NRA Ratings for your state.

[beerslurpy]

Are here. Even pro-gun states like FL have an enormous number of A rated candidates running against C D and F rated candidates. Gun control is one election away from a resurgence.

Yeah, most of the pro-gunners are republicans and most of the antis are dems, but dont give me that crap about not voting to punish "the party of bush." You are going to end up punishing the gun owners in the long run.

Examine the candidates you can vote for and vote for the best ones. If you dont choose to participate, you may end up with the far greater of two evils.

If you live in Florida, the least you can do is turn out to support the reelection of Charles Bronson for commissioner of agriculture. Yes, all our CCW permits are signed by Charles Bronson.

I am kind of pissed at them for rating Ron Paul as a B, when he is easily the most pro-gun person in the entire federal government.

 

[WayneConrad]

Thanks for posting this.

Come election day, I'm going to use the NRA scoresheet to decide my vote for those candidates that I'm still undecided on. It's good to have a default, however flawed.

 

[ArmedBear]

Yeah, most of the pro-gunners are republicans and most of the antis are dems, but dont give me that crap about not voting to punish "the party of bush." You are going to end up punishing the gun owners in the long run.

A recent comment by a pundit or blogger, I wish I could remember who...

For those who think that punishing the GOP by voting individuals we generally agree with out of office will accomplish what we libertarian-leaning types want:

If voting a party out of power would improve them, you'd think that the Democrats would be GREAT by now!

 

[scurtis_34471]

Most of the people I plan to vote for are A rated, which is good to know. The only one that gives me pause is Kathryn Harris, who I refuse to vote for.

 

[Helmetcase]

Even though he's a B and O'Malley's an F, they're not endorsing Ehrlich in a critical governor's race, perhaps the most critical one in the country (MD is the most likely state for the Brady's to try another AWB).

What gives?

The fact that they've given GOA Legislator of the Year Don Dwyer a lowly C (he's done nothing to indicate he should be given anything less than an A+) and refused to endorse him shows they're playing politics here. The truth--Dwyer defeated NRA lobbyist Jennifer Holland's father to get the seat he's in.

I'm sure the uppity ups at the NRA can't babysit every one of these decisions and catch all that bullhuckey every time, but I know for a fact that MSI has made the NRA aware of this little pecadillo in writing.

 

[beerslurpy]

What gives is the usual politics that the NRA gets up to. The NRA likes to punish people that go against it, to make examples for others. In your case it was unseating an NRA lobbyist. In Ron Paul's case it was going against the NRA on the lawful commerce in arms act.

The NRA's support of incumbents and withholding of endorsements from people that have snubbed it is all about being able to tell politicians "95% of the people we support win" and "we effectively punish those that go against us." Just plain old Carrot and Stick, really.

Part of the reason for sites like this board is that local people like you can educate people on candidates so the movement isnt hurt by the NRA's own self interest. I'm just trying to encourage people to get informed and vote. If people here (like you) can post corrections, so much the better.

It kind of frustrates me that the NRA doesnt release reasons for candidate rankings, nor candidate survey responses. I thought they stopped this behavior in the mid 90s.

The reason to vote for Katherine Harris is because she is very pro gun and Bill Nelson is VERY anti gun. Who cares if she is a complete bitch. She votes the way we want and Bill Nelson doesnt.

 

[Waitone]

My LT governor rated an A+. Problem is the guy is dangerous to the physical health and safety of the state's citizens. I think it irresponsible to vote for the guy knowing he has lots of non-gun related problems.

 

[profshadow]

I'm in Florida and there is one Supreme Court Justice of for a "shall retain" vote. And a couple judges running locally.

Not on the NRA list...and the judicial branch is the one that can do more "damage" to our rights than any other, since ultimately any challenge is decided in the courts.

Wondering if it is too much to check or some other reason...

 

[beerslurpy]

I dont have full access to westlaw yet or I could search by judge to find the cases theyve been involved in.

In all likelihood, I doubt a search would reveal much. Almost all the shooting and firearm releated cases are going to be heavily fact bound- once the jury finds that John Smith reasonably feared that Mike Crackhead was about to inflict bodily harm upon him when he shot him, it falls straight into black letter law. The outcome of the case hinges upon the jury's findings of fact, which the higher courts are powerless to overturn. The best example of anti-gun bias you might find is a trial judge giving bad jury instructions or trying to exclude evidence favorable to a self defense shooter, but I havent heard evidence of this happening in Florida.

Also, Florida is blessed with some excellent statutes. There arent a million mines strewn across the legal landscape for gun owners to step on. And even if there were, the judges would have little power to get rid of them.

 

[Shield529]

I love my state. Almost every Democrat has an A rating. It lets me vote for more then just one issue.

 

[Hyunchback]

This election

This election I have given money to NRA, CSSA and RMGO backed candidates.

I never gave money directly to a politician before in my life, but I did this election.

I have given money to candidates for whom I'm not even a consituent so they had more ammo in the war chest.

I'm putting my money where my mouth is. It's not much. It's probably more than I can afford. What I can't afford is to have more of the same 'ban the gun' government.

Here the As more often go to Republicans than Dems (John Salazar a noted exception). There are two races, though, where the choice is crystal clear.

Beauprez or Ritter? Beauprez has a rock-solid pro RKBA record while Ritter has stood against the rights of citizens to keep arms, defend themselves and worse yet has allowed drug-dealing illegal aliens to stay in this country and commit more crimes, including crimes against children.

O'Donnell or Perlmutter? Perlmutter's debate against his Dem primary rival devolved into a "I'm harder on gun-owners than you" slug-fest. Look at their websites. O'Donnell spells out in concrete terms what he wants to accomplish while Perlmutter is loaded with more generalities than the Pentagon on payday. Perlmutter and his DNC helpers spend millions on "I'm not that guy" advertising smearing Rick O'Donnell. Rick O'Donnell is a man, through and through who says what he means, means what he says and isn't afraid of admitting when he was wrong. I just wish I could vote for him.

Tancredo or Winter? Is there really a choice? I'm surprised anyone gives Winter money. He lost just by declaring his candidacy.

Will I vote with the NRA/CSSA/RMGO choices in my hand? Yep.

When every Democrat running in my state seems to be running on the "We aren't with George Bush" platform there really isn't a choice. Telling me who you aren't with doesn't tell me what you will do.

 

[dirtdog]

Nice of the NRA to disable the interactive map during an election year.

That is why I will never join them.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Nice of the NRA to disable the interactive map during an election year.

That is why I will never join them.

What in God's name are you talking about? It's not General Election time yet, this is just the primaries. The survey results are not compiled yet even

Very top of the web page:

Candidate grades and endorsements for the 2008 General Elections will be available in the Fall.

You will also notice that for states having immediate elections there are links to those states ratings.

You really need to become more educated on how things work before you decide to post drivel like that.

 

[mpmarty]

If you joined them you might have some input as to what they do. As a non member, you have no say and your opinion counts for nothing.

Member of NRA since 1954
Life member since 1974
Endowment member since 2004
Put your money where your mouth is.

 

[ilbob]

I wish the NRA was more transparent in how they come to these ratings.

It seems to me they used to publish the actual returned surveys somewhere.

I agree there is way too much politics in the way they select candidates. They often seem to support mediocre or even bad incumbants over really good challengers.

 

[Car Knocker]

That is why I will never join them.

 

[7Star]

more than just a thought...

:banghead: Old post... but one I thought worth commenting on. For the person who said .. "that's why I wil never join them," and any other who shares this view. Who else do you think is out there fighting for your rights in this area. You may not like all the tactics or stances.. but what if they were not out there doing what they do. Basic fact, if you are not a member of the NRA or a minimum, on of the other similar organizations... you are a free-rider, enjoying the rights and freedoms other protect for you. There is a very thin line seperating our freedoms and regulations that would strangle the life out of those freedoms. For a member of a site like this, I would hope we are all pulling our weight in some manner. So ask yourself, what am I doing to help in the effort. Membership is the NRA or another lobbying organization is the bare minimum. Non-membership in any similar group in the modern age is just begging for rights to be eroded away in the the legislature and especially the courtroom.. the real battleground.