Why I didn't rejoin TSRA yesterday

[springmom]

*shrug*

CT, some websites are better at staying up-to-the-minute than others. I might be a wee bit surprised if something about Heller isn't on there in the next few days, but I'm betting that their website, like so many things done for them, is donated by somebody who has other responsibilities and another job. You certainly know better than to think that they don't care.

You do sound like you're looking for an excuse to justify yourself, rather than having a serious objection to the website content. If it were that, I'd expect that you would have contacted them and complained, instead of doing it HERE, where nobody can fix what you see as broken....

If you want it to be better, then offer to work on it. I'm sure they'd find a way to use your talents.

Springmom

 

[TX1911fan]

The TSRA is largely a volunteer organization. I've been approached several times to assist with regional duties, etc.

Have you SEEN the Heller decision? 176 pages. Perhaps they just don't have the manpower to read it, come up with opinions, and post something. Could they have at least added a headline? Sure, but I somehow suspect that you were able to find out about Heller without a blurb on the TSRA website. If you think it means they don't care, then fine, I guess you really didn't understand the TSRA when you were a member.

 

[strat81]

Well if grassroots means their priority is hunting dogs they should state we are a hunters rights organization as much as for Texas gun rights. I hate to see that's the case. The dog issue is a private/personal property issue and NOT something my membership dues should go to defend. SUVs and trucks are used for hunting and banned on some public lands, cheap clothing from China is used by hunters, etc. which can hurt the textile industry here where does the line end for TSRA? It seems pandering to a certain group of the hunting community. Usually the same folks who don't support my right to military type weapons because "Why do you need an AK-47 to hunt with?"

"Hunters should support my black rifles and bayonets but I refuse to support their over-unders and bird dogs!"

Good luck with that.

 

[csmkersh]

[quote="springmom]CT, some websites are better at staying up-to-the-minute than others. I might be a wee bit surprised if something about Heller isn't on there in the next few days, but I'm betting that their website, like so many things done for them, is donated by somebody who has other responsibilities and another job. You certainly know better than to think that they don't care. [/quote]

No, Jim Dark, TSRA's ececutive director hired a programmer to maintain the site about 3 years back. Prior to that time, you would have been correct. Then the site was maintained by Jim Nicholson, past TSRA president and former NRA board member.

​

 

[texas bulldog]

CentralTexas is in Austin and that itself explains a lot. Sigh.

i understand why you might feel that way, but let's please not start in on that, sam. divided we fall and all...


that said, i agree that it seems a bit short-sighted and reactionary to give up on an organization over one headline.

 

[springmom]

No, Jim Dark, TSRA's ececutive director hired a programmer to maintain the site about 3 years back.

OK. My point still stands. A website not being up to the minute is no reason not to support TSRA.

This was a decision looking for an excuse to justify it.

I too will be sending $$$ to TSRA. Time to ramp it up, not stop now!

Springmom

 

[texas bulldog]

i'm also not clear why the TSRA really has any need to put up a notice about heller on their website. the decision was not made by the TEXAS supreme court. they focus on state issues, and there's plenty here for them to do. if they chose not to comment on a federal issue that is being widely covered elsewhere, that wouldn't strike me as a problem.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Hell the OP was complaining at 9:39 this morning (Central).

The Heller decision at that time had only been out for a few minutes.

 

[jrfoxx]

My states gun rights organization (Oregon Firearms Federation) doesnt have anything about Heller on thier site either. But, I could care less. Heller was a Federal issue, they are a state rights group.Their job is to deal with state level issues.We have the NRA and others for the national stuff.

Personally, I'm glad to see them spending the volunteer time, and money, of OR residents on OR specific issues. Heller has been a "done deal" for months now, where there was nothing anyone could do, and even before then, all anyone could do was send an amicus brief.That was what, 3-4 months ago? What is there for anyone to have done once that was done? Nothing.

I prefer my state org. to focus on any potential BS that comes up in the state, and helping OR gun owners with legal help when they need it (which they do a lot of), since I dont see GOA, JPFO, etc coming to Oregon to fight in our legislature, or hire and pay for lawyers for OR gun owners, so that means OFF needs to do it. If they wasted time and money on Heller, which they can do nothing about, OR gun owners would be busy getting screwed, and all for nothing.Most people knew Heller wasnt going to do squat about anything but D.C specific, or best case, some federal law.Heller wasnt going to help us any if our state moonbats managed to pass some gun bans of their own.

 

[CentralTexas]

Okay...

Well TexasRifleman, I can maybe help here. Many Americans have an issue with a candidate over one item, Maybe gun rights or "Abortion" and write that candidate off -as that's a big issue for many. Judging by your quote it is for you, (I can explain that Constitutional issue if you would like in private emails BTW if that is a serious question).

I have an issue with groups like the Teachers Unions who veer of course on the environment or gun rights or whatever that really isn't in their bailiwick as far as I'm concerned.Breeding dogs has nothing to do with guns, gun rights or the Texas Constitution on firearms as I see it. If we say TSRA is an all inclusive hunter/firearm enthusiast organization that's fine. This is a small issue,has other means to be resolved. It's not deserving of center stage headlines or much of my membership dues, especially with more mainstream and important issues to deal with. It seems from my first impression of the website that TSRA is more concerned with Old Blue losing his testicles than Texans rights to carry in their car without a CHL.

If it had been the fifth item down, Maybe I could live with it but it wasn't. EVen though I am a former TSRA member it was like a first impression, and one that said they aren't serious about gun rights in Texas anymore. Sure, I could just research and see if that is a correct assumption. It's kind of like that one presidential candidate that talks about his good judgment and then I see who he has long associations with which tell me he might have some good judgment but there is some doubt....

also may I clarify-Heller was Federal and TSRA is a state org., thanks but I'm aware of that. Heller has a bearing all the way down the food chain and is germane to my statement.

 

[csmkersh]

I get the impression that CentralTexas is a once a year if that often visitor to the TSRA web site. TSRA also has a PAC page and another dedicated to CHL issues.


​

 

[jedwi]

CT, sorry you have chosen to leave TSRA. I still don't quite understand your argument. In my view, TSRA has done much to support RKBA and works hard to support state and local candidates that do the same. They support the national organization, the NRA, who lead the national battle. Besides Heller, there are other state and local issues that TSRA addresses, and, yes maybe it's hunting dogs that firearm owners use to enjoy their sport. It may also have been trying to help gun range owners keep their business going. I'm just really unclear on what you wanted the page to say or show....As I said in an earlier post, Heller had been in SCOTUS for months....no more lobbying from TSRA would have made any difference....So go on to more local, Texas issues....Sorry I am missing your point or complaint...

 

[Nate C.]

As a TSRA Life Member, I hate to see you go. I think the organization does truly great things, and there is strength in numbers. However, it's your choice whether you renew or not. It's sad if you don't in my opinion, but I have to say your original post halfway sounds like you were looking for an excuse not to renew.

I base this only partially on your original post. I further base it in the fact that one does not have to look very deeply into any of the bi-monthly TSRA magazines (that they send to all the members) to realize just how much TSRA is doing in support of 2AD relevant issues in our State.

For what it's worth, I just now looked (7:45 PM), and the TSRA website has the Heller decision as top billing.

 

[jkingrph]

Just filled out membership application for 3 years, In another couple of years a I shall upgrade to life +.

 

[TexasRifleman]

If it had been the fifth item down, Maybe I could live with it but it wasn't. EVen though I am a former TSRA member it was like a first impression, and one that said they aren't serious about gun rights in Texas anymore. Sure, I could just research and see if that is a correct assumption. It's kind of like that one presidential candidate that talks about his good judgment and then I see who he has long associations with which tell me he might have some good judgment but there is some doubt....

If you had renewed your TSRA membership when it expired you would have received the TSRA Sportsman magazine early this week with a rather lengthy (full page) article by Jim Dark explaining his reasoning for taking the TSRA into the Dallas animal ordinance fray. This article came out BEFORE the dog thing hit the web page. Then you would know the full story and you could participate in the discussion rather than just get mad about it.

You had already let your membership lapse BEFORE this supposed incident that "pushed you over the edge". You are looking for some excuse for not renewing and this was handy, that's all there is to it.

If you had taken an exception to this as a current member the discussion would be entirely different, but you decided this made you mad AFTER you didn't renew. That's a whole different thing.

 

[Fburgtx]

Well, looky there! If you'll check the TSRA website again, you'll notice that there's a new headline regarding Heller.

 

[orionengnr]

...and still no reply on whether you took those monies and put them to work with another RKBA organization.

I only received my copy of the TSRA Sportsman today, and haven't read the infamous "dog article" yet, but I did read about the backlog in Texas CHLs.

And about how the #1 isue in the 09 Legislative session would likely be legally keeping your gun in your car at work. Number two will be allowing CHL holders to carry on campus.

I'd sure like to see Open Carry added to that list, but so far it sounds as if they are focused in the right direction.

 

[obm]

I just joined TSRA...even though I live in Hawaii...

 

[Gunnerpalace]

I don't know if this is related but as of 30 minutes ago I became a member of the SAF.

 

[LJH]

obm, that is truly funny!

Looks as if I will be joining TSRA
btw I am in Austin, and wouldn't want to be anywhere else...... except perhaps Hawaii

 

[CentralTexas]

Dead horse here

I could care less that HELLER wasn't the headline, I used that and a couple of other things to try to point out items more important that the Dallas spay/neuter law.

Maybe a new motto for is in order for the TSRA-
"They can have my dog's testes when they pry them from my cold dead hands!"

 

[Greybeard]

Coincidentally, I was quite pleased to see the article on the Dallas animal shelter problems. In fact, I ran a copy of that article the day the TSRA newsletter arrived and mailed it to a distant cousin. He's a retired veterinarian and had recently told me a little about the HUGE mess down there.

The same newsletter had a couple of other excellent articles also of special interest. One elaborated on DPS's current problems with processing the major spike in CHL applications.

Another was quite informative for CHL holders close to a renewal - and concerned about DPS's current processing times. It explained how to obtain a Pennsylvania non-resident license in about 30 days - for only twenty something dollars.

Yes, the animal shelter article was a little off the beaten path. But certainly fine with me as it reflects concern on issues important to the great diversity of the TSRA membership.

It's sad to say, but as a CHL instructor, I frequently get more timely information from the TSRA newsletter than we get from DPS, so I certainly have no problem with their very timely article on the "animal administration" problems in Dallas.

 

[O.F.Fascist]

I havent had the chance to go hunting yet, and while I dont care much for the Fudds that think the right to keep and bear arms is only about being able to hunt, that being said I think you seem to be bigoted against hunting. Nice kneejerk reaction.

 

[anygunanywhere]

The article did not imply that the second amendment was about hunting.

The article included all things hunting under the umbrella of the second amendment and shows clearly that the TSRA is for Texas hunters, no matter where the threat originates.

Anygunanywhere

 

[Owens]

CT,
I would ask that you reconsider. The TSRA really is a good organization and have done a lot for us. There are many issues that tie in with the right to arms. They are just trying to do a bit in all areas possible. Granted there are other concerns, but each in turn.

The more members there are, the more that can be done.

Just think it over again.
Thanks,
Owens