NRA-ILA letter/My response

[Third_Rail]

In response to the newsletter the NRA-ILA put out regarding action that they're taking, I sent the following by e-mail.

Now that Republicans have the upper hand, I would like to see the NRA pushing some MAJOR changes in law.

By this I don't mean getting rid of the DC Gun Ban, or just getting a firearms manufacturer protection act passed. I think now is the best time that we've ever been given to be able to fight for much, much more than that - for things like suppressors moved to Title I items, allowing new Class 3 rifles and pistols to be made, bought, and sold (restricted by the 1986 FOPA, I cannot remember which section), and pushing to strike down such anti-freedom laws such as the 1989 EO banning "non sporting" imports.

If we don't start actually pushing for change, in a few decades even my bolt-actions will be deemed "non-sporting assault weapons", and you know it. If you want to keep my membership, and the memberships of every single person I can reach, you'll act ASAP.

-My Name

And I got a message back, earlier today.

Thank you for contacting the NRA-ILA. Currently, lawsuit preemption, lifting the DC Gun ban, fighting so called "assault" weapon bans throughout the states, and national reciprocity will be on the list of NRA-ILA's major priorities in the new legislative year.

There simply are not the votes nor the right political climate for us to push for reversals of these "landmark" firearms laws of years' past. We will certainly work on these issues where we can. But right now, the four items in the first paragraph will be our main focus.

Sincerely,

Joel Brewer
NRA-ILA

Not quite what I'd like to see, but this part is kind of nice, as a MA resident...

...fighting so called "assault" weapon bans throughout the states...

If I start seeing some action in NJ, CA, MA, and others, I may yet keep my membership.


I just thought you'd all like to see this.

 

[dakotasin]

i don't know... one brick at a time, i guess... but, it does seem to be a prime time to work on some of the bigger bricks. 'course, what they want to work on now, but perhaps those 4 things will lay a foundation for being able to repeal some more...

i would really like to own a few suppressors. how many older shooters out there are deaf now, or nearly so?? yeah, i wear hearing protection at the range, but not when hunting - and if it wasn't a hassle to suppress some of my guns, i wouldn't be concerned about it at all...

i wonder if there is any hope to easily, legally, and cheaply own suppressors, without having waiting periods and tax stamps??

 

[taliv]

that's not good. it's a piss-poor strategy and everyone knows it.

FUNDAMENTALLY, the 2nd Ammendment protects the rights of individuals to own weapons appropriate for militia. It does not in any way protect hunting or sporting.

Kerry understood that, and took a strategy that will (probably) eventually win, which is to support hunting and sporting because it sounds good, while gradually banning and hassling other weapons out of existence. Once those are all gone, hunting and sporting will go too.

Face it, with the rate of population growth and urbanization, in the next 20 to 30 years, few individuals will have access to property they can hunt on, and shooting ranges will be zoned away from cities, so there simply will not be a large portion of the populace willing to go to bat for hunting and sporting.

If the NRA goes after those four things, they'll win the battle and lose the war.

On top of that, the NRA is two-faced about states rights. They're for it when they can play on people's fears about left-wing nutjobs on the 9th circuit, but then they turn around and push national reciprocity. As was well-stated on another thread, national CCW means we'll all get to CCW for a couple years, but when the pendulum swings just a little bit to the other side, we'll all lose CCW because of NY and CA, and there won't be a dang thing people in common-sense states like TN can do about it, just like all the other federal gun bans.

The NRA's number 1 priority should be getting a supreme court ruling that says the 2nd Ammendment is an individual right. Once that happens, all the other stuff will fall in place.

Their 2nd priority should be recruiting lots of young people into shooting sports and and promoting events, so that guns will be like they used to be, just part of life, instead of like today, where people see a gun and call the police.

 

[Standing Wolf]

The G.O.A. is what the N.R.A. ought to be.

 

[txgho1911]

Pre-emption

I read somewhere about pushing for a federal pre-emption. If it was worded correctly and included some explanation referring to "reform to repair a uniformly unconstitutional assault on individual rights"!
The more constitutional legislators could beat the socialists over the head with this from every corner. Scotus might kick and scream at the thought. Every legislator could find themselves constantly reminded of the oath they and so many of us here have taken.

One bill titled as such containing other repairs and clarifications as clean up efforts of so many other muddy clear rules laws and such. How would these senators look voting against medical and other professional tort reforms Or real teeth in arming pilots now.

Just another random thought. Something if written correctly and acted upon could pave the way to 2A relief.

 

[Bubbles]

The anti's didn't make all their gains overnight, and we won't win back our right overnight.

Having said that, I think that we need to take a page from the anti's playbook (push for a big gain) and "compromise" to accept a smaller step in the right direction.

 

[Gray Peterson]

On top of that, the NRA is two-faced about states rights. They're for it when they can play on people's fears about left-wing nutjobs on the 9th circuit, but then they turn around and push national reciprocity. As was well-stated on another thread, national CCW means we'll all get to CCW for a couple years, but when the pendulum swings just a little bit to the other side, we'll all lose CCW because of NY and CA, and there won't be a dang thing people in common-sense states like TN can do about it, just like all the other federal gun bans.

Um....why are people still confusing "National CCW" and "Nationalwide CCW reciprocity?". They are not the same thing. I've heard people say "National CCW" and nationwide CCW reciprocity interchangably, and then think that when we call for reciprocity, we want some sort of federal CCW permit issued by the BATFE.

Not true.

Please read: Article 4 of the United States Constitution., Section 1, which states:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

The US congress can mandate licenses be recognized across the fifty states. They could with drivers licenses, but that wasn't neccesarily due to interstate compacts. They can do the same with CCW licenses.

The way it's written, a person with a license to carry from ANY state could carry in any state. Want to be able to carry in NJ? Just get a UT or FL permit and you're good to go.

Now that isn't to say the bill could be amended to prevent that, but it's a start.

 

[taliv]

i realize it would be handled the same as drivers licenses and not issued by the batf. all the bills proposed thus far have had that model. doesn't change the point that the NRA is two-faced on states rights, or the point that it's a dangerous precedent. for example, if congress did the same thing re: gay marriages, then those done in massachusetts would have to be recognized in all other states.

 

[SMLE]

I have NEVER agreed with the NRA's dumb idea of trying to defend the 2nd. Amendment and RKBA on the basis of "sporting" purposes and for a while I chose not to join. But now I'm a member. Why? because if all of us who bellyache about the way the NRA does things would JOIN and then VOTE, we could exert some force in the right direction. The NRA is still the "800 pound gorilla" of RKBA groups. We just need to convince the gorilla where the best bananas are.

FWIW, I'm a member of the NRA, JPFO and GOA. ALL gun owners should try to join ALL the Pro-RKBA groups, including their State groups.

The antis got us in the hole we're in by incrementalism. Demand the whole pie, then accept a "reasonable" compromise for just a bite, then repeat, we've kept on giving them bites until they've got the equivilant of several slices. I think we could do the same thing if we tried. But we MUST get the gun owners who have fallen into the trap of thinking of the 2A as only being about hunting and collecting to wake up and see the truth.

 

[Highland Ranger]

They are going to have to do something to keep our attention otherwise membership will definately drop off . . . .

 

[jke456]

(quote)
The anti's didn't make all their gains overnight, and we won't win back our right overnight.

Having said that, I think that we need to take a page from the anti's playbook (push for a big gain) and "compromise" to accept a smaller step in the right direction.
(/quote)


Bubbles hit the nail on the head, except that we should hit them with both barrels, try to repeal all federal gun laws and see what the anti's are willing to compromise on.
Getting SCOTUS to rule on the second IMHO is a pipe dream in the near future.
They have always shown to sidestep it or the prosecution drops any case that might make it that far...... and if a case should happen to make it that far it will be some scumbag and the public will support a ruling against OUR right....

go after all laws see what can be compromised....then again ....and again.....till it gets back to pre 1934

Compromising has always been my #1 complaint about the NRA.....

jon

 

[RavenVT100]

If I start seeing some action in NJ, CA, MA, and others, I may yet keep my membership.

The NRA-ILA has stated that NJ is a legislative priority. Whether or not that's true, I don't know.

What I do know is that we were able to do away with a bill similar to CA's .50 cal proposal last year, so that is definitely something positive.

The strategy of compromising our way back into an area that we're satisfied with is a good way to go, in fact I think it's pretty much the only way to go. Newly gathered crime statistics will support the fact that our compromises aren't hurting anyone, just like the crime statistics for shall-issue states do not indicate that people are shooting each other in the streets. Of course there will be spin, but savvy people can see through that.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

......."the climate isn't right".

Sounds like hesitation to battle.
An attempt to delay the call to action.
Weak leadership.

In the meantime, we will all mill about smartly, awaiting the call to fall-in and charge.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

Vick