repeals its ordinance rather than face a CRPA lawsuit.

Jan 2003: CRPA Lawsuit Forces San Francisco To Repeal Its "Assault Weapon" Ban

Apr 2002: CRPA Condemns Kaiser Permanente Campaign Against Gun Ownership

Apr 2002: CRPA Launches Project To Assist Local Pro Self-Defense Candidates

Oct 2001: CRPA Re-Launches Controversial Billboard Campaign "Society is safer when criminals don't know
who's armed."

1995: CRPA Launches Controversial Billboard Campaign "Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed."

1991: CRPA conducts a poll of police officers and sheriffs throughout California, conclusively establishing that
law enforcement does not endorse gun control as a crime control measure.

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 06:38 PM
Again, you're talking nonsense because you know you have no leg to stand on. I'm sure the CRPA is a very good organization.

No one says there are not state organizations that are as important. Hell my signature has ads for the Texas State Rifle Association all over it.

You asserted however that the NRA doesn't do enough for your state, and the fact is they do more out there than for any other state, even though they generally only fight at the Federal level.

NRA has gone above and beyond for California and you say you won't join because it's not enough.

That is outrageous frankly, and naive of you to think that only state and local fights matter.

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:38 PM
Yes i can claim that, even as powerful as the NRA is they dont focus 100% on CA were as CRPA does. Thats what i need, they also dont focus 100% in all areas NRA is not the end all, though of course i am going to be a paying member of the NRA anyway lol

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:41 PM
RA has gone above and beyond for California and you say you won't join because it's not enough.

That is outrageous frankly, and naive of you to think that only state and local fights matter.

please read my FIRST post you will see that i list about 3 or 4 reasons why i did not join them not just one. Its because of all those reasons i dont join not just the one your arguing on.

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 06:41 PM
Thats what i need,

So if there's a Federal ban of some sort proposed you won't be impacted at all?

You have no interest in the Heller case?

There's more to the world than what goes on in California, as hard as that might be to believe.

please read my FIRST post you will see that i list about 3 or 4 reasons why i did not join them not just one. Its because of all those reasons i dont join not just the one your arguing on.

Yeah I get that, I said that already however I contend that particular reason is absolutely bogus especially when talking about California.

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:46 PM
Um well if i had the money i would join every 2nd origination. But i dont! so i have to choose which ones i join. And the one does the most for me is CRPA. If you would like to send me 10 dollars i will join the NRA right now on your good faith of sending the money.

CRPA does fight federal issue they yell at our heads of state not to pass federal bills.

Also you dont think if every state had 2 million members in there own state pro 2nd that it would be just as good as a federal 2nd group. Instead of one call they get 50. I think we need more members signing up for 2nd groups period. Thats what we need. Not only the NRA

mindwip
February 27, 2008, 06:52 PM
Honestly i dont get were you talk about heller and breing me into this. You are making wide claims about what CRPA with out even knowing all they do.

Clements amicus brief was filed as part of a campaign in which amicus briefs covering various issues were filed. Vice President Dick Cheney joined a bipartisan majority of 55 senators and 250 representatives in filing a pro-Second Amendment brief in the case. This is the largest number of co-signers on a congressional amicus brief in American history! CRPA joined with forty other state rifle and pistol associations from across the country in filing a powerful and significant amicus brief in the case. CRPA’s brief supports the Second Amendment protection of an individual right to keep and bear arms. A companion amicus brief in support of the Second Amendment was filed by: twenty-nine California District Attorneys, the San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association, the Long Beach Police Officers Association, and other law enforcement groups from across the country. CRPA’s attorneys assisted in writing the brief and in requesting that those district attorneys and law enforcement associations sign on.

Redhawk1
February 27, 2008, 07:33 PM
I am the NRA,
I am a Endowment Life Member and dammed proud of it.

I have never understood why anyone that owns guns, would not join. In my opinion, if gun laws get passed, the non NRA member have no reason to complain, after all, they must not of cared in the first place. JMHO.

Robo_Railer
February 27, 2008, 07:43 PM
Yes i can claim that, even as powerful as the NRA is they dont focus 100% on CA were as CRPA does.Right, and as much as the rest of us are willing to help you guys out, we don't pay dues to the National Rifle Association to have it "focus 100% on CA." That's why we support our own state and local organizations.

Also you dont think if every state had 2 million members in there own state pro 2nd that it would be just ass good as a federal 2nd group. Instead of one call they get 50.State organizations may be concerned about what happens in other states (ever heard the expression "domino effect"?), but their members expect them to largely pay attention to what's going on in their own state.
Who would you expect to be receiving those "50 calls," anyway? When it comes to national legislation, each state organization can call that state's Representatives and Senators. It'd be pretty foolish for the president of the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine to call Dianne Feinstein about anything, wouldn't it? Not just because she's not going to listen anyway, but she was elected by voters in California.
The NRA can lobby pretty much anyone, and does so. Furthermore, having a national organization pushing for us helps show that "united we stand." We're not "just a bunch of moose hunters from Maine" or "just a bunch of good ol' cowboys from Texas." The NRA can call DiFi or anyone else and tell them that the voters of that state and all of the others are tired of gun control laws that do nothing to control crime. I think we both know how much good talking to her will do, but maybe other legislators will vote appropriately once they have the facts.
I'm not about to ask that I be exempted from paying a percentage of my NRA dues that might go to fighting ridiculous state laws in your state or any other because "that doesn't affect me." I personally think the PRK has too many Demmies at both state and federal levels, and maybe you're just getting the government you deserve. But stupid laws that get passed in your state might inspire gun-grabbers in other states, including mine, and that's one more reason we need a national organization keeping watch.

"We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately." -- Benjamin Franklin

hanno
February 27, 2008, 08:47 PM
I'm a proud life member of the NRA and bought a life membership for my son when he was still a child.

The NRA isn't perfect and I don't always agree with their positions/actions. No matter, the NRA is crucial to our RKBA and the promotion of the shooting sports. I wish all shooters joined.

Buttermilk
February 29, 2008, 02:11 PM
Okay,
Let's all join a real fighting team. Each of us needs to join the NRA AND our state organization. Are we going to let the pro crime forces(anti gun)go unchallenged while we fight amongst ourselves?
Let's use our time wisely and join forces and fight stronger!! Don't you know the pro crime people are sitting back and laughing at us, while reading, and rubbing their hands together, while chuckling, and saying,"Now we got 'em goin".
We are smarter than this and we need to fight smarter and tougher. Don't look for a reason to not join and be a part of the problem. Realize that there will always be differences of opinions BUT the common goal is to be part of the solution that gets things done.

TexasRifleman
February 29, 2008, 02:25 PM
.....
Nevermind

aka108
February 29, 2008, 03:39 PM
If the NRA and a few other fine organizations did not exist the shooting sports and firearms ownership would be something we'd be reading about in a history book. Every gun owner should be a member of and reasonable financial contributor to the NRA and to keep the 2nd Amendment alive.

Redhawk1
February 29, 2008, 03:46 PM
aka108, how true...

TooTaxed
March 2, 2008, 03:24 PM
The NRA is the only group that closely tracks proposed gun-related laws in Congress and the individual states...and many citys...and alerts members by EMAIL, including action contact information, so they can take appropriate action. That is an essential activity in order for us to retain our gun rights, and I am proud to support it.:D

Troutman
March 4, 2008, 02:03 AM
Did anyone bring up, that a $25 dollar membership (1-year).
You will receive a “special gift”, from the NRA.
And it’s not a calendar and a handshake either.

Robo_Railer
March 4, 2008, 04:49 AM
Psst--it's $35 a year now. I just looked here (https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp) to be sure, but I thought that's what I had seen when I got back into it recently.
Associate ($10; no magazine), Junior ($15.00 to $24.95), and Distinguished (age 65+ or Disabled Veteran, $30) Memberships are also available.
Well worth it, IMHO.

Titus
March 4, 2008, 05:05 AM
See the link in my sig. You should still be able to get the annual at $25.

Robo_Railer
March 4, 2008, 08:38 AM
Doh! I've seen your sigline before, but it just didn't register with me. :o
I stand (sit) corrected. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v636/Doug_C_Maine/Smileycons/slap.gif

That's a good opportunity for somebody to join up!

mindwip
March 5, 2008, 04:38 AM
Ok maybe i am slow today, whats the "special gift" because if its a joke i dont get it lol?

Whats the difference between the magazines?/Are they well writen, thinking about getting the American Rifleman

Titus Thanks for your sig! how come its cheaper?

wideym
March 5, 2008, 05:42 AM
I put off checking out this thread for awhile now just because any "NRA" title will have the "I love the NRA" and "I hate the NRA" posters. Guess what, it was worse than I thought. Expecially the "freeloader" crap.

If you do not publish a book, magazine, even newspaper article does that mean you are a freeloader to the 1st amemdment and reporters are carrying you on their back?

What about all the war in Iraq? If you haven't fought over there does that make you a freeloader and your opinion not only doesn't count but is subject to ridicule? That would be 99% of the country, including most posters here.

You never win over anyone by calling them names. The NRA has RECUITING DRIVES not I'LL CALL YOU NAMES AND MAKE FUN OF YOU DRIVES. We need more members, not pissed of people who will bad mouth the NRA at every turn just because NRA members call them freeloaders. If they don't like Wayne, tell them about local NRA activities like Friends of the NRA banqets. You are an NRA member and don't do any local NRA activies? Only send in your membership dues once a year? Then you may not be a freeloader, but you are close, and the active members carry you on their back.

P.S. I am a life member of the NRA even though they piss me off sometimes.

Redhawk1
March 5, 2008, 07:04 AM
wideym , no matter what you say to someone that is anti-NRA, they don't care. You can talk nice and kiss there backside all you want, but they have there minds made up.
I personally don't care if they are NRA members, but at least be part of some pro gun organization, if you are a gun owner.

RTFM
March 5, 2008, 07:42 AM
.... they always shy away and make excuses every time I bring up the subject of becoming a member. One friend is concerned about the price of a basic membership, yet spends the money on AK/SKS supplies every time he has change in his pocket.


Here's a hint from someone that will probably never join the NRA, it's not the NRA that's turning them off it's you sparky, your badgering them to death on joining.
There good enough friends to NOT tell you to drop it, but internally there sick-to-death of you badgering them about joining.

Your a life member - good for you, leave it at that.

If they are to ever join, let it be THEIR decision, not your hounding.

wideym
March 5, 2008, 08:18 AM
Redhawk1: I was one of the anti-NRA guys who would not re-join no matter what. Until a local NRA cordinator invited me to Friends of the NRA Dinner. It opened my eyes to what the real NRA is, my neighbors. It changed my perception of the NRA as a huge lobbying corporation in Washington that only watches out for themselves. Do not discount the value of a freindly talk and an invitation.

American_Pit_Bull
March 5, 2008, 09:24 AM
What can I say to convince them the benefits of NRA membership?If they are close friends, I would purchase them memberships... At $25 a piece, you would get your point across.

Posted byRobo_Railer
Psst--it's $35 a year now.You can still get them for $25

TurboJeff
March 5, 2008, 09:28 AM
I have been a member of NRA for most of my adult life. About 5 years ago, I had to declare personal bankruptcy. One of the the things I had to let go was my membership in NRA.

Now that I'm back on my feet again, I just recently rejoined. My NRA card and packet arrived in the mail last week. I think I'll buy a membership for my wife. She's also an enthusiast and has her HCP.

If you enjoyed reading about "NRA Membership" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!