I quit the NRA when they let the machine gun ban slip by, without any warning I might add.
How was it the NRAs fault that Democrats in the House added the machine gun ban to the Firearm Owners Protection Act based on a questionable voice vote?
Here is a little more history that people who hold this point of view might want to consider:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=142097&page=1&pp=25&highlight=FOPA
They do not want the gun control issue resolved; too much money involved in it.
The NRA receives dues of $35 per year for around 3 million members. According to the charter of the NRA, these dues may not be used for political purposes but are only used to support the organizations goals of promoting firearms safety, matches, etc. So around $105 million a year is devoted to that purpose.
The NRA-ILA and the NRA-PAC are the political wing of the NRA. From 1989-2002,
they managed to spend about $13 million supporting gun rights (this includes salaries to their own lobbyists).
Now, let's just assume that your unsupported accusation concerning the NRA is correct and they are only in it for the money. In what way do they need the political issue of gun control to generate money?
For that matter, how does your accusation compare historically? Did the NAACP or the ACLU fade into the woodwork after these solely political organizations achieved the goals they were formed to promote? Were their leaders suddenly jobless and destitute?
When I think of the NRA, I always seem to get a picture of John Kerry holding that shotgun in his orange hunting vest , and until they (NRA)show a more aggressive stance that does not involve compromise on the antis terms, they can kiss my ....The Republicans too...
And why should the NRA care about your outside the group opinion any more than they care about Sarah Brady's opinion? What world do you live in where the NRA suddenly starts thinking "Hey some random guy on the Internet won't join us until we completely change our policies to suit his whims, even though these same policies might not be supported by our
current membership? Kind of tough to make an organization more hardcore by shunning it and allowing only the soft-hearted to make the rules.
PS I don't currently contribute to any firearms group or orginization, as I have not found one with an aggressive enough stance.
So what are you doing locally to change that?