NRA endorsed Sen Manchin (D WV) calls for AWB

The Senator has called for a new AWB. Manchin was endorsed by the NRA and received an "A" rating from them. This is just the latest example of the NRA giving favorable ratings to politicians who are at heart enemies of our liberty and second amendment rights.

It is bad enough that an organization who is supposed to be dedicated to the RKBA cause endorsing and vouching for a man who is aligned with a party who has it as an express plank in their party platform to re-institute the AWB. What is worse is now the anti gunners and liberal media is using his status as an NRA A rated politician as ammunition in their call for an AWB. The implication they are going for is that even this (supposed) gun rights advocate agrees with these regulations.

He talks about guns being for hunting. How a man that thinks the 2nd is about hunting and target shooting got an NRA endorsement should bother us all.

Its sad that the NRA is selling us out endorsing politicians like this and now it is coming back to bite us in multiple ways.

Those who truly cherish freedom and our gun rights need to close ranks and fight this most recent assault on our liberty tooth and nail. The NRA needs to stop helping to get foxes to watch our hen house.

Here are videos of some of his recent comments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXls2jzpxwk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGDqMzRu4eQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWXzLyYq1o0

He has said nothing should be off the table. So there is no limit to how far he is willing to go in selling out your rights.

Yeah, let's get SOME idea of whether the NRA had any prior knowledge of his willingness to reverse his stance before you claim the NRA is at fault here.

Click to expand...

The democratic party has as a plank in their party platform a call to reinstate a new assault weapons ban

Here is the party's position, quoted directly and verbatem from the party paltform

Firearms. We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole—so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few. (emphasis added)

Click to expand...

The guy is a professed member of a group, whose professed aim is to reinstate the so called AWB. That is pretty good evidence right there.

If you're saying that the NRA should have read his mind and predicted before he even knew that he would respond to this event in this way .

Click to expand...

No, that is an absurd take away from my comments. One need not mind read. Rather they ought to do better vetting. I'll note this man didn't even earn their highest grade and yet they endorsed him. The fact you cannot give him your highest grade is a red flag. Furthermore, and more importantly, the NRA should better define the criteria of for giving their grades and endorsements. They have a history of giving A grades to candidates who have voted to confirm anti RKBA federal judges, and cabinet members. There is a big body of evidence that they ought not turn a blind eye to. Much of this is more meaningful than limited public statements and illusory commitments.

Is it asking to much for the NRA to get a candidate to clarify their position on and vision of the 2nd amendment before giving an A rating or an endorsement? Here is a clue if the answer involves reference to hunting and sportsmen there is a HUGE problem. It is not expecting too much of the NRA that they not endorse anyone unwilling to unequivocally state their position on the 2nd and unequivocally commit to protecting it. No Democrat should get an A rating unless they publicly renounce the gun control planks in their party platform and actively seek to have them removed. Further if you are going to caucus with and actively enable their to be congressional majority leadership that favors and will work for gun control measures you shouldn't get an A rating.

In short a huge lobbying group ought to be a little more in tune with what is really going on.

However, the real point is that this guy and the media are using his NRA status and backing to actively push for an AWB. Google his name and gun and see the types of things being written/said. The NRA ought to give him a chance to recant and if not very publicly pull their endorsements and his membership so that it is obvious that an AWB is not something that real NRA members support.

Too bad they are not putting all that money into mind reading insteading (sic) of fighting legal battles and working to support gun rights....

Click to expand...

See above. It is hardly a "witch hunt" to suggest they better vet and have more stringent criteria before handing out endorsements. What evidence do you have this guy ever publicly and unequivocally opposed an AWB and has thus has flip flopped. He said in campaign materials he supported the second amendment, a vague assertion at best. The democratic party platform says they support preserving the second amendment and then immediately call for an AWB. Any Democrat who asserts they support the second ought to be pressed on whether they mean that the way their party officially does.

While we are talking about what efforts the NRA has supported it might be worth noting they opposed taking the Heller case to the SCOTUS (well to be more precise they opposed Levy a Cato institute senior Fellow and Gura pursing Parker and filed sham litigation in an attempt to have the case consolidated with another case. The NRA also pressed for legislation that would have in effect denied the plaintiffs stadning on mootness grounds and prevented the case from proceeding. Levy has stated the NRA seriously hindered their efforts and nearly derailed the case) the most important gun rights victory we have ever won. Thank God we are not relying on the legal battles the NRA is fighting. Levy did more to assure gun rights in pressing Heller and its progeny than anything else that had been done to that point. It may be the foundation for invalidating any AWB that could be passed.

I am amazed (not) that even though most of these shootings have not involved semi-automatic rifles with extended capacity magazines that is what they are targeting as the solution.

Click to expand...

The first AWB was justified by fighting gun crime despite a minuscule percentage of gun crimes being committed with the types of weapons it targeted. Gun control has never been about safety, it has always been and continues to be about control and disarming the population to consolidate power over them

So the takeaway message here is that since the guy is nominally a Democrat, the NRA should not endorse him no matter what he says or does?

Click to expand...

That is an interesting reading of what I wrote. It requires ignoring much of what I wrote in fact. Rather. I suggested that the NRA not give out endorsements to folks who are not very clear on what their vision of the second amendment is and who are not clearly and publicly committed to specifics. Was Manchin? I never saw any campaign materials, nor have since been able to find any where that was the case.

I suggested perhaps they not endorse folks who cannot even earn their highest grades on their report card. If one is not getting the highest grade that suggests they are not fully committed to RKBA issues.

I hardly suggested they could never endorse a Democrat irrespective of anything they said or did. At best I suggested that they not endorse Democrats who have not made it clear through word AND deed that they oppose their parties official position on gun control and do not share the party view of what it means to preserve the 2nd amendment.

Moreover the real point is that the Senator and others who are pushing an AWB are using his NRA endorsement, report card grade, and membership to push for gun control measure but suggesting these are measures that NRA members support. The NRA needs to, at the appropriate time, make very clear that is not the case.

It is not the NRA's fault that this guy flip flopped.

Click to expand...

Can you provide evidence that he actually flip flopped? That is can you point to anything ever showing that he publicly opposed reinstatement of an AWB?

I've never suggested Republicans should get endorsements more readily than Democrats. I do not believe that. While it is true only one party has publicly taken the stance that it will work for an AWB, it is true their are Democrats who are in reality strong supporters of RKBA and republicans who are not. I have suggested we consider criteria for grades and endorsements. It is worth noting that an endorsement may be the result of the NRA perceiving someone as a least bad option, it also can stem from the reality that one candidate is more likely to win than another and thus the endorsing group is seeking to tie its self to that person and perhaps create in candidate a sense of indebtedness to the group. This is part of the reason why I have spoken separately at times with respect to the the issue of endorsement versus the issues of offering an A rating. If you want to endorse the D candidate over an F candidate that is one thing, and may even be sound strategy in some respects. I'd prefer it to be clear what the endorsement means and why it is given though. Ignoring the many ways in which a person may harm (affecting majorities of congress, leadership positions, confirmation hearings, etc) the RKBA cause and giving them an A or higher is another.

Lastly what is up to the NRA is how they respond. There is a timing consideration to be sure. However, it is up to the NRA whether this guy remains a member in good standing and can still hold himself out as having their endorsement.