My frustration with the NRA and other RKBA activist organizations

Status
Not open for further replies.

belus

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
289
Location
Houston, TX
Forgive my pseudo-rant, but if there's any gun forum where a post like this can be seriously considered and discussed it's THR. Hopefully it lives up to my expectations.
(BTW, I'm actively looking for a pro-rights organization I can support, please let me know if you think any fit after reading these concerns.)

After recently receiving my CCW, which took only four days after dropping my application in the mail thanks to Arizona DPS vk_smiley_thumbs_up.gif , I've apparently been put on one of the NRA's mailing lists.

Today I opened a letter entitled the "Truth About Gun Owners (TAG) Poll". I was optimistic that I would be able to tell the NRA who I was and why I do not think they represent me. Unfortunately it was simply a membership application masquerading as a loaded questionnaire.

I'll give you all an idea of who I am - the same information I wish the NRA would have asked for. Perhaps if they invested in gathering information like this about who really owns guns, they'd have more than 5% of the gun owning population among their ranks.

24 year old, white male, unmarried, no kids
I've owned guns since the day before my 13th birthday (H&R Topper in 20ga :) )
I own handguns, rifles and shotguns - for self defense and target shooting (I no longer hunt)
Democrat and member of the ACLU
Atheist/Agnostic
Completed college, but still a student
Under $25k/year
County population ~4 million

If questions like these had been on their TAG poll, I would have signed up. It would have signaled to me that they care about accurately representing gun owners.

Instead they seem to focus on creating, in part by misrepresentation and polarization, a voting block that cares about only one issue.
That doesn't cut it for me.

I'm liberal: I care about the whole Bill of Rights.
I'm concerned that the RKBA community gets so tied up in protecting their guns, that they forget about the importance of the Fourth. Who cares if your privately purchased AR or Glock is unknown or unregistered when the legal system can be circumvented by executive order and you can be secretly monitored?
Or what about the Fifth and Sixth? Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla were enemy combatants and US Citizens at the same time. The power of a President (Republican or Democrat) to suspend such fundamental rights for whatever gain scares me much more than the thought of another 10 years under an AWB.

The RKBA community claims that the 2A is the foundational clause of the Bill of Rights. It seems like they're feverishly guarding the trunk of the tree while our government cuts all the branches.

Additionally, I support public education and think we should spend more on it. An country of uneducated voters scares the crap out of me. It's much easier for an authoritarian government to gain control over our lives when voters do not have the knowledge or capacity to challenge political decisions. Fascism, as a philosophy, relies upon the masses to support a political and intellectual elite, and we can't allow a gap in intellectual force to develop. (This paragraph is one of the thesis of liberalism, by the way.)

Finally, the gun community seems mute to acknowledge that violent crime is a problem. Why aren't we suggesting alternative ways to combat crime? It seems we should be jumping on any idea which has a reasonable chance of making our world safer - especially if it's unrelated to guns. A lower crime rate overall would take the wind out of the anti's sails. And just imagine the effect if the successful initiative was sponsored or supported by the NRA!

Perhaps it's status-quo bias and because I live in Arizona, an admittedly friendly place to gun owners. But there are only two liberalizations of the law that I would really like to see - both pertaining to CCW holders. I'd like to be able to carry at work (University), and in restaurants serving less than 51% alcohol. I like the existence of FFL dealers, and NICS background checks on handgun purchases.



Pretty much everyone in the RKBA community knows this quote:
Benjamin Franklin said:
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!

I hope they learn this one:
Benjamin Franklin said:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
 
Another "excuse" thread about not joining the NRA. Just what we needed.

FWIW, most NRA members probably don't really mind the freeloaders, but we'd sure appreciate it if they'd pipe down about it.
 
Hmm...

Complaining that an organization founded around marksmanship and dedicated to the preservation of the second amendment is... focused on the second amendment.

Wow...

I applaud that public education system you love.
 
Let's not stoop down to 'poison the well' tactics. Let's debate the man's points, pro and con. Public debate is the real American way, not attacking the man instead of his message.

Belus:
If you're mad because they wanted your membership and disguised it as a 'poll', so be it. But the rest of your rant doesn't address whether the NRA or any other group is effective at protecting one's gun rights. Is the NRA actively destroying the other civil rights? Or simply focussing upon one right, leaving the others to other civil rights organizations? There is nothing wrong with an organization specializing. Not even the ACLU national board supports ALL your rights, do they?
 
The man's points seem to boil down to "I refuse to join the only organization that has been effective in preserving gun ownership in this country because they didn't ask me to talk about myself, and also I don't approve of a second amendment organization that focuses on the second amendment".

So I guess I'm not seeing any real reason to debate that.

But, based upon the pledge I made the last time one of these threads came up, I'm off to the ILA website to make another $25 contribution, marked "care of Belus, THR".
 
Quite right, ants.

Alright, belus. If you truly do care about education, and not simply the poorly made government provided kind, perhaps you should look at the vast majority of what the NRA does.

The fight for our rights is extremely important, but the NRA also works for education: hunter education, firearm safety, marksmanship, self-defense. Many of these are focused on bringing new people into the shooting sports, especially children, as this is where the battle is being waged.

Investigate for yourself: the NRA is far more than simply a lobbying organization.
 
I'm not sure exactly how the NRA offended your concerns about education or Habeus corpus. The political activities of the NRA (actually the NRA-ILA) are geared to gun rights because that is their issue.

They have often been opposed to Democratic party candidates - but that is not due to the Democrats' positions on farm subsidies or alternative energy. It is because the Democrats have generally been supporting/advancing the cause of gun control, to the detriment of gun owner rights.

I doubt there are more than a handful of thoughtful voters who completely agree with either party's position on every issue up and down the board. Most of us wind up voting for someone because they are on our side for what we consider to be the most important issues, not because we agree with them on every issue.

It sounds like you are basically in line with a left/liberal governmental philosophy and you are more aligned with the Democratic party on most of the issues (or at least the issues you consider most important), and that gun rights are less important for you. In that case, you are very likely to wind up voting for people who do not support your gun rights because you think there are more important issues on the table. That is your right.

If you are going to stay in the Democratic party camp, I would encourage you to pressure your local/state/national party leaders to adopt positions that are less hostile to gun owner rights. You do have the option of voting for more gun-owner-friendly candidates in primaries, at least.

I don't want to get into all of the issues you mention above - partly because this is not a "general politics" forum. However, I will briefly say that:
a) I have generally been in the Republican camp but I differ strongly with the current administration's moves on executive power and extra-legal treatment of anyone they want to call a terrorist
b) I agree that a well educated independent thinker is less likely to be swayed by totalitarian propaganda. However, government run schools do not have a good record of producing well educated independent thinkers. On the contrary, government run schools have often served the role of indoctrinating young people in group-think according to government priorities. I would be a lot less hostile to funding public education if they were more open to basic education and developing differing viewpoints, rather than promoting the attitudes and values of the NEA.
 
I am a life member of the NRA and I admit that I have been frustrated with them a time or two.

But they are pretty good at what they do.
 
MakAttak said:
Complaining that an organization founded around marksmanship and dedicated to the preservation of the second amendment is... focused on the second amendment.
I know how and why they were founded, and I'm grateful they sponsor hunters safety classes for 12 year olds. Without programs like that I'd worry about the future of the sport. I also appreciate their sponsorship and support of local ranges and public matches (I happily pay the non-discounted fees when I use them, too).

As a gun owner I do not feel represented by the NRA, nor do I feel a sense of community with other gun owners because of our ownership. Their recent mailer reminded me of this.
Perhaps I shouldn't expect any sympathy when voicing this frustration to a community that organizes solely around gun-ownership. I may have been naively hoping that other enthusiasts also had broader concerns.

Edit:
Thanks a lot for your comments Antsi. You're correct in that my rant was more directly at the singularity of the gun issue in general and not so much the NRA. The recent mailer just reminded me of more general frustrations with single issue voters.
You're also correct in pointing out that I don't fully agree with the ACLU. Clearly we differ on gun issues :D.

And you're correct in my preference for some rights over gun-rights. I do actively debate with my local officials for more gun-friendly laws (a beer with them helps!) and I don't walk very close to the party line as a Democrat. I'm one now because I care about some issues more than guns.

Anyways, thanks again for the well reasoned response. I think I mostly needed some confirmation that there are members of the gun community that don't vote based solely on the candidates NRA rating.
 
Is the NRA actively destroying the other civil rights?

I think one point the OP is making is that the NRA supports (as far as I know) only Republican candidates. You can argue that in most cases, only Republican candidates support 2A issues. OK. But the OP is suggesting, if I understand correctly, that the current Republican administration is responsible for a serious erosion of other constitutional rights - and that - as important as the 2A is - it is not the ONLY one we should be concerned about.
 
I may have been naively hoping that other enthusiasts also had broader concerns.

I do. That's why I belong to other organizations that are active in supporting other causes. And I do not resent the fact that those other organizations are not actively supporting the second amendment, because that would be silly.
 
I know how and why they were founded, and I'm grateful they sponsor hunters safety classes for 12 year olds. Without programs like that I'd worry about the future of the sport. I also appreciate their sponsorship and support of local ranges and public matches (I happily pay the non-discounted fees when I use them, too).

As a gun owner I do not feel represented by the NRA, nor do I feel a sense of community with other gun owners because of our ownership. Their recent mailer reminded me of this.
Perhaps I shouldn't expect any sympathy when voicing this frustration to a community that organizes solely around gun-ownership. I may have been naively hoping that other enthusiasts also had broader concerns.

What exactly do you want the NRA to do that they don't already do?
 
Finally, the gun community seems mute to acknowledge that violent crime is a problem. Why aren't we suggesting alternative ways to combat crime? It seems we should be jumping on any idea which has a reasonable chance of making our world safer - especially if it's unrelated to guns. A lower crime rate overall would take the wind out of the anti's sails. And just imagine the effect if the successful initiative was sponsored or supported by the NRA!

I do not think the gun community is mute to acknowledge the problem of violent crime. Quite opposite, in many parts of the country gun ownership is defended not only as a Const. right, but as a measure to combat violent crime. Also, bear in mind that the RKBA organizations are just that, they are not political parties, and they do not address social ills as a whole. We have elective representatives for that. Crime is a not a product of firearm ownership; its roots are many and complex. It is not a role of the NRA and the rest of the gun rights orgs to combat crime and fix social problems. Yet, as individual voters I agree that we should demand that our politicians are resolute in addressing and reducing crime.
 
I think one point the OP is making is that the NRA supports (as far as I know) only Republican candidates. You can argue that in most cases, only Republican candidates support 2A issues. OK. But the OP is suggesting, if I understand correctly, that the current Republican administration is responsible for a serious erosion of other constitutional rights - and that - as important as the 2A is - it is not the ONLY one we should be concerned about.

Of course it is not the ONLY one we should be concerned about. But there is such a thing as being "forum" appropriate.

This is after all a gun topic related forum. Just like the NRA is a gun related organization.

Bitching about other topics is sort like putting socks on a rooster...

Just don't fit!
 
I may have been naively hoping that other enthusiasts also had broader concerns.

I do. And your naivete in all these other matters makes me fear for the future of my country. I can only hope that life will teach you the error of your ways.

However, this is a gun forum and to keep discussions civil and on-topic, this forum has eschewed politics. If you care to discuss them, armedpolitesociety.com (linky at the top of the screen) is the place to do so.
 
Finally, the gun community seems mute to acknowledge that violent crime is a problem. Why aren't we suggesting alternative ways to combat crime? It seems we should be jumping on any idea which has a reasonable chance of making our world safer - especially if it's unrelated to guns. A lower crime rate overall would take the wind out of the anti's sails. And just imagine the effect if the successful initiative was sponsored or supported by the NRA!

Belus: I have to be honest with you, you're way, way, way off on this one. You need to go whine to the anti-gunners about this statement. I would bet 90% of the individuals here on the High Road, and most gun owners as well, would be in favor of a little thing called Crime Control. Not Gun Control, but Crime Control. I have plenty of suggestions on how to fix the crime problems we have in our country. But do you want to know who stands in the way of fixing our crime problems? BLEEDING HEART LIBERALS. :fire:

Feel free to research it all you want, it is liberal policitians at the local, state, and federal level, liberal judges at the local, district, appellate, and federal level that make it so difficult to punish people for the crimes they commit. Liberals believe in "rehabilitation", while everyone else with 1/2 a brain looks at the recidivism rates, and they say, "lock them up and throw away the key." If you want to get rid of gun crime, knife crime, rapes, murders, child molestation, etc... Lock the pieces of crap up, that are committing the crimes. :cuss:

Please don't take offense, but you need to get some facts and understanding before you start throwing around generalities regarding gun owners. Especially when it comes to crime/gun controls.

Give me a break.
 
MakAttak said:
However, this is a gun forum and to keep discussions civil and on-topic, this forum has eschewed politics. If you care to discuss them, armedpolitesociety.com (linky at the top of the screen) is the place to do so.
I'll check that out, thanks.
Perhaps it will reestablish some faith in the gun-community to not throw everything else under the bus, and I'll be able to develop an identity with them.

Camslam said:
Please don't take offense, but you need to get some facts and understanding before you start throwing around generalities regarding gun owners. Especially when it comes to crime/gun controls.
I try pretty hard to keep informed on issues I form opinions on. My concerns about gun crime and the effectiveness of gun control largely come from the CDC and this independent study: Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms. Pretty fascinating read for $6.
In terms of local crime, I'm pretty disgusted with our county's 40,000+ unserved warrants.

The recidivism rates are disturbing! I actually wasn't aware how high they were. I wish our state legislators (conservative majority, btw) would concern themselves with that problem over some others they seem to favor.
 
As a gun owner I do not feel represented by the NRA, nor do I feel a sense of community with other gun owners because of our ownership.
Like .38 Special, I just went to the NRA-ILA site and put in a $25 donation to subsidize your RKBA. So far, you've already raised $50 for the NRA, congratulations.

As El Tejon says, this wagon is heavy. Get out and help me pull.
 
I'll check that out, thanks.
Perhaps it will reestablish some faith in the gun-community to not throw everything else under the bus, and I'll be able to develop an identity with them.

What part of forum appropriate do you have a problem with?

This is a gun thread. Not a 4th amendment thread.

Your type of faith in the so called gun-community needs a lot of work.
 
belus

You said,

The RKBA community claims that the 2A is the foundational clause of the Bill of Rights. It seems like they're feverishly guarding the trunk of the tree while our government cuts all the branches.

I completely agree! The entire Bill of Rights is at stake. The Second article of the Bill of Rights is the glue for the rest. It is no more complicated than that. If they get your guns, the rest is academic. You can then give up all pretense.

The following statements dashed the hope I had that you are a classic liberal.

First:
An country of uneducated voters scares the crap out of me.

Again I agree!!

Additionally, I support public education and think we should spend more on it.

You want more young "citizens" of our "democracy" educated within government mandated Dewey camps, under the control of and directed by dedicated socialists.

It's much easier for an authoritarian government to gain control over our lives when voters do not have the knowledge or capacity to challenge political decisions.

You are correct, sir! Why then would you want that same government to absolutely control your children's education (indoctrination)??

I have a (radical) proposal: You pay for your own children's education. I will do the same. I swear to you I will never demand from you (at the point of a gun) payment for my children's education.

Fascism, as a philosophy, relies upon the masses to support a political and intellectual elite,

By "fascism" do you mean state control? State supremacy over people's lives, etc...? If that is what you mean, then the Communist system is "fascist" isn't it? And, socialism is low calorie communism.

Finally, the gun community seems mute to acknowledge that violent crime is a problem.

I disagree, sir. "Crime" is a broad brush stroke. It is an emotional issue. The term "crime" is a political term used to cause men of good conscience to submit to greater control. The truth is that crime is a behavior problem, not a tool problem. If you suffer yourself to be manipulated by the same tired old rhetoric, you have already lost the debate. Please get past this intellectual point... The actions of criminals cannot, do not, and should never be allowed to nullify your rights!

I like the existence of FFL dealers, and NICS background checks on handgun purchases.

You like the idea of a prior restraint on your Constitutionally guaranteed right? Do you believe you should be made to "prove" that you are not a hater (thought criminal) before you are "allowed" to make a call to your favorite talk show? Do you believe that you should have to have a license before you allowed to be secure in your person, house, papers and effects?

Do you have a right to draw breath? Are you made to beg permission from a police agency before you are "permitted" to exercise your right to breathe?

Have you read where the FBI admits that about 98% (rounding the number here) of all checks through the NICS system get approved immediately? That means that 98% of the people who submitted to this criminal background exam didn't need their backgrounds checked in the first place. This is a good way to spend law enforcement funds? Treat EVERYONE like a criminal FIRST? This is your idea of exercising your "right"?

The Constitution of the State (Republic) of Arizona guarantees you the right to bear (carry) arms. Exercise that right regularly. You need ask NO ONE's permission
 
This site, and the NRA are about the 2A and guns, not other issues.Just because we dont discuss, and the NRA doesnt advocate for, other issues, doesnt mean they, and we, dont care about them, and only about guns.
Couldnt be further from the truth.

Heck, just read all the threads in General here, and see the huge number of comments that come up in discussion about other non-gun issues, and see how different peoples views are on them (and since they DO come up, it shows we all care about more than just guns, or they wouldnt be mentioned at all). We just dont delve further, as that is off topic for thus GUN forum, just like non-gun issues are not the NRA's realm.They leave the other issues to the other groups dedicated to those specific things. No group can be all things, on all issues, to all people. just not possible.
 
The NRA supports pro gun candidates regardless of party. I give you Max Baucus of Montana, the NRA donated $$$ to his campaign. He is kinda sorta pro gun other than that pesky being the swing vote on the AWB thing I will hate him forever for.
 
You automatically assume that supporting one means that you don't support the others. I can't recall any people on this board arguing against the other parts of the Bill of Rights or saying that they don't matter. While it would rightly be considered outrageous to suggest that any of the other amendments be scrapped as out of date or irrelevant, we hear that sort of commentary passed every single day about the 2nd amendment not just by the media but by our representatives and even Presidential candidates. The NRA has a long history of referring to the 2nd amendment as the "first among equals" ie that the RTKBA is no more important than the other rights - your indignation seems a little misplaced to me. I'm sure you know that no other part of the Bill of Rights has had to suffer through decades of being subverted, undermined and distorted in the same way that the second amendment has. The other amendments have dozens of organisations and millions of citizens committed to defending them but the 2nd amendment really has only one (I know there are others but they pale in comparison to the NRA). It's simply a matter of prioritisation - while some rights are being bent and tested, just one is on life support. Perhaps you can give us an example of a non-2nd amendment right that you have lost recently? I'm sure there are many here who can give examples of 2nd amendment rights they have either lost or had threatened not only in the last few years but over their entire lifetimes.
 
I do. That's why I belong to other organizations that are active in supporting other causes. And I do not resent the fact that those other organizations are not actively supporting the second amendment, because that would be silly.

The question at hand would seem to be whether or not the NRA-ILA (and please stop the reverse-strawman; we all know he's referring to the NRA-ILA rather than just the NRA) considers the other Constitutional rights to be less important, or perhaps even expendable, in comparison to the Second. This is a particularly relevant question when you see the NRA-ILA strongly supporting candidates who have a horrible background in civil rights/corruption/partisanship, who also happen to be weak on gun control. The message sent is that other faults (save national scandal) can be overlooked so long as a politician just doesn't touch the issue of gun control, and maintains the status quo.

The problem with that is that we're left with a bunch of hunting rifles and some short-range infantry weapons, while everything else-our right to military weapons, our civil rights, and the strength of this country-is allowed to slowly slip away. In an election between a candidate who won't vote on gun control, but intends to curtail every other right enumerated, and the candidate who favors gun control yet supports the rest of the BOR, who should one vote for?

I think Bush is a great example of this latter issue, as we have a President who is seemingly beyond reproach by the NRA. He has done little or nothing to support our cause, and yet his actions in other arenas have caused all of us incalculable harm. For all that Clinton did to us, it's worth pointing out that Bush Senior is to blame for a fair amount of our current woes as well (Planning on buying a Tavor anytime soon?).

What exactly do you want the NRA to do that they don't already do?

Acknowledge, truly acknowledge, that the Second Amendment really is about something more than hunting and concealed carry, rather than just paying lip service to the idea. And acknowledge that the things the Second Amendment safeguards are just as, if not perhaps more important, than the Second itself. And then acting accordingly.
 
I am also looking for a RKBA activism group I can stand behind. I'm not looking very hard though, I've got priorities for my time and funds.

I agree that the NRA has its faults, but not fighting for all of our rights is not one of them. It is called the National RIFLE Association after all, I don't expect them to fight for our rights beyond those protected by the second amendment except when they are coincident with our RKBA.

It would be nice to see the NRA be more proactive in our right to privacy when it comes to things like registration. Registration in itself is the antithesis to our right to bear arms since it requires the permission, or at least notification, of the government of where our guns are. Registration of guns, licenses to carry, etc. are, in my mind, an illegal search. (That search tends to lead to seizure.) There is no probable cause in requiring us to hand over our identity just because we choose to arm ourselves. This is especially true when those records are open to the public.

I'd like to see an organization that sees the danger in gun registration. Few even recognize that a NICS check, and the form 4473 that follows, is registration. Does such an animal roam the earth?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top