"Gun Owners of America" membership a good investment?

[Babalouie]

I was looking around the web today and came across GOA lobbyist. Anyone know much about them and whether it would it be a good and responsible investment, as gun owner and ccw holder, to join up? I belong to the NRA but feel like they have spent my membership money in all the follow up crap they send to get more money from me. I don't mean to flame the NRA but since I joined I have recieved at least five other packets asking for more. I don't mean to be disrespectful of such a great organization but it makes me wonder how much my membership monies has really supported the cause. I don't need to be flamed for this and I will continue to support the NRA but what can you tell me about Gun Owners of America? What's their reputation? Thanks for the info.

 

[Kamicosmos]

First off, NRA membership doesn't go towards the legal stuff. You donate to the NRA ILA for that. You can also reduce the amount of mail you get from the NRA, either call them up, or do it on the website.

There have been some pretty heated discussion here and at TFL regarding GOA vs NRA. They are both good organizations and deserve our support. I am not a member of GOA mainly because I haven't seen them 'do anything' yet. I joined my local state organization instead, because they were instrumental (with the NRA's help) in getting CCW laws written up and passed here in Missouri.

GOA and SAF are good organizations, but I can't afford to be a member of every gun org out there, so I choose my two based on their past and current actions on state and federal levels.


(sits back with popcorn to watch the flames begin...)

 

[jnojr]

First off, NRA membership doesn't go towards the legal stuff. You donate to the NRA ILA for that. You can also reduce the amount of mail you get from the NRA, either call them up, or do it on the website.

Where on their web site is the "stop deluging me with mail" button?

 

[MasterPiece Arms.com]

If, the second these alleged republicans took control of the white house and began their one party rule, EVERY NRA member walked their membership over to GOA, gun owners wouldn't have been taken for granted and there might have been progress at the federal level (meaning ACTUAL votes to repeal crap).

The #1 thing that NRA apologists won't touch with a ten foot pole, is the fact that NRA doesn't even have it as a goal of weakening and/or repealing the NFA of 1934 or the 1968 GCA.

That being said, giving $$ to NRA's ILA will probably help the ongoing reform of these illegal "right to carry" laws (because no state has any authority whatsoever to force me to get a "permit" to take an item of my property with me around town).

The postage alone eats up your NRA membership dues in the course of a year (I figured they spent almost $2 a month just in postage back when I was a member).
Somebody always shows up to point out that you can get on NRA's "low volume" mail list (yet they never post a link). Years ago I did that, and yes, it did slow the tsunami of mailings somewhat.

The NRA, as an institution, has been allowed to get away with giving their approval to the NFA of 1934, doing nothing to stop or even moderate the 1968 GCA, and especially, giving silent approval of the 1986 ban. The NRA doesn't even admit anywhere that I've seen, that anything even happened in 1986. Whenever machine guns ever come up, they ONLY refer to the NFA. So, NRA will NEVER see me as a member until it apologizes and comes clean about the above. Why should I, or any of us expect any less?

 

[Monkeyleg]

Mike Irwin, who worked for the NRA for many years, has often posted that the mailings bring in an enormous amount of money, even though not everyone contributes. The response rate he reported was somewhere in the neighborhood of 5%, which is very good for direct mail.

The real test of an organization is not what it says, but what it does. Call your congressman and ask if any lobbyist from GOA has ever been in his office. Then ask about an NRA lobbyist.

I honestly don't know what GOA does with their money other than issue press releases.

As for the NRA not focusing on repealing the full-auto provisions of the FOPA of 1986, or the GCA of 1934, I'm upset as well. I'm also upset that the NRA hasn't found a cure for cancer yet or even a cure for the common cold.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

If the NRA worries Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Dianne Feinstein, and Chuck Schumer, it must be a good cause.

 

[beerslurpy]

The NRA's goal is to shift society in the direction we want, not to push for specific legislative goals. The problem isnt that the NRA doesnt want to repeal the NFA and GCA, its that society as a whole isnt ready for that. So the NRA doesnt even raise the issue. By supporting shooting sports and keeping the membership hooked on the issue, society is slowly moved to where the NRA needs it to be.

I am not sure about the GOA. They focus a lot on ideological purity and they helped focus a lot of anger towards the NRA during the 90s for not doing enough to oppose the various gun control bills. They keep the NRA honest and they are great way to double check the candidate rankings that the NRA is notorious for screwing up. The NRA has long had a habit of taking two lukewarm candidates and giving one an F and the other an A. I guess it helps the rank and file pick the right one.

I would love for the GOA and NRA to help unseat Bill Nelson next year. He is a gun grabber whose time has come. Which reminds me that I need to volunteer.

 

[AirForceShooter]

is to me but that's just my $o.02

AFS

 

[Standing Wolf]

The response rate he reported was somewhere in the neighborhood of 5%, which is very good for direct mail.

Everything after 1% in direct mail is pure gold. I've done lots of direct mail work over the years, and know whereof I speak.

 

[Cacique500]

Somebody always shows up to point out that you can get on NRA's "low volume" mail list (yet they never post a link).

From the NRA's Membership FAQ:

Q: How can I reduce the amount of mail I receive from the NRA?
A: Simply email us at [email protected] or dial 800-NRA-3888 and request to be placed on the "Do Not Promote" list. This will significantly reduce the amount of mail you receive without affecting important mailings, magazine service, or your membership renewal.

...and here's your link...NRA Membership FAQ ...about 1/2 way down

 

[Kamicosmos]

And, the 'button' to reduce mail and email spam is in the membership area once you get setup on the website. That's also a handy way to switch what magazine you want, keep your address up to date if yo umove alot, and they also have all kinds of neat little tools like auto email links to your state and federal reps, links to the bills in House and Senate, etc. Very useful site.

 

[MasterPiece Arms.com]

Monkeyleg: As for the NRA not focusing on repealing the full-auto provisions of the FOPA of 1986, or the GCA of 1934, I'm upset as well. I'm also upset that the NRA hasn't found a cure for cancer yet or even a cure for the common cold.

With optimism and backbone like that, who the hell needs Sarah Brady or Ms. Feinstein?

Ya know, those people who say that americans especially gun owners have been conditioned to accept tyranny step by step, calling each new step "normal" are just d-e-a-d wrong, we don't have people like that! So NRA doing what it claims to do (protecting 2nd amendment)

beerslurpy: The NRA's goal is to shift society in the direction we want, not to push for specific legislative goals. The problem isnt that the NRA doesnt want to repeal the NFA and GCA, its that society as a whole isnt ready for that. So the NRA doesnt even raise the issue.

Did I wander into the bizarro THR?

Of COURSE the NRA pushes for "specific" legislative goals, what are you on ? Talk about having it 180 degress backwards. So you're saying that when "society is ready" THEN it's ok to expect the NRA to push for repeal of NFA and GCA 68? Oooooo kayyyyy. And just when do you expect THAT to happen? If you're waiting for society's permission before you expect the NRA to do the right thing, then you're in for one helluva wait!

AND, if, in some distant fantasy future, society somehow becomes "ready" for the repeal of NFA & GCA, (thus taking away yours and NRA's lame ass excuse), how will it get there? Wishful thinking? Hoping? Waiting? Or will it happen by getting excuse makers off their hind end? I think you know the answer .

Didn't it ever occur to you that JUST maybe the reason the NRA "doesn't even raise the issue" is because it's the path of least resistance?

 

[Ryder]

If the NRA worries Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Dianne Feinstein, and Chuck Schumer, it must be a good cause.

The worries of such people are of no worth to me.

NRA lied to me on multiple occasions and then ignored my mail when I wrote for an explanation. I asked my wife to call them and they disrespected her to the point of tears. I won't associate with such an organization and have lately developed reservations toward those who do. I quit the local gunclub after many years of membership because they began stipulating a mandatory NRA membership requirement. I doubt the GOA will try backdoor tactics to get my money.

 

[Border]

So you stop supporting a powerful and effective pro-gun lobby because you encountered someone rude, don't like their rhetoric, and don't agree with every tactic and position they take. You even left your gun club! I think that you are losing perspective. The anti-gun crowd would love to see us all drop the NRA and support little splinter groups that can't even get a return phone call from a congressman or the media to show up for a press release!

Anyone catch "Nightline" a month or so back? It was on the bill that would prevent the gun manufacturers from being sued that we won on. Ted Koppel and the Democratic sponsor of the bill (whose name escapes me) both credited the NRA in a BIG way for the passage of this pro-gun(manufacturers) bill through the Senate!

The show went on to talk about the NRA being "on the ropes" a few years back but "has since doubled it's membership!" Everyone on the show from both sides, including independent analysts, spoke of the NRA as being a HUGE influence on Capital Hill! Not joining the NRA if you care about gun rights is indefensible in my opinion!

 

[Ryder]

Hi Border,

It's priciple. Upholding your priniciples often requires sacrifice. I hold others accountable for their actions. Anyone that lies or steals from me ceases to exist. Treat my family wrong and I take it personally.

No big deal about the gun club. They needed me worse than I needed them. There are lots of other places to shoot.

I contribute to GOA but I wouldn't go as far to say I rely on them to defend my firearm rights and that wasn't the reason I joined the previously joined the NRA . I'm perfectly willing and able to undertake that defense on my own.

 

[pcf]

The #1 thing that NRA apologists won't touch with a ten foot pole, is the fact that NRA doesn't even have it as a goal of weakening and/or repealing the NFA of 1934 or the 1968 GCA.

Okay dude we get it, if it's not GOA, you're going to take a crap on them. In the last couple of minutes I've read two threads where you've dumped on the NRA and SAF. Good thing after that little NO fiasco GOA came through after the NRA and SAF hung us out to dry.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=160114

Back to your quote, can you or GOA name 60 senators that will bring cloture to this issue?

 

[bearmgc]

NRA is not a Sacred Cow. I don't interpret anyone's reasons for not being NRA as "crapping" on this organization. NRA is accountable for its practices. And for reasons already cited, I no longer am a member.

 

[MasterPiece Arms.com]

Okay dude we get it, if it's not GOA, you're going to take a crap on them. In the last couple of minutes I've read two threads where you've dumped on the NRA and SAF. Good thing after that little NO fiasco GOA came through after the NRA and SAF hung us out to dry.

Back to your quote, can you or GOA name 60 senators that will bring cloture to this issue?

Please actually read what I wrote. I was HARDLY "dumping" on the NRA. I simply collected some very public facts that I felt had been forgotten. If that's "dumping" then you are either too sensitive, or in denial, or both.

I also never said that the NRA was all bad. I say almost every time this comes up that NRA is helping to reform the illegal concealed "permit" laws. Your last sentence seems to have no real point.

Hey, pcf, you bothered to quote me, but you had no response to the very topic you quoted. What say you? How 'bout an actual response?

 

[Waitone]

You get direct mail because you responded to direct mail or you joined. The best predictor of future success in direct mail is the last response to direct mail. Don't repond and it will stop.

5% response on direct mail puts it the top 10% of the business. The figure is astounding (if accurate). I always used 1%.

 

[Harve Curry]

Yes

 

[Border]

Well Ryder, I don't know what happened so you may well have made the correct decision. I just hope that it wasn't because of just one or two rude employees/single event-that's no reason to condemn an entire organization.

 

[Monkeyleg]

"With optimism and backbone like that, who the hell needs Sarah Brady or Ms. Feinstein?"

I'll put my backbone and optimism up against anyone's at any time. I've done more than my share.

Before we try to get the public acclimated to the idea that it's okay to own full-auto's, let's convince them that .50 BMG rifles are not the threat that "60 Minutes" portrays, or that gun shows are not flea markets for terrorists, or that serial-numbering ammunition is rational way of fighting crime.

Would I like to see the GCA of '34 and the full-auto restrictions of the FOPA of '86 repealed? Hell, yeah. I made the mistake of selling my full-auto Thompson for $1800 nine years ago. I'll probably never be able to afford one again.

But we're trying to get concealed carry passed here in a state that completely prohibits carry. To the south of us, in Illinois, legislators are coming up with a ban a minute.

Sun Tzu said words to the effect that a good general doesn't attack until he knows he has won.

The public would go ballistic if the NRA or any group tried to repeal the restrictions on full-auto's.

Fortunately, the public is moving away from gun control, albeit slowly. So it may take many more years before a repeal effort could be possible.

 

[beerslurpy]

Clarification about my statement that the "NRA doesnt push for specific legislative goals"

Yes, the NRA does attempt to sabotage anti-gun bills and craft pro-gun bills, but the NRA's long term goals CANT be about specific legislation. Why? Because whether such legislation can make it through is entirely dependent on society's overall attitudes towards firearms ownership. An anti-gun or gun-neutral populace will get laws just like in the UK in short order. As the populace becomes more and more pro-gun you will get less and less gun control, eventually no gun control and later still, repeals.

If people chafed at the restrictions of the GCA or NFA and it became a voting issue, then you would see movement. But the people have to be there. And they arent- yet. Which is why we all have to make an effort to evangelize about guns, get people interested in shooting and get them to vote on the issue.

 

[Waitone]

I'd be happy with slight modifications like ending the ban on silencers.

 

[MasterPiece Arms.com]

The public would go ballistic if the NRA or any group tried to repeal the restrictions on full-auto's.

You did not think that through all the way. The only ones that "would go ballistic" are those against us right now anyway, AND THAT INCLUDES the worthless "sporting purpose" cowards among us. You underestimate how many who are not currently in any camp would join us.

By the way, the best defense is a no fear offense.

Would I like to see the GCA of '34 and the full-auto restrictions of the FOPA of '86 repealed? Hell, yeah. I made the mistake of selling my full-auto Thompson for $1800 nine years ago. I'll probably never be able to afford one again.

How much did you pay for it originally?

If people chafed at the restrictions of the GCA or NFA and it became a voting issue, then you would see movement.

I would like to point out that several of you are helping the enemy without realizing it by essentially being reactionary and making your tactics dependent on the whims of the idiot public. If the unconstitutional B.S. known as F.D.R.'s NFA and L.B.J.'s GCA don't "chafe" people, then you need to become extra strength gold bond itching powder. A comfortable populace is one that is controlled by the status quo NOT PRINCIPLE!