Bazooka Joe71
Member
Wow, seriously?
After that, only one thing comes to mind...
But maybe that's just me, since I don't know what I'm talking about.
Range forces members to join the NRA
- Thread starter Grizfire
- Start date
- Status
Wow, seriously?
After that, only one thing comes to mind...
But maybe that's just me, since I don't know what I'm talking about.
TexasSkyhawk
Internet SEAL
Another example of "We've met the enemy, and it is us."
Hate?
First and foremost, I "hate" that you're not a member--apparently--of any pro-gun organization. I don't "hate" you per se, but I do hate it that you do not join up with several million other gun owners who are fervently working TOGETHER and COLLECTIVELY to protect and advance the RIGHTS for the other 90% who are doing little more than sitting on their asses bitching about how the NRA fosters "hate" and "throws legal guns under the bus" and other such BS.
If THAT isn't being a part of the problem rather than the solution, I don't know what is.
Again, what I "hate" is a complete lack of comprehension or semblance of objectivity.
Speaking for me personally, I want to include EVERYONE who owns a gun, wants to own a gun, is thinking of owning a gun, has shot a gun, wants to shoot a gun, has pictures of guns or even thinks about guns in the collective membership.
I don't know too many NRA members who don't feel pretty much the same way I do about that.
After all, if we had even HALF of all gun owners alone as members, every state would have open carry with a Castle Doctrine, there would be virtually no taxes on ammo or guns, zippo lawsuits against manufacturers and you wouldn't even be able to spell t-r-g-g-e-r l-o-c-k, let alone see it on almost any new gun you buy today.
So I guess that that's what we're ultimately working towards, those who will reap the benefits of the members' hard work, dedication, financial contributions, etc, but without having to have lifted a finger, let alone lower themselves to joining a hate group, will benefit just as equally as those who did all the work.
Kind of like right now what with all the states that have passed CCL and Castle Doctrine laws. Members worked their butts off to get those passed. Yet those who refused to even join for even one year simply to add to the numbers (politicians look at numbers), are reaping the same benefits without having to have done much of anything.
Sounds like freeloading to me.
Jeff
Hate?
First and foremost, I "hate" that you're not a member--apparently--of any pro-gun organization. I don't "hate" you per se, but I do hate it that you do not join up with several million other gun owners who are fervently working TOGETHER and COLLECTIVELY to protect and advance the RIGHTS for the other 90% who are doing little more than sitting on their asses bitching about how the NRA fosters "hate" and "throws legal guns under the bus" and other such BS.
If THAT isn't being a part of the problem rather than the solution, I don't know what is.
Again, what I "hate" is a complete lack of comprehension or semblance of objectivity.
Speaking for me personally, I want to include EVERYONE who owns a gun, wants to own a gun, is thinking of owning a gun, has shot a gun, wants to shoot a gun, has pictures of guns or even thinks about guns in the collective membership.
I don't know too many NRA members who don't feel pretty much the same way I do about that.
After all, if we had even HALF of all gun owners alone as members, every state would have open carry with a Castle Doctrine, there would be virtually no taxes on ammo or guns, zippo lawsuits against manufacturers and you wouldn't even be able to spell t-r-g-g-e-r l-o-c-k, let alone see it on almost any new gun you buy today.
So I guess that that's what we're ultimately working towards, those who will reap the benefits of the members' hard work, dedication, financial contributions, etc, but without having to have lifted a finger, let alone lower themselves to joining a hate group, will benefit just as equally as those who did all the work.
Kind of like right now what with all the states that have passed CCL and Castle Doctrine laws. Members worked their butts off to get those passed. Yet those who refused to even join for even one year simply to add to the numbers (politicians look at numbers), are reaping the same benefits without having to have done much of anything.
Sounds like freeloading to me.
Jeff
evan price
Member
Quoth Tejas Skyhawk:
Yes, because all those folks that shell out thirty bucks a year and rest quietly in their smug, self-assured awareness that They Have Done Their Part For RKBA... and do nothing else the rest of the year...are really doing so much for the rest of us.
No, no, we understand. You're part of the Collective Unity. Workers of the World, Unite.
I would say, forego that NRA membership, and spend $30 a year on postage writing letters (Real, truthful, fact filled, intelligent letters, with professional formatting and grammar and spellchecked and everything) to your Congresscritters.
When every pro-gun item on their desk bears the NRA's hallmark, it's easy to marginalize. When actual, breathing, voting citizens express their own independant and spontaneous feelings in a nice correspondance, it adds up.
Hey, what can I say, I paid my ten bucks to the NRA. One of us, One of us...
Yes, because all those folks that shell out thirty bucks a year and rest quietly in their smug, self-assured awareness that They Have Done Their Part For RKBA... and do nothing else the rest of the year...are really doing so much for the rest of us.
No, no, we understand. You're part of the Collective Unity. Workers of the World, Unite.
I would say, forego that NRA membership, and spend $30 a year on postage writing letters (Real, truthful, fact filled, intelligent letters, with professional formatting and grammar and spellchecked and everything) to your Congresscritters.
When every pro-gun item on their desk bears the NRA's hallmark, it's easy to marginalize. When actual, breathing, voting citizens express their own independant and spontaneous feelings in a nice correspondance, it adds up.
Hey, what can I say, I paid my ten bucks to the NRA. One of us, One of us...
Robert Hairless
Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 3,983
Play fair, BazookaJoe.
First you said you were talking about converting a fence sitter. Your original budget was $360 a year. I showed you how to do convert 10 fence sitters for that money and have $10 left over.
Then you reduced your annual budget to $35 a year. So I showed you how to convert 1 fence sitter for that meager amount.
Now you ignore both my proven ways to convert fence sitters. I know how to convert fence sitters but I don't know how to convert freeloaders, especially the kind who don't like being recognized for what they are.
I don't know why freeloaders dislike being recognized for what they are. It seems to me that they should take great pride in knowing that they're being carried by other people and boast about it. Maybe it's because they're embarrassed. But I don't really know. I also don't know why they identify themselves and try to talk other people out of doing what they won't do. I think they should know that if they succeed in talking everyone else out of supporting the NRA there won't be anyone to carry them.
Do you ever watch the judge shows on television? The most amazing cases to me are some of those in which people refuse to repay loans made to them by friends and relatives. "Well I would have paid him/her except that he insisted I do it. I'm not going to repay a loan made to me by someone who demands that I do it. Who does he/she think he's talking to anyway?" Ingratitude, cheapness, and density are hard to elevate into virtues no matter how it's done. But it's fun to watch the attempts as long as one doesn't take them seriously. I don't.
It was you who said you didn't know the cost of NRA membership after you delivered one of your tirades against it. I hope you're not griping about that now.
Bazooka Joe71
Member
Alright Robert, just a couple more things:
1. I thought (and I'm still not 100% sure) you were implying that I was a fence-sitter and I should buy a membership to "convert myself," but if you weren't then how is buying a fence-sitter a membership a sure-fire way to convert them? Is buying Rosie Oddonell a membership to a gym going to make her skinny?
2. If I recall correctly, I have said MULTIPLE times in this thread that I am by no means anti-NRA and eventually I will have a membership...What exactly would you call a tirade?
3. You are basically saying no NRA membership=freeloader. WTH??? I don't feel like wasting my breath on something that has already been touched on, so I'll just say to refer to what Evan Price had to say.
BTW, since you are obviously much more knowledgeable about helping us keep our rights, instead of spending 25 minutes writing your previous post, why not write a letter to your local congress critter?
Just a thought...I sincerely hope we can still be friends after it's all said and done.
1. I thought (and I'm still not 100% sure) you were implying that I was a fence-sitter and I should buy a membership to "convert myself," but if you weren't then how is buying a fence-sitter a membership a sure-fire way to convert them? Is buying Rosie Oddonell a membership to a gym going to make her skinny?
2. If I recall correctly, I have said MULTIPLE times in this thread that I am by no means anti-NRA and eventually I will have a membership...What exactly would you call a tirade?
3. You are basically saying no NRA membership=freeloader. WTH??? I don't feel like wasting my breath on something that has already been touched on, so I'll just say to refer to what Evan Price had to say.
BTW, since you are obviously much more knowledgeable about helping us keep our rights, instead of spending 25 minutes writing your previous post, why not write a letter to your local congress critter?
Just a thought...I sincerely hope we can still be friends after it's all said and done.
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert Hairless
Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 3,983
On behalf of NRA members everywhere, I thank you for spending $10 on an associate membership for the year. We all are grateful.
In case you might not know, being an NRA member does not prohibit you from "writing letters (Real, truthful, fact filled, intelligent letters, with professional formatting and grammar and spellchecked and everything) to your Congresscritters."
You also are allowed to telephone and e-mail them, convert fence sitters, vote in elections, attend rallies, post gung-ho messages about the Second Amendment on Internet gun forums, and complain about the NRA.
As a full member--which costs an additional $25 but also gets you an informative magazine such as America's First Freedom, insurance, and other benefits--you'll have additional information and also be able to appreciate NRA- supported programs such as those that make Concealed Weapons Permits possible in most states.
Of course I do understand that there are heroes amongst us who would be able to: have CWP laws in every state without the NRA, perhaps by writing their legislators or e-mailing or telephoning them; to certify themselves as CWP instructors; to write, print, and publish all the instructional materials; and then attract unto themselves the people who want or need a CWP and instruct them so the states grant the permits.
I don't know how to do such things so I support the NRA in doing them.
I also have never known a Congressman or Congresswoman who liked being called a "Congresscritter." Those I've known think of themselves as people. They're not awfully sophisticated I suppose.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
I'm all for the mission of the NRA, but I'm tired of the "All or nothing" approach that many gun owners speak of whenever the NRA is brought up.
The NRA is a good organization, but membership with them is not the only way to be politically active on the gun issue. Similarly, not every environmentalist is a Sierra Club member, not every police officer is an FOP member, and not every rock climber is among the ranks of "The Access Fund". While all of these organizations may meet their goals appropriately, the fact that a person does not belong to any one of them is not necessarily indicative of an apathy towards the issues.
I will fully agree that the NRA has made positive headway on the legal facets of gun ownership in this country, but I don't agree that it absolutely "can't be done without them!". Blindly following any organization based on their history alone is an open door to allowing that group to drift away from your real goals!
So, while I support the NRA... I won't be critical of those who don't.
With that in mind, I'm sympathetic to those who are bothered by the NRA's requirement of membership for all persons shooting at ranges that they insure. I understand why it is done, but I can still see that there is an active shooting community beyond the NRA, and many of the non-members are still activists for the gun ownership issue.
The NRA is a good organization, but membership with them is not the only way to be politically active on the gun issue. Similarly, not every environmentalist is a Sierra Club member, not every police officer is an FOP member, and not every rock climber is among the ranks of "The Access Fund". While all of these organizations may meet their goals appropriately, the fact that a person does not belong to any one of them is not necessarily indicative of an apathy towards the issues.
I will fully agree that the NRA has made positive headway on the legal facets of gun ownership in this country, but I don't agree that it absolutely "can't be done without them!". Blindly following any organization based on their history alone is an open door to allowing that group to drift away from your real goals!
So, while I support the NRA... I won't be critical of those who don't.
With that in mind, I'm sympathetic to those who are bothered by the NRA's requirement of membership for all persons shooting at ranges that they insure. I understand why it is done, but I can still see that there is an active shooting community beyond the NRA, and many of the non-members are still activists for the gun ownership issue.
Robert Hairless
Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 3,983
You do recall correctly. I couldn't have said it better. Thanks.
I have other things to do right now and although I think you've made the relevant points more effectively than I could have done so, I now bequeath you to TexasSkyhawk or someone else with greater joyous sufferance.
If you and others here are specimens of what's really protecting our Second Amendment rights instead of the NRA we all depend on you. Keep up those conversions of fence sitters and those letter writing campaigns to your Congresscritters. Somebody is doing a lot for gun owners. I hadn't known it was you.
Please don't think I am not your friend. I have never said I wasn't and eventually I will come to think well of you and maybe even that you are not a freeloader.
Bazooka Joe71
Member
Uhh, that was a tirade I guess? What it because "multiple" was in caps? What am I missing?
Yep, so you finally answered my question...Non-NRA member = free loader.
I can't tell you how thankful I am that all gun owners don't think with this same logic...I can't honestly tell you that I would be proud to be pro-gun if it were like that.
BTW, thank you for that sad attempt at belittling me with that last sarcastic remark.
Shadow1198
Member
I think many people completely overlook the one simple part about joining an organization to support a right, concern, policy, social issue, etc etc or whatever the subject may be. Think about it like this. ALL of the facts are on gun owner's sides. I mean the anti gun group is basically entirely built out of misconceptions, lies, and half truths. By all logic that movement should have died out decades ago under it's own weight. But you know what, it didn't. Do you (speaking generally, no one in particular) know why that is? The gun control crowd knows how to appeal to people's emotions, and they have made the effort to reach large audiences in such a manner that they have generated lots of public support, no matter how ill-informed. Support being the key word. Why do gun control policies still continue to be pushed? Because there are organizations with large numbers of people backing them up, meaning it's that much harder for politicians to ignore them.
Okay, stay with me on this. Now think about this. If every gun owner paid for a yearly NRA membership and 90% of them still just sat back and did nothing, guess what? It wouldn't matter anyways. You know why? Because whenever someone would raise the issue of gun control, regulations, bans, etc etc guess who would step up? The NRA would, and they would tell said politician, "Look here pal, these are the facts.......Oh, and by the way, our organization has 100,000,000+ members". Judging by some studies I've read, apparently something like 40% of Americans own guns, and at last glance I believe the population of America is somewhere around 302 million. Now can you imagine how much work would get done on our behalf if we had a pro gun organization with some 100 + MILLION members?! No one would brush us off, no one would attempt to ignore us, they would be forced to take us seriously. THAT'S why I joined the NRA. People can write all the letters to Senators and Governors that they want, and I applaud that. Though how serious do you think politicians will really give one letter as opposed to 100+ MILLION people standing up and saying "You're trampling on all of OUR rights, stop it!". At $10 a year for an associate membership, there really is no excuse for every gun owner to not be a member of the NRA as far as I'm concerned. Lets start working together as opposed to playing the "divide and conquer" game that the other side probably enjoys watching us play.
Okay, stay with me on this. Now think about this. If every gun owner paid for a yearly NRA membership and 90% of them still just sat back and did nothing, guess what? It wouldn't matter anyways. You know why? Because whenever someone would raise the issue of gun control, regulations, bans, etc etc guess who would step up? The NRA would, and they would tell said politician, "Look here pal, these are the facts.......Oh, and by the way, our organization has 100,000,000+ members". Judging by some studies I've read, apparently something like 40% of Americans own guns, and at last glance I believe the population of America is somewhere around 302 million. Now can you imagine how much work would get done on our behalf if we had a pro gun organization with some 100 + MILLION members?! No one would brush us off, no one would attempt to ignore us, they would be forced to take us seriously. THAT'S why I joined the NRA. People can write all the letters to Senators and Governors that they want, and I applaud that. Though how serious do you think politicians will really give one letter as opposed to 100+ MILLION people standing up and saying "You're trampling on all of OUR rights, stop it!". At $10 a year for an associate membership, there really is no excuse for every gun owner to not be a member of the NRA as far as I'm concerned. Lets start working together as opposed to playing the "divide and conquer" game that the other side probably enjoys watching us play.
JohnBT
Member
"I never said it was because this thread,forum or anything else on the internet. It is because anywhere I turn that has something to do with guns, folks are demanding I join an orginization that fosters HATE in anyone that doesn't belong to it."
Hate? I suggest you need to learn to ignore the few strident voices. And it is just a few. The majority of NRA members are not strident name-callers.
Meanwhile, you're still reacting to those other people and not thinking for yourself about the pros and cons of the NRA.
John
Member www.vcdl.org
NRA Patron
Hate? I suggest you need to learn to ignore the few strident voices. And it is just a few. The majority of NRA members are not strident name-callers.
Meanwhile, you're still reacting to those other people and not thinking for yourself about the pros and cons of the NRA.
John
Member www.vcdl.org
NRA Patron
Prometheus
Member
The nra is as much a problem to the efforts of RKBA as the brady bunch. It's a shame most members of the gun community prefer to blindly mail off a check rather than research where their money is actually going and what an organization does besides provide lip service.
Most gun owners can see through the lies of the clintons or obamma when they say they are pro-2A, but can't withe nra... makes no sense.
find out more:
the nra FRAUD
jcwit
member
With the comments I see buy some of the people on this thread I'd hate to see what the letters to their Congressman & Senator would be like.
PershingRiflesC-7
Member
********
Deleted to conform to THR standards on political material.
Deleted to conform to THR standards on political material.
Last edited:
Nobody's_Hero
Member
What do the letters look like? Those letters to congressmen and senators probably contain grossly offensive statements borne of years, perhaps decades, of frustration caused by not getting anywhere [by writing letters].
(just speculating, I mean, I'm no Sherlock Holmes)
(just speculating, I mean, I'm no Sherlock Holmes)
TexasSkyhawk
Internet SEAL
Again, the sheer ignorance and institutional paranoia among some of us is hard to grasp.
But I reckon these are also the same folks who who subscribe to the National Enquirer, believe every Elvis sighting report they read, and secretly desire to change their place of birth on their birth certificates to Roswell, New Mexico.
It is also another reason why my wife and I are no longer GOA members. When a supposedly pro-rights organization can exist solely on creating conspiracies and innuendo against its larger brethren rather than on its own merits, then while its mission may be admirable, its credibility is not.
Again, if anyone doubts the effectiveness . . . call up any congressional staffer and metion GOA, then mention NRA--see which one evokes instant name recognition. See which one the congressman respects/fears more.
And as far as having a "Democrat" on the NRA's board, so what? The NRA has given "F's" to Republicans and the NRA is not about political parties--it is about civil rights.
One of the staunchest pro-gun senators to ever come out of Texas was once a Democrat--Phil Gramm. He later switched to the Republican party, but nobody here in Texas would have objected one damn bit if he'd been on the BoD or anything else with the NRA.
When it comes to guns, there ARE party lines--but there are also one helluva lot of Democrats that vote the way their constituents expect them to vote in favor of the Constitution.
Does anyone honestly think we'd have all the CCL laws and Castle Doctrine law in the states we do WITHOUT support from Democrats? Likewise, does anyone also honestly think that ALL Republicans voted in favor of ALL pro-gun laws in ALL states?
Individual efforts are great--but just because I'm an NRA member does not mean that I can't, or no longer write letters and correspond with my elected officials. But my letters also carry more clout when I let the congressman know I'm an NRA member--he/she knows there are millions more who think like me on the issue of "no more gun laws" and that we historically vote as a block.
Were it not for AOPA (Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association), not one general aviation pilot or airplane owner has any doubt that we'd be overwhelmed with user fees, more restricted airspace, more restrictions on where we can fly and when, etc.
And flying is not protected by the Constitution--the right to keep and bear arms IS protected.
I'll never think for one minute that the NRA is perfect or even close to it or that everything they have done has worked out wonderfully to all of our advantages.
But I'll also look at their track record and see that they've overwhelmingly won more for us than they've lost.
Jeff
La Pistoletta
Member
"Force" is a bit of a misnomer in this case. Maybe if the range was governmentally subsidized, or if members already had a contract and the requirement to join the NRA was suddenly introduced.
tinygnat219
Member
Tab,
Saw in post "57" in this thread that you think the NRA is a for-profit institution.
That is incorrect, they are a 501(C)3 tax-exempt organization.
Saw in post "57" in this thread that you think the NRA is a for-profit institution.
That is incorrect, they are a 501(C)3 tax-exempt organization.
JohnBT
Member
"It's a shame most members of the gun community prefer to blindly mail off a check rather than research where their money is actually going"
Let's talk about yearly dues and what they can be used for. Hint: it's not politics.
That $35 check for annual dues CANNOT by federal law be used for lobbying and political efforts. It's the law.
Dues are used for education, training, etc.
Facts are important. You need facts if you are going to make an informed decision.
JohnBT - and the B ain't fer blindboy
Let's talk about yearly dues and what they can be used for. Hint: it's not politics.
That $35 check for annual dues CANNOT by federal law be used for lobbying and political efforts. It's the law.
Dues are used for education, training, etc.
Facts are important. You need facts if you are going to make an informed decision.
JohnBT - and the B ain't fer blindboy
JohnBT
Member
Forgot something. Because of the federal restrictions on the use of dues, we now have the NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF. That's Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund.
That's why we get mail from the NRA and 2 other NRA groups
I know this info was posted earlier, but the facts need to be repeated until everyone understands.
John
That's why we get mail from the NRA and 2 other NRA groups
I know this info was posted earlier, but the facts need to be repeated until everyone understands.
John
pbearperry
Member
Joining the NRA is a good start.If you can afford to join other pro gun groups do so.Get out and be heard by voting out anti gun politicians whenever possible.I had a local Democrat running for office knock on my door.He started his speech about making the world a better place.I asked him what his stance ws on gun control and he perked up saying we need more gun laws.I am sure me slamming my door in his face made him realize he would not get my vote.Thats all these liberal pinheads understand.If enough folks showed their displeasure,they will change their stripes.Or maybe not?
MD_Willington
Member
You mean the Lewiston Pistol Club, so you can use the range near Moscow Idaho?
In that case, yep they want you to join the NRA...
In that case, yep they want you to join the NRA...
JohnBT
Member
"When push comes to shove, Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Rats will call the tune for Boren to dance to and dance he will."
Proof of this please? He hasn't been following the party line so far, has he? I don't think you even know.
I like the idea of having a pro-gun Democrat talking to Pelosi and all the others. Of course, with his pro-gun record he would be talking to them anyway, but now he's an NRA Board Member and proud of it.
I don't see the problem. It's not like we elected him King of the NRA.
_______
From Tulsaworld.com
""The Second Amendment is an important part of Oklahoma and this nation's heritage, and I pledge to uphold it for all who wish to keep their families safe and for sportsmen, shooters and hunters everywhere,'' the Oklahoma Democrat said.
"I harvested my first buck at age 9 and have taken one every season since," the 35-year-old Boren said in his statement, recalling that he had to calm his "buck fever'' on the morning of his first hunt. "
Proof of this please? He hasn't been following the party line so far, has he? I don't think you even know.
I like the idea of having a pro-gun Democrat talking to Pelosi and all the others. Of course, with his pro-gun record he would be talking to them anyway, but now he's an NRA Board Member and proud of it.
I don't see the problem. It's not like we elected him King of the NRA.
_______
From Tulsaworld.com
""The Second Amendment is an important part of Oklahoma and this nation's heritage, and I pledge to uphold it for all who wish to keep their families safe and for sportsmen, shooters and hunters everywhere,'' the Oklahoma Democrat said.
"I harvested my first buck at age 9 and have taken one every season since," the 35-year-old Boren said in his statement, recalling that he had to calm his "buck fever'' on the morning of his first hunt. "
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked