NRA Statement On Legislative Efforts On Capitol Hill

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Free? Here in Oregon I have to pay a ten-dollar fee for an instant check."

That's because Oregon is a Point of Contact (POC) for NICS and Oregon processes the background checks for all gun purchases. http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics.htm

Folks, let's remember why we have a NICS system. NICS was proposed in lieu of a 5/7-day waiting period as part of the Brady bill, which NRA fought for more than a decade, even when it was finally amended to include NICS . If you remember we had a 5-day wait on handgun purchases from '93-'98. While I don't love NICS, I would argue that an "instant check" is far superior to the alternative.

I grew up in a state that had a 7-day waiting period for all handgun sales. That 7-day wait was effectively a month long, even though by law FFLs could transfer the handgun after 7 days(none did).

Something else to keep in mind, NICS isn't going away. There simply aren't the votes to do that. I know there are many folks on here who think NRA should be spending it's political capital working to repeal NICS but that simply demonstrates their complete lack of understanding of the legislative process and our current political reality. In case you didn't notice, long-time NRA foes took control of Congress in the last election. And don't forget it took 6 years to pass the gun industry lawsuit bill to prevent gun manufacturers from being sued out of existence and that was with the Republicans in control.
 
"The NRA supports the firearms INDUSTRY (companies) not firearm owning citizens."


That's ridiculous. NRA is made up of millions of individuals and represents its members (individuals). I assume however the author is taking issue with NRA's efforts to pass the gun industry lawsuit bill.

Try buying a new gun when all the firearms and ammunition manufacturers and FFLs have been sued out of existence. It's hard to have a Second Amendment if no one can buy any guns.

NRA supported the gun industry lawsuit bill because there was a very real danger of the manufacturers being sued into bankruptcy. Even if municipalities never prevailed in court they could cost the gun companies, distributors and FFLs hundreds of millions of dollars of dollars. Does anyone remember the S&W settlement? The Clinton Admin was able to extract concessions from S&W regarding the types of products they could sell, how often and to whom. I'd say that was plenty good reason to support an industry from which NRA members and other folks could buy guns.
 
You won't change it by being a member, either:

NRA's bylaws are set up to restrict voting to the most faithful.
Fully-paid life member can vote. So can annual members with five years of CONTINUOUS membership. Let your annual membership lapse for even a day and the clock resets to zero. Because of this restriction, no more than 10% of annual member are even eligible to vote.

Actual voting is done by a tiny subset of NRA members. Out of 4,000,000 members, only 150,000 vote in the election of the seventy-six member Board (BTW, too large a group to actually direct). Thats a mere 4%. No member votes in the election of Mr. LaPierre as EVP.
 
I do not believe the NRA at the top leadership gives much of a damn about individual rights, as long as the sponsor companies can maintain sales numbers.

What percentage of NRA money comes from gun manufacturers? I wouldn't know but smell cynical nonsense here.
 
Is the 1st amendment directed to different people than the 2nd??? How about the 4th????

When do we get to see the mental "test" that gives an individual the license to exercise their Freedom of Speech right??? I mean we wouldn't want "crazies" out there running there mouths with their silly opinions right?

What will the mental test be in order to maintain the RIGHT against unlawful searches??? Why shouldn't we be able the search the "crazies" whenever the hell we'd like?... I mean they ARE "crazy" right???

It sure is a SLIPPERY SLOPE.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top