Range forces members to join the NRA

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I feel horrible about my previous donations and years of membership to the nra. At this poitn I'd sooner give money to the brady bunch. Atleast they are up front about their adgenda!

Prometheus, I spent most of post #111 in this thread explaining the ways your statements were disingenuous. But just in case you missed it:

The nra has been against machine guns and fought to get the limits and bans on them now.

The NRA helped fund the first ever challenge to 922(o) (and lost - see post #132)

link or just do a google search and turn up dozens of quotes by virtually every nra president and board of director

On the contrary, I see a few quotes taken out of context from over 70 years ago. However, when I look at more recent quotes I see guys like Nugent (an NRA board of director) advocating for machineguns.

As to heller, the nra also fought to keep that out of the USSC.

The NRA fought to consolidate Heller/Parker so that they could include other grounds for the law to be dismissed instead of a straight Second Amendment challenge. One reason they did this is because the NRA knew firsthand from challenging 922(o) that there was a great deal at risk here.

However, Heller's own lawyer, Robert Levy has commented that the NRA had valid concerns and that since then the NRA has been a tremendous source of help to their case. Strange no one who decides to criticize the NRA ever mentions that point when they bring up Heller...

It's all about money to the nra. They are nothing more than a giant self serving money pit.

Your posts are chock full of questionable reasoning; but this one takes the cake. The NRA is limited by its charter to promoting the shooting sports and safety. The money you pay to the NRA for an annual membership doesn't even go to lobbying, PACs, litigation or challenging gun control. It goes to programs like Eddie Eagle, Range Safety, Boy Scout shooting programs, Building new ranges, etc.

At $120 million annually ($30 x 4 million members), the NRA rakes in far more money from these programs than they do from the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF (the lobbying and PAC arms). If tomorrow, it was legal to carry a loaded machinegun down mainstreet, the NRA would be just as necessary as they were from 1873-1934 when there was no federal gun control at all.

Even if you STILL believed that the NRA needed the spare change generated by gun control to keep its money in order to justify its existence, you would have to be a fool to think that Heller would change that. Has the NAACP folded its doors since Brown v. Board of Education? Are they starving for funds? How about NARAL or NOW? Did they fold up and go home after Roe v. Wade or Casey v. Planned Parenthood? Every one of those organizations receives more money today than they did at the height of their particular battles. Given that Heller is just the first step in a long line of litigation, anyone who thinks the need for the NRA will shrivel up and die after an individual rights ruling is a bloody fool.

 

[jcwit]

To those not thinking the NRA does not defend or help with local issues I see on another forum where locals are trying to close a range called The Blue Trail Range in Conn. As I understand it this the range once owned by the Lyman family. The NRA got involved last week in fighting to keep it open. I guess we'll see how this all turnes out.

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

Nine pages - wow!

Well, 8...And all but about 5 posts have not even come close to answering the OP's question.

 

[JohnBT]

"Folks, I spent a lot of time and money to acquire an education. I think I've gone far enough down that road."

I heartily recommend education throughout life. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

John

 

[Walkalong]

My Range does the same thing. You must belong to the NRA. I generally don't like being told what I HAVE to do, but it is, after all, a private club and can do as it wishes. I have no problem with it. There are other places around here to shoot where you do not have to be. Our yearly range fee is quite reasonable and making members belong to the NRA is no big deal to me.

As far as insurance purposes, I have no clue, but I do believe the NRA helps ranges get insurance, which could be it. Someone here should know.

 

[Deleted member 66305]

The range is not forcing anybody to do anything. You don't have to go to that range if you disagree with their policies.

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

MisterPX,

The range is not forcing anybody to do anything. You don't have to go to that range if you disagree with their policies.

My Range does the same thing. You must belong to the NRA. I generally don't like being told what I HAVE to do, but it is, after all, a private club and can do as it wishes

See?

 

[-v-]

You don't like GA House Bill 89 that was signed this year?
Among other improvements...
allowing licensed carry permit holders to possess a firearm in any private motor vehicle, while on any publicly accessible parking lot;
prohibiting gun dealer entrapment schemes, such as those orchestrated by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg;
allowing concealed carry permit holders to carry in State Parks, recreational areas, wildlife management areas, and public transportation;
creating a stricter time limit for various stages of the concealed carry license application process; and
allowing concealed carry permit holders to carry in restaurants.

While I will not debate that those things were passed, the version of HR89 that I saw back in January when I was first made aware of it did not have those elements. Its main thrust at that time was that employers could not ban the carry of firearms in cars parked on their property. The competing bill, HR 915, had all those elements and more in it. Thus, it seemed rather odd at the time that the NRA would back a more conservative bill and issue statements such as "The NRA report card on Georgia will be based entirely on the success of HB89 and ONLY HB89." If they were truly interested in fighting for the rights of firearms owners, that seems like a rather odd statement to make. Seems more like petty politiking over being top dog rather then looking out for our rights. Now I am glad that the revised HB89 included all those provisions, it is definitely a step in the right direction, but the lead up to this has sullied my view of the NRA.

Also, the 3 page rant that I received from them in the mail about "Dem Libhurals gunna takes urz gunz awayz!" also did little to convince me to support then. If you want my support, (and my hard-earned money!) lay out why I should support you in a reasonably articulated and thought out logical argument, highlighting the pro's of why I should support your organization and the work that you have done in the past to advance said right. Rants, hyperbole, and fear mongering is what extremists do, who likewise have, in my eyes, little chance of success.

That, and there are plenty other organizations that support the 2nd amendment that are not the NRA.

 

[JohnBT]

HB 915 - What's not to like? A quick read reveals some interesting language. The first paragraph I copied includes a penalty of 1 to 10 years and/or a fine of $25,000. John

www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2007_08/versions/hb915_LC_28_3829_a_3.htm

"(a) Any person who attempts to solicit, persuade, encourage, or entice any dealer to transfer or otherwise convey a firearm other than to the actual buyer or who willfully and intentionally aids or abets any such person shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of not less than one nor more than ten years or by a fine not to exceed $25,000.00, or both."

"b) Upon conviction of the offense of carrying a concealed weapon, a person shall be punished as follows1) For the first offense, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor; and(2) For the second offense, and for any subsequent offense, he or she shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned for not less than two years and not more than five years.(c) This Code section shall not permit, outside of his or her home, motor vehicle, or place of business, the concealed carrying of a pistol, revolver, or concealable firearm by any person unless that person has on his or her person a valid license issued under Code Section 16-11-129 and the pistol, revolver, or firearm may only be carried in a shoulder holster, waist belt holster, any other holster, hipgrip, or any other similar device, in which event the weapon may be concealed by the person´s clothing, or a handbag, purse, attache case, briefcase, or other closed container. Carrying on the person in a concealed manner other than as provided in this subsection shall not be permitted and shall be a violation of this Code section."

""(1) 'School safety zone' means in, on, or within 1,000 feet of any real property owned by or leased to any public or private elementary school, secondary school, or school board and used for elementary or secondary education and in, on, or within 1,000 feet of the campus "

"SECTION 10.Code Section 38-3-51 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the emergency powers of the Governor, is amended by revising paragraph (8) of subsection (d) as follows:"(8) Suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation of alcoholic beverages, firearms, explosives, and combustibles"

 

[JohnBT]

"Well, 8...And all but about 5 posts have not even come close to answering the OP's question."

It only takes one factual post to answer a question. Five should be more than enough. The rest is discussion of some sort.

john