What Gun Advocacy Organizations Do You Belong To? Why?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChanceMcCall

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2017
Messages
350
Location
Midwest
I suspect that each person here has reasons for picking particular gun organizations to belong to and perhaps some they will not be involved with. It might be interesting, and perhaps helpful, for people to write about their feelings on the subject. Here are my ideas:

I am a Life Member of the following:

SASS - I used to compete in their shooting events and it was necessary to join to compete. The Life Membership made sense economically;
CMSA - same as above
NRA - I am a long-time member. I wanted to be a Life Member to be allowed to vote and because I wanted to give them a larger amount of money. I have not upgraded my membership but instead, funnel money the Institute for Legislative Action because I am more interested in legislative results than anything else;
Guns Save Lives An Illinois based organization that organizes rallies and does a lot of grass roots work including posting Burma Shave style signs along major highways that promote the benefits of owning guns for self defense.
The Well-Armed Woman - My wife and many of her friends really like this organization.

There are a number of national and state pro gun organizations I don't belong to for different reasons.

JPFO - I really like their message and their strategies, but, since I'm not Jewish it doesn't make any sense for me to join. (I'm not even sure that I would be allowed to join.)
SAF - I don't know enough about this organization to comment.
DRGO - Apparently part of SAF. Seems like a good idea.
GOA - Not my cup of coffee.
NAGR - I know nothing about them.

There are many not on this list. Feel free to add them and your comments about them.
 
I am an NRA Lifetime Member.
IMO, if not for the NRA, there would no longer be a 2nd amendment and we would be just like GB and AU.
Also, we are the 1000# gorilla on the Dem's back and I really like that.
I donate to the ILA branch so they can fight the court battles where we need them the most.
Are they perfect? No, but they are the best we have. We need them.
 
I have been a NRA member now for over 50 years. The NRA has a had a few ups and downs over the last few decades but those that have been long term NRA members, at least me for sure, will tell you that if not for the NRA we would not be allowed to own guns today.

Perhaps the others mentioned are just as good. I would rather be a member of one very strong organization rather than a member of several other lessor ones. No matter which ones those would be.
 
NRA (Life) - Why? Because they are the organization anti 2A people go after - The more members, the stronger the lobby
CRPA (California Rifle and Pistol Association) - fighting for protection of gun rights in CA
 
NRA Benefactor Member. Live member since I turned 18 (several decades back). Why? They are the #1 reason we haven't lost our 2A rights. In addition, they are also working for the FUTURE of the 2A through the NRA Foundation. I donated to both, though donating to the NRA Foundation is more fun (by going to Friends of NRA banquets).
NSSF - National Shooting Sports Foundation - Member for more than 20 years. They often back up or proceed the NRA in law suits in various states and localities not to mention on a National level. They also support clay shooting sports as well as youth shooting sports. (see SCTP as an example). They put on the SHOT Show every year as well.
 
Life member of the NRA, because they're THE gun rights organization in America and second place isn't even close for lobbying power on the national level.

If they back off from conservative politics unrelated to gun rights, I'll be glad to give them some more money.
 
NRA Life, recently used the discounted deal to upgrade to Endowment.
TSRA (Texas State Rifle Association)
Sporadically, I have had yearly memberships to JPFO and GOA, but I'm thinking SAF soon.
When I feel like donating, it is usually to NRA, or NRA-ILA.

Because theEdit NRA is the biggest and most influential, and most feared by the antis. JPFO is very strident and hard-core, but I don't think that they are very effective. GOA has seemed to me to be mostly interested in promoting themselves and criticizing the NRA, and I'm pretty fed up with their being so full of themselves without any actual effectiveness. SAF has done some good. But the rock is NRA.
 
Last edited:
NRA Life, recently used the discounted deal to upgrade to Endowment.
TSRA (Texas State Rifle Association)
Sporadically, I have had yearly memberships to JPFO and GOA, but I'm thinking SAF soon.
When I feel like donating, it is usually to NRA, or NRA-ILA.

Because theEdit NRA is the biggest and most influential, and most feared by the antis. JPFO is very strident and hard-core, but I don't think that they are very effective. GOA has seemed to me to be mostly interested in promoting themselves and criticizing the NRA, and I'm pretty fed up with their being so full of themselves without any actual effectiveness. SAF has done some good. But the rock is NRA.

JPFO interests me. I would think their message would resonate with Jewish people who disproportionately seem to be anti gun. As ethnic members of a group that has suffered many times throughout history I have never understood their reluctance to arm. Yet, reluctantly, I concede that JPFO does not seem to be very effective. As a former member, do you have any insight as to why they lack effectiveness?
 
SAF - I see them as the front lines. They take direct legal action. They do it even in places where draconian gun control is popular, suing for the rights of the citizens there that are abandoned by the NRA who only fights for red states.
 
Last edited:
deleted. realized I was shooting off about stuff that I don't know enough about.
 
I support the NRA and SAF.

To be honest I wouldn't be a member of the NRA if my range didn't require it. I think the NRA has an agenda to subject us all to permitted concealed carry with required training and insurance. The nat'l reciprocity bill that they support in congress would be the first step to do that. The next step would be a bill in congress that required training and insurance for everyone that carries. That would fit their agenda of training soccer moms and providing carry insurance from the same source. RKBA isn't about permits, training and insurance. It's about constitutional carry.
 
NRA and SAF because they do different things. NRA's strength is keeping gun restrictions from becoming law. SAF's strength is suing to overturn or limit restrictions after they've become law.

I'm a life member of the California Rifle & Pistol Association (the CA state NRA affiliate) because I used to live there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top