NRA Directors. Who wants to repeal existing gun laws?

[Nutt]

I am tired of the NRA just taking my money and staying on the defense. Does anybody know of anybody who is on the ballot who wants to take the fight to the white house? I like Timothy Knight and Robert Viden, but i was wondering if anybody had some info I do not. I would even give money to a candidate if they would be ballsy enough to say they wanted to take on the big ones like fighting to remove The gun control act and other overbearing bills like that. Any info would be great. Thanks!

 

[thirty-ought-six]

The more I look into it, the NRA is more for gun makers and not gun owners.

While they say they "fight", if you actually find a list of their accomplishments on capital hill, it's a really short list.

 

[barnbwt]

"The more I look into it, the NRA is more for gun makers and not gun owners."

I agree, but it's not the NRA's fault. Think about it; a bunch of slick, highly professional elbow-rubbers and palm-greaser lobbyists, with more or less the same list of desires, versus...this

Who would you more readily form a dialogue with, yourself being a slick, highly professional elbow-rubber and palm-greaser working for the NRA?

We see it here on the boards daily; Gun Culture 2.0 is a whole heck of a lot more diverse than the 1.0 the NRA was built to service. In them olden days, the fight was for more hunting licenses, more hunting locations, more game seasons, and protection against their restriction --goals pretty much universal to all hunters (it's not like the dove hunters want to curtail deer season, or hog hunters to ban the use of duck decoys)

But now we have a whole mess of camps in addition to hunters;
-The Tannerite Crowd; they desire protection of stuff that looks really scary in action (also bump-firing)
-The Competition Crowd; they desire event organization, facilities, and promotion of the shooting sports
-The Black Powder Crowd; they desire to remain completely removed from the gun discussion as far as policy is concerned
-The Tacticool Crowd; they desire the ability to purchase/own all manner of small arms (less emphasis on use, simply because laws aren't focused on use, but possession)
-The Concealed Carry Crowd; they desire laws permitting and recognizing their right to self defense (the right typically denied where CC was barred)
-The Open Carry/Home Defense Crowd; they desire laws/recognition allowing them to freely use their weapons as they see fit, so long as they do so responsibly
-The Gun-Building Crowd/NFA Crowd; being intimately familiar with the technical and legal details of gun-law, they universally want the entire apparatus thrown out altogether. (Frequently the most 'radical' demands of the bunch, usually untenable due to limited representation and poor political optics)
-You also have an urban/rural divide within each of these groups (one seeking offense to reclaim turf, the other more focused on fending off advances of urban Anti's)
-And then you have your good old Fudds, alive and kicking (just barely, though) ready to make short-sighted decisions at a moment's notice. The other groups are no less short-sighted, but aren't courted by conspiring Anti's nearly so earnestly, so they don't get the opportunity to blow it for the rest of us.

How would you align your position among all these competing upstart groups, when you already have a long-established sporting focus and tons of like-minded industry representatives? It really doesn't matter what percentage of donations they get from us, if the signal we give is white noise. When we unify --like against the AWB or BGC bills post-Newtown-- we come through loud and clear, and industry is an afterthought (they may care about AWB's, but probably could care less about background checks in practice, since their products are already subject to those at point of sale)

Which is why the NRA tends to work most effectively as a 'ratchet' to prevent more gun restrictions from passing. Every group more or less doesn't want restriction on any front (aside from BGCs, which is why the issue has proven so dangerous) so it's easy for them to hold fast. But when it comes to offense, they must choose a target and follow a direction, and in that we are too divided to get through to them. I personally think multiple groups with competing goals is the best solution, possibly even within the NRA, so they could form parliament-like coalitions as their interests align. This is basically what we see at the State level in many cases.

At present, they just shout each other down at the national level

TCB

 

[Warp]

Not only that ^, but some of those issues are a bigger deal right now at the state level than the federal level. Carry particularly, that is almost entirely state law. Sure the NRA gets involved in state level stuff but to really push forward you need a dedicated org for that particular state to get it done.

 

[Nutt]

I am in quite a few of those groups. I am 21 and I feel the majority of people my age are a lot more rounded than those groups. I also feel that my generation doesn't really appeal to any one political party but mostly want freedom to do what we want and I live in a blue state, Washington. Does anybody have any suggestions? I don't really want to dabble on why the NRA sucks, but on who will change this organization to actually do what we want that is running for Director.

 

[Nutt]

There are a few organizations here in WA that are just for gun rights. Committee for right to bear arms is a good one. Concealed carry laws, even though I do have a cpl and carry every day, it is not as important to me as the laws surrounding long guns. I simply don't see why I need to get 6 background checks in a year if i want to buy 6 guns. I would also love it if the NRA would take on importation bans and the like. SBR and SBS laws. FFL laws and serialization laws. So does anybody know anybody running that is interested, or at least talking about, repealing laws? NRA lobbyists can do some good work if they are directed correctly.

 

[George Dickel]

At this point in time and for the last 6 years, and for the next 2 years Obama would just veto it. To get enough support to get this through both houses a legislator would have to make a lot of deals to get the necessary votes. Why waste "favors" from fellow legislators on a law that will just get vetoed in the end? Just getting a majority vote to pass the law is quite a bit easier than getting enough votes to overturn a veto. Just because Republicans ( who have traditionally been pro-gun) are in control of both houses not all of them would vote to remove some of these existing anti-gun laws. Yes there are Democrats who are pro-gun but their numbers are far smaller and getting them to buck their leadership would be almost impossible.

We didn't get where we are with gun control laws all at once, we got here a little bit at a time. That's the way you have to get rid of anti-gun laws, a bit at a time. How long ago did we have CCW in nearly every state? It was accomplished over a long period of time and done at the local and state level. A lot of this effort was helped by the NRA. The NRA is the only organization with any clout we have to work for us. Are they perfect, hell no but when it's the only game in town you are really limited.

 

[Warp]

At this point in time and for the last 6 years, and for the next 2 years Obama would just veto it. To get enough support to get this through both houses a legislator would have to make a lot of deals to get the necessary votes. Why waste "favors" from fellow legislators on a law that will just get vetoed in the end? Just getting a majority vote to pass the law is quite a bit easier than getting enough votes to overturn a veto. Just because Republicans ( who have traditionally been pro-gun) are in control of both houses not all of them would vote to remove some of these existing anti-gun laws. Yes there are Democrats who are pro-gun but their numbers are far smaller and getting them to buck their leadership would be almost impossible.

We didn't get where we are with gun control laws all at once, we got here a little bit at a time. That's the way you have to get rid of anti-gun laws, a bit at a time. How long ago did we have CCW in nearly every state? It was accomplished over a long period of time and done at the local and state level.

A lot of this stuff cannot be done at the local or state level, though. Federal changes obviously need to happen for NFA reform/repeal, FFL transers/sales of handguns to 18-20 year olds, re-opening the machine gun registry, re-importation of US firearms that were sent to other nations, etc

 

[Midwest]

What I think the NRA can do is to stop throwing States like New Jersey under the bus. Same goes for other National pro-gun groups across the country. And not just NJ, what about Maryland and New York State? What has the NRA done for NJ or Maryland? Is it the gun owners fault for living in an anti-gun state. What is the NRA doing to help gun owners in all the states?

I think the 1968 GCA and the NFA needs to be repealed. While the chances of that happening is next to zero. We need another bill to reign in the BATF again, just like we did back in the 80's. The NRA should support a bill that brings more accountability to the BATF. Rules or procedures that are vague and 'open to interpretation' should be clarified.

The NRA should address the NFA and acknowledge that more and more people are using NFA related items, especially silencers. Acknowledge that silencers are mainstream in states where they are legal. In most states, people can use silencers to hunt.

Personally I think silencers are not a firearm and should not be on the NFA list. In fact the whole NFA needs to be done away with in my opinion. Get rid of the GFSZ, Repeal Lautenberg Amendment, Repeal The Hughes Amendment, Repeal Import Bans, Repeal 1968 GCA, Repeal the NFA, Allow Non violent felons have their rights restored after paying their debt to society like Martha Stewart and G.Gordon Liddy....(and whatever else I missed).
.
.

 

[kwguy]

What I think the NRA can do is to stop throwing States like New Jersey under the bus. Same goes for other National pro-gun groups across the country. And not just NJ, what about Maryland and New York State? What has the NRA done for NJ or Maryland? Is it the gun owners fault for living in an anti-gun state. What is the NRA doing to help gun owners in all the states?

I'm not too sure what the NRA can do for those states.

 

[Warp]

What I think the NRA can do is to stop throwing States like New Jersey under the bus. Same goes for other National pro-gun groups across the country. And not just NJ, what about Maryland and New York State? What has the NRA done for NJ or Maryland? Is it the gun owners fault for living in an anti-gun state. What is the NRA doing to help gun owners in all the states?

...

A lot of this stuff cannot be done at the local or state level, though. Federal changes obviously need to happen for NFA reform/repeal, FFL transers/sales of handguns to 18-20 year olds, re-opening the machine gun registry, re-importation of US firearms that were sent to other nations, etc

You guys in those commie states can't even help yourselves from passing more and more ridiculous laws every year, clearly the people of those states relish gun control. I'd move or, if you think there are enough people who don't love gun control to even stand a chance, set up a state org or lobby to put some work in. That's what most of the other states do you know.

 

[Tirod]

You don't want the NRA to do complete legislative overhaul.

You want good Representatives and Congressmen who won't throw US under the bus - which is going to take having a pro-gun majority in each House.

That's never happened, and we can say that with the '34 NFA as the start. Politicians are who get elected, not STATESMEN, and as long as many of those groups listed above support people who mouth all the right things then we won't get movement to actually make what gun laws we have Constitutional. Politicians are those who respond to another school shooting with the ideas that we need to ban guns, or limit mag capacity, or create no gun zones - because that is what sells to their electorate.

It's the non gun voter who causes the real problem, because when you get enough of them they vote the wrong people in to represent their views. Taking the recent shooting in Paris as an example, the French are convinced their culture has advanced beyond the need to have firearms - so much so the policeman executed on the sidewalk wasn't issued one. And few in France see anything wrong with that - they blame the killers, not the anti gun mindset or method.

That is exactly the same attitude we are fighting in Congress, elected officials who think we need to "progress" to the level of a new society than doesn't use or need firearms to solve issues. It doesn't recognize the reality that there are many elements still left who aren't capable of "advancing" to their "superior" lifestyle. Which leaves those who recognize the threat as looking just like the ones carrying guns stalking them.

So, they vote against anything we see as needed because we are just as much a threat to them in their minds eye. If you carry a gun you are of a lower order.

Elitist. I don't see it as much different from the rise of German politics post WWI. Asking the NRA to take on even bigger political change is asking for them to set themselves up for failure. No sense spending money and political capital on reversing the NFA when they have their hands full fighting CO, NY, NY, CT, CA, WA, and others on their unconstitutional laws.

The NRA has done a lot of the last 30 years - we went from a minority of states with CCW to almost every state, and we are on the threshold of having reciprocity under Federal Law. A huge amount of progress has been accomplished - we went thru the AWB and saw it actually set aside. More reform WILL happen as citizens demand their rights at the state level to be just the same as other states.

I wouldn't throw the NRA under the bus just yet - if anyone plans on seeing the NFA "repealed" in the next ten years I'd like to place a well sized wager it won't. But we will see the gears of justice grind slowly and the NY SAFE act and others found unconstitutional. Those suits are going to happen and things will change.

It's really about growing up the non gun population to accept that their mindset fails to provide actual protection and that they have no right to deny others their rights.

 

[TimSr]

I think the whole premise of this thread is flawed seemingly to a lack of understanding as to how government works, and the limitations on what the NRA can do. On the federal level, when you've had a congress that will not even allow debate or discussion in the US senate for over 400 bills over the past 6 years, I'm not seeing an opportunity for the NRA to back any bills or find representatives to push them, unless they are Democrats, and you might have noticed even pro gun Democrats are reluctant to move against party leadership. On defense, the NRA informs and rallied gun owners, and quite successfully, to the point that even a Democrat congress was unable to exploit Newtown into more gun control. Nearly all of the major court victories, (and defeats) concerning 2nd amendment issues were fought by the NRA.

The NRA picks and chooses battles they can win, and incrementally advance restoration of rights. Sometimes, especially in the past, I think they compromised too much trying to appease the antis and prevent worse things happening, such as te NICS system with which they have been repeatedly beaten over the head with by antis who are NEVER appeased. All in all, when the opportunity presents itself in the courts or the congress, the NRA is leading the charge. Personally, I am more aligned with Gun Owners of America, but is would be foolish for me to bash the NRA who has the same goals and a lot bigger membership.

The NRA also works on state and even local issues, but moreso as consultants with local organizations. In Ohio we have the Buckeye Firearms assoc. for example.

The simple of it is, it takes elected lawmakers to fix things. The NRA is there to giver expertise, organise, and rally support, but they cannot be expected to fix what voters have screwed up, without the voters.

 

[stchman]

Is the NRA perfect, no.

The NRA is a voice that speaks loudly.

I am a life member of the NRA and I love it when I hear some anti say the following:

"We could get more things done if it wasn't for that damned NRA."

I think Rachel Maddow said that. Does my heart good.

 

[Old Fuff]

Keep in mind that the now-Republican-controlled U.S. House and Senate can pass repeal bills, but the President can veto them, and likely would. This is a fact of life, and the NRA can't do much about it. :banghead:

The only way major gun control laws that are already on the books can be repealed is by a combination of Republican-Democrat-Independent legislators overriding a veto. While this is possible, it's not probable.

Personally, I'm thankful that the NRA, along with other pro-gun advocate organizations and individuals, have been successful in stopping the most recent proposals made at the Federal level.

On the positive side, given the results of last year's election it's unlikely that president Obama will see any new gun control legislation come across his desk - and that's a good indicator of what the NRA can do and has done.

 

[Thermactor]

If it weren't for the NRA we'd be looking like Little Britain in terms of gun rights.
While they have blundered in the past, they've done wonders to preserve and fight for the 2nd Amendment in the past decade.

 

[OpticsPlanet]

I was thinking about this the other day while reading the latest sig brace update

this is the type of issue that the NRA needs to take up the fight

issues where gun owners are being unfairly taxed and restricted in their right because of the opinion of someone in power....we don't have the time and money as individuals to follow the due process and seek relief from the persecution

but an organization like the NRA does, just the the individual state rifle associations do

I'd like to see more out of Wayne LaPierre than rabble rousing against the president. Slinging opinions in the mud doesn't help any of us and just inspires the less responsible gun owners to get more vocal/reactionary/embarrassing.

That is what I wish the NRA would get involved with lately. Stop playing the game and lining politicians pockets to protect us. Start changing the game.

-Matt S.

 

[Nutt]

I could not agree with you more. Non of those laws have done much good for crime rates and i know doing the same thing that hasn't worked in the past, putting more laws on the books, won't work either. The removal of these emotionally charged laws would be a great thing for this nation in many aspects, including more revenue for the states and our Republic in which we live.

We are all basically saying the same thing though, most gun laws are stupid and don't do anything to deter LAW BREAKERS. But what are we going to do about it to make an actual change? Who will actually point our megaphone, The NRA, at our law makers and actually get something done that we all want? Does anybody know of anybody who is running for a director position that will do this? If not, does anybody have any ideas on what WE can do other than just talk about how we want things to look and actually make those things happen?

 

[Nutt]

I was thinking about this the other day while reading the latest sig brace update

this is the type of issue that the NRA needs to take up the fight

issues where gun owners are being unfairly taxed and restricted in their right because of the opinion of someone in power....we don't have the time and money as individuals to follow the due process and seek relief from the persecution

but an organization like the NRA does, just the the individual state rifle associations do

I'd like to see more out of Wayne LaPierre than rabble rousing against the president. Slinging opinions in the mud doesn't help any of us and just inspires the less responsible gun owners to get more vocal/reactionary/embarrassing.

That is what I wish the NRA would get involved with lately. Stop playing the game and lining politicians pockets to protect us. Start changing the game.

-Matt S.

Agreed, now what do we do as citizens? Who can we elect to the NRA board of directors that will do this?