Latest Emails from the NRA Change in Tone


PDA






Doc7
May 12, 2013, 09:57 AM
I am wondering if anyone else has noticed this and is concerned by it.

I joined the NRA in winter of 2012 (unrelated to Sandy Hook, although I did get my membership card after that happened; I had asked for the membership for Christmas), about 6 months into my gun ownership career. I'm proud to be a member of an organization that so aggressively defends my rights in this area.

One thing I really liked about a lot of what I saw from the NRA, and which I have read both here and elsewhere, is that they were doggedly single-issue. They have one purpose - defend the rights of the American citizen to purchase and use firearms. They grade politicians on their firearm-related votes and nothing else.

The last couple of e-mails I've gotten from the NRA (during and since the conference) and in the latest copies of magazines I've gotten, there are frequent references to unemployment, ObamaCare, Benghazi, and many other topics that don't have anything to do with guns. Even though my political leanings fall into what seems to be the most vocal majority on a message board like this one and possibly the NRA membership as a whole, I still find this off-putting and counter-productive. I think these kinds of messages solidify the perception that the NRA is a right wing organization instead of what I think it really is, a firearms and nothing but organization.

Does anyone else get this feeling, or has it been this way a long time and I've only noticed it recently? I think we should be trying to win over more "liberals" (although I'm still recognizing the fact that many liberals ARE gun owners and NRA members) and people of all political backgrounds, colors, etc. If a Democrat who is thinking about purchasing a handgun to concealed carry is perusing the magazine rack and picks up an NRA publication, do we really think they will continue reading the magazine if the first article they read is a rant about Obama's failed social policies?

If you enjoyed reading about "Latest Emails from the NRA Change in Tone" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SuperNaut
May 12, 2013, 10:10 AM
I donate to the NRA-ILA instead of just the NRA for this very reason. There is a positive to the way it is structured, think of it this way:

NRA = Kata

NRA-ILA = Randori

Or:

NRA = The Battle Cry

NRA-ILA = The Battle

jem375
May 12, 2013, 10:13 AM
Are you sure you are a NRA member??.. Of course NRA members have to get into politics to keep the gun haters or administration from passing gun laws that effect us gun owners...

Doc7
May 12, 2013, 10:20 AM
jem375 - I didn't say I'm not into politics. But why lump the gun issue with the other issues when it doesn't always line up? There will be plenty of times where a GOP candidate with an NRA "F" rating may be going against a Dem with an "A" rating. The NRA isn't about health care, foreign policy, or abortion rights. It is about the 2nd Amendment.

Rembrandt
May 12, 2013, 11:28 AM
It wasn't the NRA that has tried to force healthcare professionals to ask gun questions from those seeking medical care.....it was Obamacare. Bengazi is about our National Security and protection of US Citizens home and abroad. If you don't think those things infringe on the second amendment and your freedom, better wake up.

sidheshooter
May 12, 2013, 03:14 PM
I'm going to agree with the OP here; I want my NRA single issue, and totally committed.

Hell, I now want my NRA single issue and on the offensive--it's no longer enough to defend against attacks on the 2A, it's time to push for protections.

MErl
May 12, 2013, 03:51 PM
you noticed that email as well? I agree, they are a pro gun lobby and should stick to that.

ok, ok, ILA is the part that works with Govt and NRA is the part that works with shooters. Still single issue, stick to it and don't muddy the issue.

There are shooters out there that like some of the rest of the things this administration is doing and the NRA is actively driving them away.

-v-
May 12, 2013, 04:02 PM
I'm with the OP there. Lets keep it to guns and not to general republican issues. More people we get on both sides of the aisle to push for gun rights, the more secure those rights become. Its always dangerous to drive away potential support, and we need every Pro-gun R, D, or I that we can muster.

Lets look at the defeat of all the rescent anti-gun legislation. I'm sure it would have passed if it wasn't for millions writing their congressmen that they opposed any new gun control measures, be they republicans, democrats, or independents. We needed them then, we need them now, and we WILL need them in the future when the gun grabbers make another push. Don't worry, we all know they will.

Doc7
May 12, 2013, 04:04 PM
Glad to see a lot of people in agreement here. The next time I get a similar feel from an article I will write them a letter and see if I get any useful feedback from the organization. I'm not interested in making waves, but I'm paying money to be a member of and support a gun rights group, not a conservative think tank.

il_10
May 12, 2013, 04:04 PM
This is part of the reason I try to focus more on local or state groups that promote 2A. VCDL has done quite a bit for Virginia in the past few years; it's nice to directly see the work my donations help advance.

Johannes_Paulsen
May 12, 2013, 04:06 PM
Agree with Doc7. My personal beliefs skew libertarian anyway, but the right to keep and bear arms has to be non-partisan.

basicblur
May 12, 2013, 04:17 PM
The last couple of e-mails I've gotten from the NRA (during and since the conference) and in the latest copies of magazines I've gotten, there are frequent references to unemployment, ObamaCare, Benghazi, and many other topics that don't have anything to do with guns.
Don't know 'bout the unemployment and Benghazi blurbs, but I've seen numerous discussions about items in ObamaCare that could very well affect your gun rights.
Some folks can only connect the dots and get a straight line - others know how to triangulate...

I still see folks (including the loony leftists on MSNBC etc) that are now attacking the NRA-ILA. In their continuing 'divide and conquer' strategy (which sadly some in the shooting sports / NRA are falling for) they love to point out that years ago, the NRA was about hunting, target shooting, safety, yadda yadda yadda. They never miss a chance to denigrate the NRA-ILA and point out how the NRA has strayed from its roots / original mission.

Talk about blaming the victim!

I'm sure the NRA would love to spend all its time / money on actual shooting related items - it's just that anti-2nd clowns like the pundits at MSNBC, The Brady Bunch, etc will not allow them to do so!

mrvco
May 12, 2013, 04:19 PM
Agree with Doc7. My personal beliefs skew libertarian anyway, but the right to keep and bear arms has to be non-partisan.
ditto

Obviously there is going to be "some" blurring of the lines due to all the tactics used by the Antis, but that IS why they use those tactics. So the NRA really needs to be cognizant of that and not get sucked into peripheral issues that can be divisive for Pro-2A members of the main-stream Republicans, Blue-dog Dems, Tea Partiers, Libertarians or whatever.

Arp32
May 12, 2013, 04:42 PM
I noticed it and it bothered me too, although as a relatively new NRA member I had assumed it was always the case. Honestly that's what has kept me from being an NRA member until recently.

Although I mostly lean to one party, there are some core plank issues I completely disagree with, so I don't donate to the party. To be honest, I'm suspicious of anyone who follows one party 100% and disagrees with 100% of what the other party promotes... Haven't you ever seen the pendulum swing? Because it certainly does if you watch it long enough.

I do, however, donate to other single issue advocacy groups that align with my beliefs.

I knew what I was getting into when I joined the NRA after the recent events, but I held my nose knowing it was a necessary check on those who don't understand or support the 2nd amendment.

David G.
May 12, 2013, 04:52 PM
I too generally agree with the positions the NRA is taking on other subjects but do NOT want them brought up in the first place by them.

Texan Scott
May 12, 2013, 05:14 PM
I can't help but wonder if this isn't somehow related to the sudden increase in membership ... they may be playing to the feelings of a larger segment of the member body... I don't disagree with what I've seen, but I DO NOT LIKE SEEING IT in the NRA forum. Probably safe to say that the large majority of us disagree with Zero's politics... but the NRA is not a Barry -bashing club... WE HAVE A POSITIVE MESSAGE, AND WE NEED TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.

DO YOU HEAR US, NRA? KEEP THE RKBA MESSAGE CLEAN, CLEAR, AND UNCLUTTERED!

Dean1818
May 12, 2013, 05:59 PM
However......... Its tough NOT to be partisan, when one group is far and above taking shots at gun ownership.

ONE of the parties, regularly use words like :

Hicks, red-necks, idiots, paranoid, stupid............


They constantly tell lies about gun owners........


The people that hit me with...". YOU DONT NEED THAT" are by a vast majority ONE of the parties

Its like sport to ONE of the parties.......

Maybe its a bit too political, but sheeze................ If someone is offended by what he NRA says, they arent listening to what the other guys says about YOU....... Hourly...... Dayly.....

Doc7
May 12, 2013, 06:59 PM
Dean, I don't deny that it seems to me that the majority of Pro-gun fall into one end of the political spectrum and the majority of Anti-gun fall into the other end.

I'll even agree with the statement that the 2nd Amendment is a litmus test for a person's views on a whole variety of individual rights vs government control, and again a lot of those situations fall into a certain political spectrum as well.

However, as we clearly saw with the outcome of the latest federal gun control legislation, we NEED both sides of the fence on our side. There are tons of venues and occasions at which those of us who are conservative can espouse those views. I don't think the NRA is one of those venues or occasions. Turning away a whole group of people is exactly WHY they call us "Rednecks" "hicks" "wrapped up in the American flag" etc - because even if they tried to relate to our gun views, turning it into a right-wing platform may prevent them from even reading more than a few pages in a gun magazine, then a few threads on a gun forum and taking a CCW class, and then becoming a card-carrying NRA member who emphatically defends his right to bear arms.

baz
May 12, 2013, 07:01 PM
Not being sure what this was all about, I scanned my emails, and the closest thing I came up with was a link to this:Things haven't been very good for President Obama lately. This week, Congress heard from witnesses concerning his administration's fatal failures related to the September 11, 2012, attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Not buying into the make-believe nonsense that Obama has improved America's standing among terrorists devoted to our destruction, jihadists recently attacked the Boston Marathon. The unemployment rate has decreased by only 0.4 percentage point since January.

And then there are the things that Obama really cares about. Perhaps symbolically, this week, Republican senators Bob Corker (Tenn.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) defeated Obama and Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) in a game of golf. Likewise, reporters have been suggesting that the defeat of Obama's gun control agenda in the Senate puts his political clout in as much doubt as his golf prowess.

Adding to the bad news for the Obama agenda, a report issued by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS-a component of the Justice Department) shows that firearm homicides in general, and violence at schools, have decreased substantially during the last two decades; the percentage of homicides committed with firearms has decreased; and only a tiny percentage of state prison inmates imprisoned for gun offenses obtain their guns from gun shows. As the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin characterizes it, the report is "wonderful news for the country and rotten data for anti-gun advocates." There's more (http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2013/4/new-government-report-undercuts-obama-anti-gun-agenda.aspx) of course, but the ostensible purpose of the email was to point to an NRA-ILA article about the BJS report. Perhaps it was a poorly chosen lead in to the BJS report to mention Benghazi or unemployment, but I don't take it to imply that NRA-ILA is deviating from its single issue focus on RKBA issues. Tactically, if not strategically, anything that undermines Obama is probably helpful to our cause. He has chosen to be the face of the latest assault on gun rights. If he and his administration should find itself distracted by questions about Benghazi, Obamacare, or anything else, that can only help distract from, and perhaps undermine, both his focus on gun control, as well as his credibility to get anything further accomplished in the remaining years of his presidency.

That is all I would read into this. If NRA-ILA actually starts lobbying, somehow, on other non gun related matters, then I would think it would be ill-advised and seen as a betrayal of the trust we put in it to pursue RKBA issues single mindedly.

Cosmoline
May 12, 2013, 07:05 PM
It is concerning. There are plenty of Republican leaders who want to tie gun rights in with a general culture war. It's not a good idea for a lot of reasons.

Sam1911
May 12, 2013, 07:14 PM
Amen! If RKBA could be truly divorced from the partisan hackery and culture war, red/blue, nonsense, gun control would be deader than disco.

Here's hoping, someday.

Unfortunately, the way we do things is to pretend that "people like us" think what we think. And then WE are often daft enough to buy into whatever we're told "people like us" think!

mnrivrat
May 12, 2013, 07:14 PM
I'm sure the NRA would love to spend all its time / money on actual shooting related items - it's just that anti-2nd clowns like the pundits at MSNBC, The Brady Bunch, etc will not allow them to do so!

+1 It wasn't the NRA that changed the game - they are, simply put, needed to meet the challenges to your gun rights. What good is focus on target shooting, safty, etc., if your gun is taken away from you ?

DO YOU HEAR US, NRA? KEEP THE RKBA MESSAGE CLEAN, CLEAR, AND UNCLUTTERED!

Tell that to MSNBC, CNN, and the anti 2nd amendment government officials. Tell them to focus on what this county needs, instead of trying to bastardize the 2nd amendment, so that the NRA can get back to core business.

exbrit49
May 12, 2013, 07:17 PM
Last fall before the General election I was really getting torqued off with all the political articles in the American Rifleman, Most penned by the president and high officers within the NRA. I wrote to them and called, and said stick to the gun issues and the second amendment. The responses were zero.
I did as I threatened, and did not renew my membership. I have been keeping watch on them via my Son in law's copy of the magazine and it appears they still want to be politicians in areas NOT PERTINANT to the primary focus, the Second Amendment and gun owners rights. Until I see a change. Count me out.
I realize my position is not a popular one but I am a firm believer in the political system and I don't think the NRA is the vehicle to move political changes not pertaining to gun ownersrights. I am quite capable of contacting my legislators and do frequently to address purely political issues!
So if any NRA officers are reading this, lets get back to basics. Then I will renew.

basicblur
May 12, 2013, 07:17 PM
Tactically, if not strategically, anything that undermines Obama is probably helpful to our cause. He has chosen to be the face of the latest assault on gun rights.
I'm not so sure Obama has "chosen" to get into the gun battle - I think he's a more pragmatic politician than some folks give him credit, and I've got a feeling he's taken to heart Bill Clinton's views on the NRA / gun rights, and how that could affect your political career.
I think Obama has been dragged kicking and screaming into this debate (although I do know his history and stand on guns).

If he and his administration should find itself distracted by questions about Benghazi, Obamacare, or anything else, that can only help distract from, and perhaps undermine, both his focus on gun control, as well as his credibility to get anything further accomplished in the remaining years of his presidency.
Bingo!
While some are thinking checkers, the NRA is thinking more along the lines of chess.

On another forum, we had a new member (troll?) whining about how stupid it was for the NRA to recommend guards in schools instead of just ? (I assume he wanted a line drawn in the sand?).
I told him (and others agreed) that when I heard the NRA come out with their recommendation for guards in schools, while it may not have been checkmate, it certainly was check!
Predictably (and the NRA knew this), the anti-2nd pundits for a while were stumbin', bumblin', mumblin' over how to handle the recommendation before they simply resorted to "do we really want our schools to be armed fortresses"?

Quite simply, the NRA called their bluff. Before the guards in schools recommendation, it was all about "the kids" and "our most precious resource". After the recommendation, it was all about not wanting to turn schools into armed forts and THE COST!
So...now that we have determined you HAVE put a price on your "most precious resource", we're just trying to determine what that price is?
(The guards in schools really drove the MSNBC pundits batty).

savanahsdad
May 12, 2013, 07:30 PM
Not being sure what this was all about, I scanned my emails, and the closest thing I came up with was a link to this:There's more (http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2013/4/new-government-report-undercuts-obama-anti-gun-agenda.aspx) of course, but the ostensible purpose of the email was to point to an NRA-ILA article about the BJS report. Perhaps it was a poorly chosen lead in to the BJS report to mention Benghazi or unemployment, but I don't take it to imply that NRA-ILA is deviating from its single issue focus on RKBA issues. Tactically, if not strategically, anything that undermines Obama is probably helpful to our cause. He has chosen to be the face of the latest assault on gun rights. If he and his administration should find itself distracted by questions about Benghazi, Obamacare, or anything else, that can only help distract from, and perhaps undermine, both his focus on gun control, as well as his credibility to get anything further accomplished in the remaining years of his presidency.

That is all I would read into this. If NRA-ILA actually starts lobbying, somehow, on other non gun related matters, then I would think it would be ill-advised and seen as a betrayal of the trust we put in it to pursue RKBA issues single mindedly.
yep .. thats what I took from it . so "what he said ^^^^^^ "

Sam1911
May 12, 2013, 07:31 PM
I'm not so sure Obama has "chosen" to get into the gun battle - I think he's a more pragmatic politician than some folks give him credit, and I've got a feeling he's taken to heart Bill Clinton's views on the NRA / gun rights, and how that could affect your political career.

I think I concur. Back on January 18th, right after the announcement that the President was naming Biden to head up the effort to stamp out gun rights in the names of the dead children (or however he put it), I posted this:

[A]ll indications -- really right from the initial burst of outcry -- seem to have been leading to an inevitable petering out of momentum. The best thing he could do with something so contentious and hard to win would be to delay and "think on it" for a while, release a few non-contentious orders that won't do anything at all and don't really get anyone up in arms, give it to his political scapegoat (Biden) to separate himself from the inevitable failure to go anywhere, blame Congress, and simply let the momentum for any action at all to die away as it always does.

If that's the plan (and it is pretty smart politics, after all) then he's RIGHT on track.

The_Armed_Therapist
May 12, 2013, 07:51 PM
Most people in my area are members of the Democratic Party, and are mostly Obama supporters. I find a lot of their support of him to be misplaced, but that's a separate issue. Most of these people are also pro-gun. Democrats with concealed carry permits, and who enjoy hunting (or would like to). So I can sympathize with wanting the NRA to stick to a single issue. However, I also don't trust the NRA, and don't think they do a good job of defending the right to keep and bear arms. So in that regard, I'm really not surprised.

baz
May 12, 2013, 08:55 PM
It is concerning. There are plenty of Republican leaders who want to tie gun rights in with a general culture war. It's not a good idea for a lot of reasons.It may be disconcerting, but it is not "concerning." I agree it is not a good idea, but I am not sure I agree that this is as wide spread as suggested. Most cultural conservatives support gun rights, but I don't think they are trying to "tie" gun rights to their cultural causes. I would be one of those.

docnyt
May 12, 2013, 09:57 PM
But how do you fight an opponent infringing on the 2nd amendment if it happens to be the POTUS and his party? The strategies the NRA uses will almost always be deemed political if the administration is the focus of those tactics.

Prince Yamato
May 12, 2013, 10:28 PM
Which I guess begs the question: at what point in recent history did guns become a partisan issue?

Waywatcher
May 12, 2013, 10:30 PM
This is exactly why I quit the NRA, Doc7.

SuperNaut
May 12, 2013, 10:34 PM
This is exactly why I quit the NRA, Doc7.
...and then donated to the NRA-ILA?






Right?

hang fire
May 13, 2013, 01:26 AM
Amen! If RKBA could be truly divorced from the partisan hackery and culture war, red/blue, nonsense, gun control would be deader than disco.

Here's hoping, someday.

Unfortunately, the way we do things is to pretend that "people like us" think what we think. And then WE are often daft enough to buy into whatever we're told "people like us" think!
The antis constantly tie social, political, or anything negative that happens, into screaming for more gun control.

Me, I can remember when the NRA was a namby pamby, goody goody organization of, can't we all just get along with our skeet shooting and hunting. The NRA back then was always ready to roll over to appease the antis on way too many issues.

The members had to fight like Hades to wake them up as to what was really going on, which was/is the antis will never relent with their anti 2nd amendment crusade using any and all means. It is a multi facet/front war the antis are waging, and the NRA (and us) had damn well better fight fire with fire.

Sam1911
May 13, 2013, 05:52 AM
... and the NRA (and us) had damn well better fight fire with fire.Certainly true! But that can't entail hooking the RKBA wagon to wayward social issues some folks see as "conservative" or whatever. I think that's the main point of this thread. If the NRA starts standing for some party stance on immigration, abortion, healthcare, foreign policy, religion, education, etc., etc., then our rights get dragged down into all that ugly partisan bickering over issues that folks who strongly support gun rights do NOT agree with each other on.

Do that, and the "star" of RKBA rises and falls on the fortunes of the specific political vermin who pander to one or the other particular socially self-identifying wing of society. And that's non-sustainable if we hope to have real long-term success.

RKBA just HAS to be beyond and above all that fluff.

Dean1818
May 13, 2013, 06:27 AM
Look at it this way.......

What major social issue is NOT tied to a political party or "side"


Unfortunately, it is what it is.......... I wonder how we got here......

Davek1977
May 13, 2013, 06:34 AM
The NRA is a friend, not foe. While not always agreeing with them 100%, they do far more for gun rights than any other group, and I won't withdraw support over what I see as a largely petty issue in the grand scheme of their mission. They had my support before, and they will continue to receive it until I feel there's a better alternative out there. At this point, no other group comes close in my view.

hillbilly
May 13, 2013, 09:48 AM
If you like guns, and are not in the NRA, then I say you are totally clueless.

Of course this applies only if you really do want to be able to keep your guns, don't care if you can keep buying as many guns as you want, don't care if you have good access to ammo, don't care if you have places to shoot your guns.

Folks who say, "Ewwww. The NRA has some allies who are like totally icky and everything" are completely clueless as to the nature of the fight we are in here.

Lefty-wing, anti-gun urbanite liberals hate us. Not just guns. They hate people who own guns, and who think they have a right to own guns.

Urbanite liberals are almost universally far-left Democrats.

If that's your enemy, then you adjust your tactics accordingly.

basicblur
May 13, 2013, 09:58 AM
I don't think our biggest problem right now is Obama, etc.
I think it's King Michael (Bloomberg).

Realizing he's not having much luck on a national level, once again the strategy is divide and conquer as Bloomberg and company attempt to pick off states in order to gain national momentum.

As some of the posts in here seem to indicate, divide and conquer is working much better than it should.

Sam1911
May 13, 2013, 10:18 AM
And a big part of the "divide and conquer" effort is to pin RKBA down to one certain wing of the political spectrum and tie it up in unrelated issues that a large portion of society will never agree to support, no matter how much they support the Constitution and RKBA.

Highland Ranger
May 13, 2013, 01:47 PM
On the surface, its easy to agree that the NRA should focus on a single issue. Even from NJ where they totally ignore us while our senators plot to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate (but do take our money.)

At the same time, isn't it kind of like tying one hand behind your back?

All of the issues of the day, Benghazi, Shenanigans at IRS, Obamacare details, don't they all erode credibility and as such help in the RKBA struggle?

If there wasn't all this noise going on, we might be in a lot more trouble than we are now, even though individual states are doing some serious damage of their own accord.

Sam1911
May 13, 2013, 01:59 PM
It depends on whether you see a politician or an administration as the embodiment of the anti-rights movement, and if you're willing to see our single-issue rights organization diversify into broader political infighting. Unfortunately, the "liberal" side of the aisle from generation to generation, doesn't have any sort of monopoly on unethical or even illegal activities, so if you tie RKBA to one platform or the other, then RKBA is vulnerable when "its" politicians falter, just as we may see Schumer & Co. as vulnerable when "their" folks are caught doing something despicable.

Surely, issues of the day can be used to torpedo the prospects of individual politicians, but the NRA should stay out of such things. Let the other political rodents gnaw on each other. Don't bring our RKBA organization down into that morass.

phil dirt
May 13, 2013, 02:05 PM
If not for the NRA and NRA-ILA, we would have lost our gun rights a long time ago. Those who object to the politics should continue to object ............ I don't have a problem with that, but we are in a fight that we will surely loose if we don't continue supporting NRA-ILA.

Dean1818
May 13, 2013, 03:08 PM
Without the NRA........ We would be in some deep waters....

They get my support

dprice3844444
May 13, 2013, 03:48 PM
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=261154614856#description
maybe this will help the nra

cluck
May 13, 2013, 03:52 PM
I donate to the NRA-ILA instead of just the NRA for this very reason. There is a positive to the way it is structured, think of it this way:

NRA = Kata

NRA-ILA = Randori

Or:

NRA = The Battle Cry

NRA-ILA = The Battle
I really like the martial arts reference!

Dave P.
May 13, 2013, 05:36 PM
I'm a NRA member because our local range requires it.

Strongly dislike their present political posturing.
If I want to read political mudslinging/crap I'll read
newspaper editorials.
I sent a few e-mails to the NRA about this....got a
"thanks for sharing" reply.
Somebody should forward a link to this thread!
Dave

Bruno2
May 13, 2013, 11:21 PM
Well, look at it like this. The more noise made about the other big issues the antis are up to like Benghazi or the IRS acting biased towards conservatives the more attention is diverted from the anti gun rights movement. I think its a good strategy. You haven't heard much about the UBC's or AWB's since the Benghazi hearings started have you?

Whatever it takes to keep them out of my sandbox.

r1derbike
May 13, 2013, 11:43 PM
Well, look at it like this. The more noise made about the other big issues the antis are up to like Benghazi or the IRS acting biased towards conservatives the more attention is diverted from the anti gun rights movement. I think its a good strategy. You haven't heard much about the UBC's or AWB's since the Benghazi hearings started have you?

Whatever it takes to keep them out of my sandbox.We don't need to let our guard down. The antis with their gun control agendas have only retreated into the nearest closets with their cloaks and daggers for round two.

Possibly counting Bloomberg's money for a political bribery scheme. Surely not here, in America?

HKGuns
May 13, 2013, 11:48 PM
Amazing to me how many folks posting in this thread who appear to want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend politics isn't all related.

NOBAMA needs to be discredited on as many fronts as possible. His lack of political clout will force gridlock which is good for everyone given 99.9% of his socialist agenda. It is all related and if you pretend it isn't you're fooling yourselves. If NOBAMA had any political clout at all we'd all be living under an assault weapons ban right now.

Don't fool yourselves into thinking this is over or that it wasn't his idea. He's screwed the Democratic party in '14 unless you all decide to forget or decide you're going to vote the other issues that don't matter.

(His policies are flawed to the core and are not creating jobs or growing the economy. Unless you're in the Government sector and even if you're employed by the Govt. he's milking taxpayers dry where that game will be up soon enough as well.)

Say it after me.....Highest Corporate Tax rate of any of the developed nations, including FRANCE. Keep saying it. Even after that, we're Trillions in the hole and the pension liability for all these Government employees is the next shoe to drop.

Bruno2
May 13, 2013, 11:56 PM
If anybody here doesn't think the NRA doesn't have well educated think tanks and strategists plotting and planning their every move then you need to wake up. Wayne Lapierre doesn't just all of the sudden write a quick speech on a napkin and then go address the nation on natl TV. There is more deep thought put into everything they come out saying than most mainstream media outlets.

These guys aren't amateurs and they know what they are doing. Just let them do their thing.

basicblur
May 14, 2013, 12:52 AM
If anybody here doesn't think the NRA doesn't have well educated think tanks and strategists plotting and planning their every move...
Yup!
I'm still DVRing a bunch of MSNBC shows and skimming 'em every night to see what gun lies they're telling tonight (they gave up trying to be cute / skirt the edges a while ago). I particularly remember one show (Chris Haynes) where the MSNBC talking heads were engaged in their usual groupthink, and making fun of the NRA (sounded like a bunch of the "cool kids" in high school).

One of the guests that night was Jack Abramoff (you remember him, don't you?).
Old Jack gave the MSNBC pundits around the table a quick lesson on how lobbying really works, and explained to them how the NRA was playing both sides in the recently defeated legislation. If one group they're lobbying wins, the legislation goes down in defeat - if the other side they're lobbying wins, they're working to water down the legislation to the point of it being useless.

I could not help laughing, as you could see the light come on in the heads of all the MSNBC "cool kids" around the table after Abramoff schooled 'em a bit - you could see the "HUH" expression on all of the group's faces!
Unfortunately, some NRA members have not had that light come on yet.

I saw many gun owners that were ripping the NRA because of some stuff they were doing regarding the recently defeated legislation - it's a shame they didn't see Abramoff's 'Inside Baseball' take on what the NRA was up to.

'Course, human nature being what it is, some of those same folks will refuse to see that light, and will probably stomp off in a huff....
I ain't giving that NRA any of my money!

Hey, I may not agree with everything the NRA does, and LaPierre may not be the best spokesman I've seen, but the more I learn, the better they seem to be playing the political game lately.

I wonder how many of those "ain't giving none of my money to the NRA" crowd are supporting their state 2nd Amendment activists?

I belong to the NRA for the national level work they do - I belong to VCDL for the state level work they do.

gmofftarki
May 14, 2013, 02:03 AM
I, too, would prefer "my" NRA to be focused solely on issues surrounding 2A.

On the other hand, one can empathize with the change in tone given the recent "Et tu, Harry?" moment after decades of endorsements.

hang fire
May 14, 2013, 02:19 AM
It depends on whether you see a politician or an administration as the embodiment of the anti-rights movement, and if you're willing to see our single-issue rights organization diversify into broader political infighting. Unfortunately, the "liberal" side of the aisle from generation to generation, doesn't have any sort of monopoly on unethical or even illegal activities, so if you tie RKBA to one platform or the other, then RKBA is vulnerable when "its" politicians falter, just as we may see Schumer & Co. as vulnerable when "their" folks are caught doing something despicable.

Surely, issues of the day can be used to torpedo the prospects of individual politicians, but the NRA should stay out of such things. Let the other political rodents gnaw on each other. Don't bring our RKBA organization down into that morass.
So by the same tolen, should all those political rodents who support the 2nd Amendment just STHU and keep out of the fight?

goon
May 14, 2013, 03:13 AM
I sympathize with the OP.
While I am totally in support of protecting the Second Amendment, the NRA does occasionally cross into right wing hysteria.
It's unproductive.

Sam1911
May 14, 2013, 05:55 AM
So by the same tolen, should all those political rodents who support the 2nd Amendment just STHU and keep out of the fight?What would that accomplish? I think you missed my point. I don't want the NRA endorsing any other political issues. But if the political types don't support RKBA, why would the NRA or any of us support THEM?

Pilot
May 14, 2013, 07:10 AM
jem375 - I didn't say I'm not into politics. But why lump the gun issue with the other issues when it doesn't always line up? There will be plenty of times where a GOP candidate with an NRA "F" rating may be going against a Dem with an "A" rating. The NRA isn't about health care, foreign policy, or abortion rights. It is about the 2nd Amendment.
Can you cite any examples of these Republicans with F rating and Democrats with A ratings?

MErl
May 14, 2013, 09:00 AM
One of the guests that night was Jack Abramoff (you remember him, don't you?).
Old Jack gave the MSNBC pundits around the table a quick lesson on how lobbying really works, and explained to them how the NRA was playing both sides in the recently defeated legislation. If one group they're lobbying wins, the legislation goes down in defeat - if the other side they're lobbying wins, they're working to water down the legislation to the point of it being useless.

This really applies more to the thread "Will you continue to support the SAF after..." than to this one. If in part of lobbying the NRA has to stoop to endorsing some other Conservative issue, I do not want them going that far.

nelsonal
May 14, 2013, 09:52 AM
jem375 - I didn't say I'm not into politics. But why lump the gun issue with the other issues when it doesn't always line up? There will be plenty of times where a GOP candidate with an NRA "F" rating may be going against a Dem with an "A" rating. The NRA isn't about health care, foreign policy, or abortion rights. It is about the 2nd Amendment.

I know this is a good point in theory, but in practice it seems like both parties don't really fear losing an NRA A rating (Toomey had one as did at least one Democratic senator who voted for the bill) unless there's a risk they'll loose soon (all the Democratic senators who voted against the bill are from strong gun states--Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Arkansas) and at least one is up for re-election soon (Montana's other Democratic senator voted for it despite an NRA A rating). In practice, one thing both parties seem to fear is a more extreme candidate "primarying" them, and sadly the more extreme pro-gun candidates tend to be of the Republican variety. Until there's a pro-gun primary risk for a super majority of senators in both parties, I'd expect this to remain an issue.

HOOfan_1
May 14, 2013, 10:16 AM
The last couple of e-mails I've gotten from the NRA (during and since the conference) and in the latest copies of magazines I've gotten, there are frequent references to unemployment, ObamaCare, Benghazi, and many other topics that don't have anything to do with guns.

While I don't think we need to hear bout ObamaCare form the NRA....I am perfectly fine with them hammering Benghazi. Obama is showing his UTTER HYPOCRISY right now. He has claimed that Republicans are dishonoring those who died at Benghazi by turning it into a political controversy.

This is not even a month after Obama paraded around the parents of the Newton victims for his own political capital. Not much infuriates me more than hypocrisy.

hang fire
May 14, 2013, 10:34 AM
While I don't think we need to hear bout ObamaCare form the NRA....I am perfectly fine with them hammering Benghazi. Obama is showing his UTTER HYPOCRISY right now. He has claimed that Republicans are dishonoring those who died at Benghazi by turning it into a political controversy.

This is not even a month after Obama paraded around the parents of the Newton victims for his own political capital. Not much infuriates me more than hypocrisy.
ObamaCare is chock full of antigun gun ownership regulations, Obama's Affordable Health Care is not about health, it is about control. And when you and your family's health care is controlled by the government, they will be controlling every aspect of your life.

basicblur
May 14, 2013, 12:00 PM
ObamaCare is chock full of antigun gun ownership regulations...
Nobody's paying attention to ya - quotes like that just get in the way of a good rant! :rolleyes:

From a post way back, I reported that I have seen numerous discussions about how ObamaCare can be used as a back door for various aspects of gun control.
If true, I not only have no problem with the NRA opposing it, I feel it's their job to do so.

Sam1911
May 14, 2013, 12:05 PM
Certainly it is perfectly acceptable for the NRA to take a strong public stance against an anti-gun provision in a specific piece of legislation. I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

I think what most of us here are opposed to is if the NRA should pander to broad "conservative" (or liberal, for that matter) issues that have no direct, tangible affect on gun control. e.g.: immigration, abortion, gay rights, education, foreign policy, religion, economics, etc., etc.

12many
May 14, 2013, 07:08 PM
I hope they focus on gun issues and not other non-gun issues as has happened with the AMA and ABA.

it is true though that often the gun issues are hidden deep inside other legislation or at first glance it may not seem gun related.

Part of what makes the NRA strong is the unity that the members share.

HKGuns
May 14, 2013, 08:33 PM
And when you and your family's health care is controlled by the government, they will be controlling every aspect of your life. Yep and it is scary how many sheeple don't get that or worse, want it.

Bruno2
May 14, 2013, 09:13 PM
You have to pass it to see whats in it.

This is another reason I think gun control is out of wind right now. Whenever you get politicians to reach across the aisle for stuff like Obamacare you are pretty much out of favors at this point.

Doug S
May 14, 2013, 09:39 PM
In general, I'm not so sure we can separate things out into stand alone, single issues. If voters keep voting the same way as they have in the last couple of elections (both parties tend to stand on platforms), I don't think the people behind Obama Care, Benghazi, and environment/jobs are going to allow the 2nd Amendment to stand alone. It will be taken away with the rest. So I can understand why the NRA might mention some other political issues that on the surface may seem unrelated, but foundationally are one and the same. Going a step further, I might add that I'm of the opinion that most people who ahve problems with this, try to play it off and being fair-minded, when in fact it is a reflection that their politics in the main are probably contrary to those the NRA are now promoting (A.K.A. Democrat/Liberal leaning voters).

Arp32
May 14, 2013, 11:15 PM
Well, I just got an email from the NRA Wine of the Month Club. So at least they are getting back to their core RTKBA mission.

goon
May 15, 2013, 05:31 AM
I also got the NRA wine of the month club email... You've got to be kidding.

Davek1977
May 15, 2013, 06:20 AM
Doug, I think you hit the nail on the head. The people shouting loudest about the NRA's conservative leanings and favor separating the 2A from other issues have been, in my experience, much more likely be liberal and Democrat. They don't like being forced to decide just how strongly they feel about the 2nd Amendment, and would rather pretend to embrace it, while wholeheartedly supporting those whose mission it is to destroy it. You can't have your cake and eat it to, and to pretend that this issue doesn't have partisan leanings simply means you arent paying attention.

alsaqr
May 15, 2013, 07:57 AM
I've been a member of the NRA for over 50 years: For many years i donated to the ILA and PVF until it hurt.

The NRA got into superfluous feel good stuff when long time political operative David A. Keene became president of that organization.

While the NRA was warning about the the US government confiscating your guns under the auspices of a UN treaty and Obama-Care; politicians in several states were planning serious gun control. As a result we were blind sided.

i find it strange that the NRA never demanded reform of the BATFE during the now defunct congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious.

http://www.meetthenra.org/nra-member/David%20A.%20Keene

Davek1977
May 15, 2013, 08:31 AM
While the NRA was warning about the the US government confiscating your guns under the auspices of a UN treaty and Obama-Care; politicians in several states were planning serious gun control. As a result we were blind sided.


I don't believe for a second that many people were blindsided by the gun control movement, especially after it was given such a boost from Sandy Hook. Anyone who was "caught unaware...be it NRA leadership...its membership...or the common citizen...by this administration pushing gun control hasn't paid attention to Obama and Biden's history in regards to guns, their previous statements, and general arrogance.

Doug S
May 15, 2013, 08:47 AM
...The people shouting loudest about the NRA's conservative leanings and favor separating the 2A from other issues have been, in my experience, much more likely be liberal and Democrat. They don't like being forced to decide just how strongly they feel about the 2nd Amendment, and would rather pretend to embrace it, while wholeheartedly supporting those whose mission it is to destroy it. You can't have your cake and eat it to, and to pretend that this issue doesn't have partisan leanings simply means you arent paying attention.

I don't believe for a second that many people were blindsided by the gun control movement, especially after it was given such a boost from Sandy Hook. Anyone who was "caught unaware...be it NRA leadership...its membership...or the common citizen...by this administration pushing gun control hasn't paid attention to Obama and Biden's history in regards to guns, their previous statements, and general arrogance.

Agreed, and agreed, and the truth is obvious for any discerning individual to see. What shocks me is the number of people like the ones mentioned in the comments that are members of gun forums, and claim to be advocates of the 2nd Amendment. No wonder our 2nd Amendment rights are so endangered.

Bruno2
May 15, 2013, 08:48 AM
Is Biden that anti or is he just playing the role that was assigned to him?

I don't have a problem with Democrats or liberals being pro gun. I believe they can be a very necessary group in the fight for gun rights. Those guys are working it from the inside. The Dems avoided this subject for a lot of yrs and recognized it as the political poison it really was. However, they thought they had a winner with Sandy Hook and rekindled the fight. Well, they found out different and I hope when many of them lose their jobs over this they will go back to being in the closet. I believe this is why they want to push a UBC through before the yr is up b/c in 2014 when they see the fallout it creates the movement will be dead again for many yrs.

SuperNaut
May 15, 2013, 08:56 AM
Agreed, and agreed, and the truth is obvious for any discerning individual to see. What shocks me is the number of people like the ones mentioned in the comments that are members of gun forums, and claim to be advocates of the 2nd Amendment. No wonder our 2nd Amendment rights are so endangered.
I'm just going to assume that you and Davek1977 are referring to the NRA-ILA, not the NRA. Because your self-righteous tone would only make sense if you were referring to the part of the NRA that actually does something, not the part that sells t-shirts and hats and magazines.

If I am wrong and you are actually referring to the merchandising and sales wing of the NRA, then well, enjoy your hat...

swalton1943
May 15, 2013, 08:56 AM
Notice how the msm has started taking notice since their 1st amendment cellphone calls got monitored?

alsaqr
May 15, 2013, 09:07 AM
Yep, the current administration has long wanted draconian gun control; nothing new here.

The NRA refuses to downgrade the A ratings of senators Manchin and Toomey who are making the most of their NRA status while pimping for "common sense" gun control. i've made at least 10 phone calls to the NRA in a vain attempt to get these guys downgraded to F status.

The best the NRA can do is to downgrade Manchin and Toomey when they stand for re-election. In the meantime it will cost many millions in NRA contributions to counter these two guys attempt to force more gun control on law abiding gun owners.

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