North's second term at NRA goes south.

[AlexanderA]

Ultimately there is a lot at stake. This is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, for the people, defended by volunteers raised from the people (militia).

I just want to point out that the original militia of the 1790's were not volunteers. All free, able-bodied males were supposed to be enrolled, and to report for the annual musters with their own personal weapons. This universality is important, because it underlies the view that the "militia" is the "people," and that therefore the people (as individuals) are entitled to all the standard weapons of the military, under the 2nd Amendment. That's the rationale that should have been used in the Heller case, but unfortunately wasn't. Quite the opposite, in fact. Under no circumstances did Scalia & co. want to legalize machine guns for private individuals.

By extension, Scalia's rationale in the Heller case is going to be used to uphold a future AWB. That could have been avoided if the 2nd Amendment had been interpreted as I outlined above, building on the Miller case. (My forlorn hope is that an "originalist" Supreme Court majority might revisit the thinking behind Heller -- but I'm not holding my breath. Remember that Scalia himself was touted as being an "originalist.")

 

[SSN Vet]

Just because La Pierre isn't shooting 3-gun matches, running around wearing blue jeans and shouting "hell-yah" doesn't mean he has not personal connection to guns.

The lack of logic in these assertions is what led many gun-loving blue collar types to fall for the PR stunts of the Democrats, with their hunting commercials.

I want a smart businessman, a tactical legal expert and a PR genius running the NRA. And such a wunderkind is easily worth a million bucks a year... because that's the market rate for these types.

Whether he builds his own AR, shoots MOA groups at 1,000 yards or owns an example of every mil. surp ever sold means nothing to me.

I don't know that La Pierre is any of these things, but the bias I hear in all the La Pierre haters seems to be directed at him wearing a suite and tie and making a lot of money. Good luck finding the pre-requisite skill set to be effective in that job wearing camel skins and eating wild locusts and honey, while the decline any salary.

This hate has more to do with class warfare than it does job effectiveness or competency.

If evaluating your friends based on who their enemies are is a good litmus test, then La Pierre is my friend, because the gun grabbing libs absolutely detest him.

 

[Waveski]

There's that pesky reality thing again!

 

[alsaqr]

- And now it's tinfoil hat time.

Russian agent Maria Butina was sentenced to 18 months in prison and deportation.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la...nced-russian-national-nra-20190426-story.html

 

[BSA1]

I just want to point out that the original militia of the 1790's were not volunteers. All free, able-bodied males were supposed to be enrolled, and to report for the annual musters with their own personal weapons. This universality is important, because it underlies the view that the "militia" is the "people," and that therefore the people (as individuals) are entitled to all the standard weapons of the military, under the 2nd Amendment. That's the rationale that should have been used in the Heller case, but unfortunately wasn't. Quite the opposite, in fact. Under no circumstances did Scalia & co. want to legalize machine guns for private individuals.

By extension, Scalia's rationale in the Heller case is going to be used to uphold a future AWB. That could have been avoided if the 2nd Amendment had been interpreted as I outlined above, building on the Miller case. (My forlorn hope is that an "originalist" Supreme Court majority might revisit the thinking behind Heller -- but I'm not holding my breath. Remember that Scalia himself was touted as being an "originalist.")

For once you posted something I agree with.

I also feel that Heller is not the big victory that many gun owners believe it is. Justice Scalia stated in his opinion that certain classes of firearms may be subject to being banned.

I believe the Supreme Court has tilted to the left since Scalia's death despite the two new Justices. Or maybe because of the two new Justices. Chief Justice Roberts has previously his liberal leanings in his Affordable Care Act decision. I fear without Scalia's influence on him he will continue to side with the liberal justices which is why we badly need another Conservative on the bench. Ginsburg has made it clear she is not going to step down despite her failing health.

Our 2A Rights are fragile and only hanging on by 4 votes in Congress or 3 votes if the Democrats win the Presidency and 1 vote in the Supreme Court. A Democrat President can count on the RINO's votes so a Democrat majority in the Senate will not be needed.

As for Ollie North I thought he was a unusual choice for President but let’s face it Moses is dead.

As the Titanic sank the band played on...

 

[AlexanderA]

I want a smart businessman, a tactical legal expert and a PR genius running the NRA.

That's just the point. LaPierre is none of those things:
"Smart businessman" -- he presided over the financial decline of the organization, driving it into near-bankruptcy (while personally enriching himself).
"Tactical legal expert" -- I give you the bump stock fiasco as exhibit #1. Which of course was compounded by not joining the legal efforts to overturn it.
"PR genius" -- his appearances before Congress speak for themselves. Just about anybody on the pro-gun side would make a better spokesman.

What LaPierre is good at is Soviet-style cabal politics. He has managed to make sure that the Politburo -- er, Board of Directors -- is both in his pocket, and impervious to being changed by the membership.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

Where I'm going is that a collection of thugs fighting over the pot of gold. No body is in the know outside the inner circle there. I call for a "witch hunt" and an audit. Clean all the bastards out...now. Orange suits for them all.

Addendum: Remember the country song with the mushrooms. Mushrooms are raised in the dark and fed on horse manure. Let's get back on track with Olie and Wayne.

 

[Tommygunn]

I just want to point out that the original militia of the 1790's were not volunteers. All free, able-bodied males were supposed to be enrolled, and to report for the annual musters with their own personal weapons. This universality is important, because it underlies the view that the "militia" is the "people," and that therefore the people (as individuals) are entitled to all the standard weapons of the military, under the 2nd Amendment. That's the rationale that should have been used in the Heller case, but unfortunately wasn't. Quite the opposite, in fact. Under no circumstances did Scalia & co. want to legalize machine guns for private individuals.

By extension, Scalia's rationale in the Heller case is going to be used to uphold a future AWB. That could have been avoided if the 2nd Amendment had been interpreted as I outlined above, building on the Miller case. (My forlorn hope is that an "originalist" Supreme Court majority might revisit the thinking behind Heller -- but I'm not holding my breath. Remember that Scalia himself was touted as being an "originalist.")

Much of the above is a good, important point I agree with.
I just want to say this: The Miller decision was a DISASTER for the second amendment. To base any future law on it would have an enormous chance of backfiring. The court IGNORED the use of the shotgun in evidence as it could not be shown to have been used in any military action (as if the particular weapon in question has to have been used, not just weapons of the same design & function.)
This would possibly bite the future 2A case "in the butt" if it were brought before the court.
The NFA had been found unconstitutional by a lower court, which is exactly how it got to SCOTUS, thanks to Judge Ragon.
IMHO a wholly different argument must be made.
This is hardly impossible. I hope it does happen, but in the real world I won't be holding my breath.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

What happened to Olie and Wayne. Is this thread about the Second Amendment? Are we hijacked by fanboys? Surely not!

 

[Jack Ryan]

It seemed to me that some here criticized the NRAs leadership not because they wanted the NRA gone but because they think changes in leadership would make the NRA more successful.

MEMBERS make the NRA successful.

 

[BSA1]

That's just the point. LaPierre is none of those things:
"Smart businessman" -- he presided over the financial decline of the organization, driving it into near-bankruptcy (while personally enriching himself).
"Tactical legal expert" -- I give you the bump stock fiasco as exhibit #1. Which of course was compounded by not joining the legal efforts to overturn it.
"PR genius" -- his appearances before Congress speak for themselves. Just about anybody on the pro-gun side would make a better spokesman.

What LaPierre is good at is Soviet-style cabal politics. He has managed to make sure that the Politburo -- er, Board of Directors -- is both in his pocket, and impervious to being changed by the membership.

Sorry but linking LaPierre and the NRA to Communism is over the top for me.

Do you realize how negative your comments are?

 

[Mowgli Terry]

MEMBERS make the NRA successful.

Are Members in the dark? You know, like mushrooms.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I get so tired of hearing "without the NRA, you'd have no gun rights." That is the kind of fear mongering that has kept them in business, and actively lobbying against gun rights for a very long time. They have supported, or endorsed almost every major piece of gun legislation to date. The NFA, 68 GCA, background checks, red flag laws, bumpfire stock bans, and more. They have tried to interfere and stop cases like DC vs Heller, McDonald vs Chicago, both cases won by small groups who have rolled back more gun control than the NRA has managed to do in a century.

I'll never send money to a gun control organization, the NRA won't get a dime out of me.

You get tired of hearing it because it is the truth and you've done nothing to help.

 

[AlexanderA]

Sorry but linking LaPierre and the NRA to Communism is over the top for me.

I wasn't referring to the ideology of communism, but to the mechanics of Kremlin rule. Substitute the court of Byzantium if you like. What I'm saying is that LaPierre is a master at inside organizational plotting. Because of that, no matter what he does, he's impervious to removal. The general membership of the NRA are just voiceless pawns. No wonder many gun owners are not anxious to join. If I was not already a Life member, I certainly would not join today. I hate being played for a sucker.

 

[GEM]

Well, folks - We have descended into bickering. I'm calling it. If some new development that has worthwhile information surfaces, we can re-engage. But for now, chill out.