Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is is just me or is the NRAs new riot video distorting it message

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by grter, Aug 31, 2017.

  1. Ironicaintit

    Ironicaintit Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,053
    Location:
    Colorado
    Point made. I'm just not as offended by it, or even see it as a veiled threat to media. At least, not in a violent sense. More of a, "we're not going to take your crap lying down"

    Ideally
    , they should not make videos of that type, and focus on educating, firearm safety, and proper marksmanship.

    I still don't mind that they take un-PC stances, that aren't afraid to offend or even be bombastic.
    To each his own
     
  2. Mitlov

    Mitlov Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    591
    I understand that's another fair interpretation of the message. But that's not how it's being received on the other side of the fence, especially when viewed in conjunction with open carry by the "Unite the Right" folks in Charlottesville. It's being portrayed as a dog whistle to right wing extremists.

    And at minimum, I'd think that a responsible organization in a country that's so angry and divided wouldn't publish an ad that (rightly or wrongly) can be so easily interpreted as condoning unlawful violence. The NSSF, for example, plays the "good citizen" card harder and the "inflammatory rhetoric" card less, and so can criticize a media outlet's editorial bias without anyone taking their criticism "the wrong way." And the NSSF has butted heads repeatedly with the NYT in the past decade.
     
  3. Ironicaintit

    Ironicaintit Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,053
    Location:
    Colorado
    Well brother, they are going to portray the "pro-gun" side as unreasonable, racist and right wing extremist, every time, in any light.

    So I don't give a hill of beans about how they interpret it. I'm reasonable and thoughtful, and I see it as a call to stand up together, in defiance of their rhetoric. Their rhetoric, which I find offensive because it seeks to manipulate the masses by distorting truths.

    Calm, sterile videos documenting the actions of certain individuals and/or institutions are too easily pushed aside as irrelevant, it seems. Love and reason are wonderful, but often fall on deaf ears.
    I like the "in your face" aspect of it.
    Would a "gentler" video be getting as much attention? Nah.
    .......
    You could very well be right...I'm just not there yet.
     
  4. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    The core focus of the National Rifle Association was, and is so.

    The focus of the NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) is entirely to operate to protect gun rights on the political front.

    That doesn't mean (at all, even a little bit) to go to bat for every "conservative" or "neo-conservative" cause or issue, or to take a position against every "liberal" or "socialist" or "progressive" one.



    These sorts of things smack strongly of political back-scratching: Shilling for the Republican party in exchange for hoped-for political favors when that party's in power. While such arrangements are as old as politics itself, they don't become less dirty and unseemly or unfulfilling as time passes.
     
    everydefense, AZAndy, equin and 2 others like this.
  5. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,419
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    i've belonged to the NRA for about 60 years: That will probably change. For many years i donated until it hurt. My donations stopped when the NRA demanded that i give my soul to the Republican party. i could care less that the pro gun candidate is a Republican in the mold of John Brown or a lesbian Wiccan. The pro gunner will get my vote.

    i spent a career in the US Army. The NRA leadership insinuates that i'm not a "patriot" because i refuse to buy into their trash.
     
  6. Creature

    Creature Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,719
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    That video is on point and directly addresses the Left's slide into radical extremism.
     
    bc38 likes this.
  7. Coop45

    Coop45 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    807
    Location:
    Texas
    SMH...oh well! I'll stick with the NRA.
     
  8. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    Why is it the business of the NRA to comment on "the left" beyond what someone who identifies as "left" does directly related to RKBA?
     
  9. bc38

    bc38 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    it just might be, to point out the radical and violent left ( maybe? small in # but vary vocal). to show people that they may need to think about defending their own, AND if they want to keep the right to defend themselves join the NRA. If anyone thinks that we would have the gun rights, or the right to defend ourselves that we do today with out the NRA............... I have to wonder what you are thinking.

    The NRA was formed in response to the lack of marksmenship of the civil war solder. seeing that the US Army is doing a good job of that now the NRA need to go away as they have passed their usefulness[​IMG] RIGHT????? i may not always agree the the NRA but ill stick with em. withdrawing my/your support over a minor difference just emboldens the anti gun crowd. THANKS
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2017
    JohnhenrySTL likes this.
  10. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ok, find that section in the NRA's charter.

    The NRA isn't the watchdog of all things "conservative." They do not need to and should not have a position on abortion, immigration, tax policy, religion, social justice, etc. Funny, if they're "pointing out" the dangerous radical left, where are their official warnings to the members on MS-13, Al-Qaeda, the mafia, etc? Why hasn't the NRA posted a video telling violent drug gangs, "we're coming for you?"

    Maybe because that's a state and federal justice department matter and not anything to do with the NRA or its members.

    So, you agree then, that this is simply a manipulative screed designed to get more membership dollars rolling in?

    I don't think anybody's even questioning that. However, to say that the NRA has been a great savior of our gun rights does NOT mean that one has to -- or SHOULD -- agree with any manipulative hi-jinks the Association leadership might get up to, nor every harebrained thing they might publish. The leadership of the NRA-ILA is made up of people, more or less just like you and me. They aren't infallible and questionable decisions should be questioned.

    That statement has no relevance to this conversation at all. A complete non sequitur.

    And you, like many others, are confusing what the NRA does with what the NRA-ILA does.
     
    alsaqr likes this.
  11. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,419
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    "They do not need to and should not have a position on abortion, immigration, tax policy, religion, social justice, etc."

    Every year the IRS revokes the tax exempt status of 501(c)(3) organizations for dabbling in stuff outside their charter. The NRA is putting its tax exempt status at risk by pandering to all things Republican. Numerous politicians and organizations have called for the revoking of NRAs tax exempt status.

    http://davidfeldmanshow.com/nras-tax-fraud/
     
    hdwhit likes this.
  12. bc38

    bc38 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    I think that you willingly misunderstood my point. although i did use the word LEFT the point was that you are responsible for your own safety. while MS-13, Al-Qaeda,t he Mafia, etc are a threat, of late it would look to me that the "peaceful" protesters with their looting, burning, mace of counter protesters are more of a threat to me today. who knows what tomorrow may bring?

    i would remove the word manipulative. and change dollars rolling in to membership numbers but yes. and while i may not care for it it would appear to work. we have more members now than ever before. i dont like mud slinging in politics, that works also. welcome to the real world not the one we would have.


    Absolutely! however when something go's on that i dont like taking my ball ( dues) and going home dose nothing but is simpler than working to change/ or accept what you dont like for the greater good.

    no. others made reference to the reason for the NRA i was making a historical point pay attention please

    that may very well be but i dont think so. i think that it s popular to bash the NRA and some gun owners go out of their way to do so. i also think that you and i are going to have to agree to disagree.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2017 at 8:20 AM
  13. bc38

    bc38 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Sam1911 sorry but somehow my response ended up inside your quote and made you look like your arguing with yourself. if someone comes and throws a net over you because of it tell em i did it. some days i would like to heave the thing right out the window.:confused:
     
  14. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    Begging your permission after the fact, I edited that post to put the quotes in their proper form.
     
  15. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    These protesters appear to be more of a threat to you? Then this video and the news are responsible for another fault -- grossly misleading you about how likely you are to face violence.

    Unless you're an anti- protester, of course: one of those guys who heads down to the town square to engage in a little round of pushing and head-bashing with the protesters. Assuming not, these people seem to be very little threat to anyone outside of certain specific areas and situations which are well known ahead of time. They aren't randomly rolling out to the countryside to beat up suburbanites or farmers.

    But that's beside the point as I did not at all get the impression from this video that the NRA was using it to alert it's members to a safety concern. Such a video would have had a completely different tone and direction.

    This is just a political posturing piece, used to rile up "us" against "them." For somebody's benefit. Now whose?

    Oh, clearly it WORKS! That's why they do it! And to differentiate between "dollars" and "membership numbers" is a distinction without a difference. But to put that in perspective, they can't spend membership numbers and don't pay their salaries out in membership numbers, either.

    Who said anything about taking my ball and going home? Though, by membership DOLLAR numbers do they live and die, so that's the only language the NRA is really able to clearly hear.
    I'm sorry. I meant to say the historical point you made was, itself, in the context of this thread, a non sequitur. Since the formation and purpose of the NRA so many decades ago was fundamentally different from what the NRA-ILA is formed to do, saying "well maybe we should end that, too" makes no sense. The NRA itself still does that original function, and quite well.

    What the NRA-ILA does is a different matter. Much of that is good, of course. But this thread is focused on whether this current effort by NRA-ILA is helpful or hurtful to the cause of RKBA in society as it exists today.

    The question isn't simple and how you feel about it depends a lot on whether you really like the split society, us-vs-them, Liberal-vs-Conservative, situation we're deep into right at the moment. If so, you probably like this video.

    If you feel that society will not continue to be so rigidly fractured along party platform lines, then you probably see that gun rights should never be rigidly tied to any other social issues, or to either political party.

    RKBA =/= abortion, religion, climate change, social justice, immigration, healthcare reform, Republican Party, prayer in schools, etc. =/= RKBA

    Society may go in any number of directions as we sort out all of those other issues. We do not want tour right to bear arms tied to any of them in the public consciousness, to float or sink with them.

    That's funny. When I defend the NRA, I'm accused of being a blind fanboy who can't see the facts.

    When I point out where they're going wrong, I'm an NRA basher. Really can't win, can I? LOL.

    But surely you'll admit that using the "oh, it's just popular to bash the NRA" line is just a cheap and lazy shortcut to try and make the position of someone else seem vulnerable, when they've made a serious point and you don't really want to bother to think very hard about it. Can we at least agree on that?
     
  16. barnbwt

    barnbwt Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,121
    Well it is not like they will be getting any favors from the Democrats, and still need pols to push their policy goals, so...why not, again?
     
  17. barnbwt

    barnbwt Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,121
    "This is just a political posturing piece,used to rile up "us" against "them." For somebody's benefit. Now whose?"
    I know you're a smart guy, Sam --are we not in an us/them scenario? The political groups in lockstep with antigunners now directly fund & promote urban terrorism.

    Maybe the NRA references it because 1) it is a new development, and 2) we are already aware of rampant criminality in antigun strongholds
     
  18. Berger.Fan222

    Berger.Fan222 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2014
    Messages:
    437
    Location:
    TX
    While I completely agree that RKBA can not be rigidly equated with any other specific issue, I have noticed strong correlations.

    Since RKBA is a right that is ensured by a binding contract (the US Constitution), seeking to take it away is a great moral evil. This great moral evil does not tend to be found in isolation, but it goes along with other moral evils.

    It is a common approach in public discourse to address the character failings of one's opponents, especially when one great moral evil is highly correlated with others. It is a question of wisdom on how to go about this to best convince the intended audience. Those who think the NRA has gone too far in the current case have a good point.

    Since I'm a life member, I do not intend to withdraw my membership, but I don't really intend to make any donations or upgrade my membership until I observe a path that agrees more with my view of what it should be. But I also do not intend to boycott their events. The NRA sanctions lots of good shooting events and I am sort of an evangelist among my friends and family for the shooting sports. I recommend participation based on the quality of the events and the interests of my friends and family rather than subtleties of what the organizing bodies are doing politically. It would take an anti-gun stance to earn a boycott. But I also recommend events from lots of other sanctioning bodies as well.

    I will still gently recommend friends and family join the NRA if they have an interest in shooting and RKBA. Is it the best? Maybe not. If a friend or family member dislikes the NRA, there are plenty of other organizations also. But the NRA provides lots of great resources for shooters, and I wouldn't give them the cold shoulder for an errant commercial.
     
  19. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,118
    Location:
    Central PA
    As I said before, every political move made has repercussions. Some good, some bad.

    They're certainly counting on buttering up the Republican party by publishing a big "rally round the conservative flag, boys!" manifesto like this. Pushing the NRA membership to support anti "social-justice" politicians and conservatives. Ok, that may have some positive benefits. Maybe the symbiosis of NRA members and Republican party people will manage to hang onto power forever and push "our" agenda.

    Not that the Republican party has been a real generous bed-fellow on that front. But every once in a generation they throw us a bone. So, yay.

    But what about the future? What about the rest of society? Not the Democrat party leadership, but the center and center-left masses who feel than there are still some issues that need resolving which the social justice proponents are talking about -- in their ham-fisted way? Or who simply are traditionally not "conservative" and tend to vote Democrat.

    This video just picks up a big old handful of mud and slaps them in the eye with it. Most of them probably didn't need a lot of reminding that the NRA is a lapdog of the Republican party, and doesn't represent THEM (mom and pop liberal out in the suburbs). But we've just made it abundantly clear that all us NRA types are CONSERVATIVES and they can go jump in a lake for all we care.

    You ask, "why not?" I ask "WHY?" What was all that socially divisive flak useful, helpful, or necessary? Why does reminding society that the NRA is VERY VERY VERY RIGHT WING need to be done, again, once more?


    Not everything in American society is going to stay white, straight, protestant, conservative, forever. Things change. That's life. To me, if we want RKBA (and the NRA which is pretty inextricably tied to our RKBA) not to die with the conservative trend of this decade or this generation, we need to be reinforcing the idea that the NRA is for ALL Americans. And RKBA is for ALL Americans. And we don't care if you're gay, black, liberal, Muslim, conservative, whether you're in favor of current policing tactics and trends or against them -- or what all. The 2nd Amendment is a valuable right for everyone, and the NRA is here to defend it for EVERONE.

    So yeah...that's "why not."
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2017 at 9:21 AM
    alsaqr likes this.
  20. Ironicaintit

    Ironicaintit Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,053
    Location:
    Colorado
    I don't think it's the NRAs fault that it's typically only one side of the aisle that picks a political fight and attempts to work towards our disarmament.

    And I have seen a (D) behind the names of candidates they have endorsed.

    I'm curious; those of you that have canceled your membership over issues like these....did you inform the NRA of your reasoning?
     
  21. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,320

    There is no risk here. The parts of the NFA that do candidate advocacy vs. issue advocacy, vs. non-political activity are siloed off into different organizations.
    501(c)(3) is tax exempt and donor deductible. Some parts of the NRA are 501(c)(3)
    501(c)(4) is tax exempt Some parts of the NRA are 501(c)(4)
    Some parts are neither. The NRA-ILA (which must gun control advocates think of as "The NRA" is a registered lobbying organization and PAC.

    Here are some of the 501(c)(3) parts of the NRA:
    NRA Freedom Action Foundation
    The NRA Foundation, Inc
    NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund (the one I contribute to on Amazon Smile)
    NRA Special Contribution Fund - Whittington Center

    Mike

     
  22. hdwhit
    • Contributing Member

    hdwhit Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,003
    Location:
    Frisco, TX
    The NRA leadership declared me a "jackbooted thug" because I was (at the time) a Federal L.E.O.
     
  23. hdwhit
    • Contributing Member

    hdwhit Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,003
    Location:
    Frisco, TX
    And as far afield of their tax exempt status as they have walked in the past couple of decades, I would certainly not object to a review by the IRS Employee Plans/Exempt Organizations (EP/EO) bureau. Let them explain how advocating people killing Federal L.E.O.s was within their charter and within Title 26 USC 501.
     
  24. bc38

    bc38 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Sam1911 thanks! Am i anti protest? YES! i dont care what the protest is, left, right, center,.......... just for a month or two can everyone just sit down and shut up and give us all a mental break? as will i for now. again thanks for helping me not look quite so inept with this thing.
     
  25. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,419
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    "The NRA leadership declared me a "jackbooted thug" because I was (at the time) a Federal L.E.O."

    The term "jack booted thug" originated with US Representative John Dingle, a pro- Second Amendment Democrat. He used it in the context of a totally out of control BATFE. President Bush I resigned from the NRA after the NRA wrote that article. No big loss because Bush was never with us anyway: He banned over 40 so called "assault weapons" from import.
     

Share This Page