Maybe we could do it if their message appealed to a broader segment of gun owners.
Not trying to be facetious here but there is a question THR posters that want the NRA to change its policy should ponder.
How much additional regulation are you willing to support to gain that larger membership and how much of the current membership will walk out due to that support?
The easy way to guess what the initial compromise and cost would look like is check the party's platform in 2016
"
With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe. We will expand background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws, hold irresponsible dealers and manufacturers accountable, keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons—off our streets, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, domestic abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues."
At a minimum, this means a new AWB with the contents to be determined, no private sales (the gun show loophole is what it is called) without background checks, restoring the ability to sue firearms companies and retailers by repealing the gun industry's tort protections from unlawful use in current law, use broad limits such as the terrorist watch list, allow arrests and other non-vetted information to be used to deprive ownership (currently forever once on the list), and define mental illness as a disqualifier in background checks broadly such as preventing veterans or social security recipients who have handed their finances to others to manage as disqualified from purchasing firearms. There is little support for Dems in office or the electorate to expand concealed carry across state lines, relaxing the NFA on suppressors, etc. to improve the FOPA to prevent travesties such as NY and NJ putting poor travelers with firearms at risk for arrest, and so on.
California and New York which set the trend for national Democrats has progressively tightened and tightened state regulations again which are then transported across state lines to other places such as Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Illinois, etc. The only pushback, if any, is from the U.S. Courts. I suspect in those few cases, the judges were appointed by Republicans.
The sad truth is that relatively small proportions of Republicans in those states supported the new regulations versus majority support of new restrictions by the Dems and to some extent swing voters. But, in each of those states, the Republicans are not in power and the ratchet has only tightened despite what the NRA did or did not do.
Should the NRA have supported these new regulations or tried to negotiate from a position of weakness as the Dems had the votes to get the new laws with or without NRA support? And would that have given the green light for Republicans in other states to surrender on similar legislation because they could cite NRA approval for this.
Would shelling out the whole ILA warchest to support Dems that might not seek even harsher legislation in those states work?
The media has largely shut the NRA out and demonized the organization to such an extent that the only free press the NRA gets is bad. Education shuns the NRA's demonstrated Eddie Eagle program to prevent firearm fatalities. Banks, insurance companies, and retailers vie with each other to heap scorn on the NRA and by extension its members as either fools or madmen.
So, in the interest of promoting dialogue, it is time for specifics from posters that want the NRA to change its current policies on lobbying and political support or how to get new members etc.
How do you propose to do that, what will be the costs legislatively, monetarily, and politically (and there aint no such thing as a free lunch)? How important do you consider allowing further 2A regulation versus other priorities that matter to you such as perhaps free higher education, affirmative action, taxes, health care, more K12 educational spending, more immigration, etc. ?
And, how exactly do one propose for the NRA to win over current 2A hostile Democratic officeholders, party financiers, and primary voters?
Right now we appear to be mice that agree that bi-partisan support for firearm ownership and rights is the desired outcome but who is going the bell the cat?
