Just who is the NRA supporting?

Discussion in 'The Powder Keg' started by quietman, Sep 21, 2010.

  1. quietman

    quietman G&G Newbie

    There comes a time in many political activist organizations where they become more interested in maintaining their bureaucracy and bringing in money than in achieving what they were originally created for. Has the NRA reached this point?
    The NRA Endorses More Anti-Gunners

    September 16, 2010

    Once again, the NRA has taken gun owners’ money — and more importantly, their trust — and used it to support those who have a horrible record when it comes to gun rights. And what’s more is that they have done it to fund the opposition of someone who is 100% pro-gun.

    Capitol Hill insiders report the NRA will soon announce their support of incumbent Betsy Markey (D, CO-4), a politician who has never returned the NRA’s own candidate survey on gun rights, over Cory Gardner (R), a man who returned NAGR’s candidate survey 100% for the same subject. He is committed to protecting the individual citizen’s right to keep and bear arms — in addition to being a strong, conservative candidate on all grounds — yet the NRA chose to fund his opposition.

    >From National Review Online:

    Markey voted for the NRA-friendly DISCLOSE Act, which exempts large non-profits like the NRA from disclosing their donors, pending the organization’s completion of certain criteria that, in this version, favored large national groups like the NRA. Garnering only 219 votes to pass, Markey’s vote was consequential to the success of the DISCLOSE Act.

    Gardner has supported measures like “Make My Day Better”–an extension of “Make My Day” coverage to business owners and employees that currently enables a homeowner to use deadly force without fear of prosecution. The measure failed twice, however, due to opposition in a Democrat-controlled state legislature.

    Gardner was endorsed by the National Association for Gun Rights last week.

    (NAGR Note: Gardner didn't just "support" Make My Day Better legislation, but has sponsored this legislation in numerous sessions).

    This news follows closely on the heels of the NRA donating money (almost $5,000) to establishment left-wing politicians like Harry Reid (D-NV), while remaining completely silent on Senator Reid’s opponent, 100% pro-gun challenger Sharon Angle (R). Though the NRA claims they have not endorsed Harry Reid, their donation, as well as their magazine's full-page photo layout of NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre with Reid, leave little doubt as to their intentions.

    Every day brings a clearer message of who the NRA is truly interested in representing — and it’s not individual gun owners.

    Here at NAGR (through NAGR PAC) we believe in supporting candidates who are unwilling to compromise on the fundamental freedoms our country was founded upon.

    No one who follows this site (NAGR) should be shocked by this. However, it needs to be repeated; most gun owners still cling to the notion that the NRA fights for their rights to protect Constitutional freedoms. The evidence, on the other hand, is mounting to the contrary.
  2. drtybykr

    drtybykr G&G Newbie

    I saw firsthand what the nra does for Ga. They are a joke, and in it for the money only!

  3. oldjarhead

    oldjarhead G&G Evangelist

    This article is based on hear-say to say the least. The addage "don't believe everything you hear (read)" applies.
    The NRA has a statement on their political web-site that states the NRA will not endorse Harry Reid for re-election. I haven't found anything about Markey at this point but I am still looking.
    Although the NRA has done some shady things in the past, so have some of the organizational watch-dogs. Any reporter or group who lays to press articles based on hear-say and not provable facts is an idiot...written words sometimes have tendency to come back and bite the author.
  4. PAPA G

    PAPA G G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

  5. I believe

    that the charter of the NRA are only two fold, one to lobby and two it's firearm education programs....

    They lived in a city for over 40 years which ban handguns...:261:
  6. CrazyIvan

    CrazyIvan G&G Enthusiast

    I'm not a fan of the NRA really. I am in more support of the GOA and regional groups such as the RMGO (Rocky Mountain Gun Owners).

    I believe the NRA has been infiltrated by the Brady Bunch, and over time, they will do what Britain did to their citizens. They preached about anti-gun laws when it came to handguns & guns for protection, all the while saying they would never go after hunters. Then, one day, after all the guns for everything besides hunting was taken, they decided to go that step further & take the hunters' guns too.
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2010
  7. ChaZam

    ChaZam G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    80 million gunowners in this country and only 5 million of them a member of ANY activist gunowners organization???????????

    Talking about apathy, I think about 75 million of them need to get their hands out of their pockets and their head out of their 'arses' and quit blamiing the NRA for what they are losing by doing nothing but whining, finger pointing, and expecting some one else to fight their battles.
  8. DaTeacha

    DaTeacha Things are not what they seem. Forum Contributor

    NRA periodically goes through some internal upheaval. Every time it has happened, they ended up back on their two main reasons -- defending the second amendment and promoting shooting skill and safety.

    The latest issue of the magazine has an editorial that addresses the concerns expressed here pretty well. Sometimes their singleness of purpose makes it look like they are supporting the "wrong" candidate since that person may not be aligned with other issues important to many shooters. The fact remains, they are the baddest dog in the fight when it comes to the politics of gun rights. Not perfect, but definitely the most influential. Support them. Tell them when they're making a decision you disagree with, but support them in general.
  9. The NRA only cares about gun issues, and nothing else. Any other politics do not matter. If you vote on ONE pro-gun bill/issue then they will endorse you for life it seems.
  10. quietman

    quietman G&G Newbie

    If the NRA was single purposed they would be endorsing Gardner in Colorado, not Markey. Markey won't even return thre NRA's survey. The ONLY thing she's done to earn their favor is vote for the DISCLOSE act.

    The NRA does not endorse Reid, , but they did in the past. And they did contribute to Reid and now AFTER having a huge uprising from their membership when they announced they were planning on endorsing Reid have announced they are not backing Reid. That announcement came on Aug 27th, and is a recent change. You don't see a problem with the fact they were planning on endorsing Reid earlier this year?

    If they are so single purposed, why are they not endorsing Reid's opponent a 100% pro gun candidate?

    This is becoming a more frequent mode of operation. They do something and then only back down after the membership screams at them. Sometimes, not even then.

    Defend them all you want, but there is a problem in the organization. They've reached the point where they, at times, pay more attention to money than to their purpose.

    Why is there now a separate site called nramembersforangle.com trying to petition the NRA to support her?

    There's an example of 2 races where, if they were single purposed, they'd be endorsing the people they AREN'T endorsing.

    The NRA needs a shake up, and the only way to send the message is for people to not renew their membership, switch over to GOA or NRGA, and tell them they'll come back when they stop the games. They'd listen to this because it would affect them where their attention is focused- the pocket book.
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2010
  11. I got an envelope from NRA today, not asking for money. It had a NRA supports Jan Brewer bumper sticker in it.
  12. Earl Easter

    Earl Easter Pheasant Hunter Forum Contributor

    Anyone that states as Wayne LaPierre did to Harry Reid…“I also want to thank you, Senator, for your support every day for the Second Amendment and for the rights of American gun owners. “is of bad knowledge,…….Harry Reid has a list longer than my leg of bad decisions pertaining to gun ownerships and the Second Amendment…I believe this statement was made only because Reid tossed up 61 million Dollars of tax payers money to build a shooting range in Clark County Nevada…..Must be one heck of a shooting range for that price and i wonder how much of the 61 million ended up in a hot pockets in the crooks pants…My range is a plot of land maybe 50 acres with wood benches and half roofs which might have cost $75,000 dollars at best…

    This has been going on since i had joined the NRA in 1974,my last membership
    was shortened as they threatened me with letters stating they would protect my rights and the second amendment if i continued to put up membership fees so the government would not take away my rights….

    Grated they did some good but when i added up their gross income and watched the long lists get further away from the truth i quit….I was 20 years old at the time and saw not much bang for my buck AND ALL MY GUNS ARE STILL WITH ME, NO ONE HAS TAKEN THEM AWAY AS THEY THE NRA SAID THEY WOULD….…….

    No one is worth Wayne P's salary then and now, a smart fella with less high class eating habits and less fine suits and watches would be able to start a new group that would make the NRA look like a bunch of school boy thiefs…Until then i will keep my money in my pocket…..

    This was copied and pasted out of a Gun Guys article you be the judge!!!!!!!!!!!

    Special Report: What Does Wayne LaPierre Do For His Approximately $1,000,000 a Year?
    Wayne LaPierre isn’t just leading the obscene fight against common sense gun laws in this country– he’s making a killing off of it.
    Most gun owners would be floored to know that the NRA Executive Vice-President makes $633,823 in salary, plus another $258,343 in benefits in 2004 (Gun Guys has obtained the NRA’s 990 form from 2004– to read it, click here). It is possible that his total compensation package from the NRA for 2005 exceeded $1 million (the 2005 tax reports are not yet available).
    In fact, it takes more than 35,000 NRA membership renewals (at $25 a piece) just to cover LaPierre’s 2004 compensation package. 35,000 NRA memberships spent on one guy, all before a single freedom cruise sets sail.
    It begs the question: has the NRA, under Wayne LaPierre, turned itself into a money making machine to fund LaPierre’s lavish lifestyle? Is LaPierre creating issues harmful to American security to make his excessive salary and compensation package seem justified, given that is earned at the expense of the sweat and labor of the NRA membership?
    Gun Guys has asked for NRA members to tell us whether they think LaPierre should be paid so much. We’re guessing that most gun owners would be put off by such extravagance. Should the head of the NRA really make twice as much as the President of the United States?
    LaPierre’s salary and benefits will no doubt be on the minds of at least some gun owners as the NRA opens its annual convention next week from May 19th to 21st in Milwaukee.
    The NRA is constantly looking for ways to scare the heck out of gun owners in order to drive its fundraising and membership campaigns. But since George W. Bush has taken office, the NRA has gotten whatever it wants, allowing the already weak assault weapons ban to expire and giving total civil immunity to the gun industry. But now the NRA needs a reason to convince supporters to join the NRA and give money. Otherwise, how could the organization afford LaPierre?
  13. BenchRest

    BenchRest G&G Addict

    I’ve been in the NRA for quite some time. Almost two yeas ago cash flow got really tight (glad to know however the recession is over).
    I told them (NRA) that I will send my dues as soon as things smoothed out.
    They proceeded to call 5 times a day for months a day telling me, not asking to send their money.
    It was worse than the campaign calls. If they show some improvement I might reconsider till then I’m out.
  14. Any one or group that gets too close to Washington gets corrupted. the NRA has lost sight of 'shall not be infringed'.
  15. stickhauler

    stickhauler G&G Newbie

    They are based in Alexandria, Virginia, not Washington, D.C. There are no handgun bans in the city they're based in. If you're gonna bash the NRA, at least have the decency to get your facts straight.
  16. It seems that like us, they're forced to support the lesser of two evils.

    But let's face it, they've given in on some issues.
  17. Small state and regional groups are do a hell of allot more than the NRA has ever done for the average citizens rights. If you want to compromise join the NRA, if you want to put your foot down support a local group that lobbies at the state level.
  18. grizcty

    grizcty God, Guns, Glory Forum Contributor

    Folks can bash the NRA, all they want.
    That is your right.
    But if your not a active and supporting member, of any gun rights group.
    You shouldn't be bashing another!

    I will still say, that I am PROUD, to be a Lifetime Member!
    Along with other gun rights groups.

    And for what it is worth.
    With out the NRA crusading for gun rights .
    Were would LEGAL, gun ownership be today?
    We would of followed Canada disastrous path.

    Folks either don't know the history of the NRA.
    Or just don't care.

    In 1871 the NRA was started to promote ownership, shooting, safety & hunting.

    The ILA Institute for Legislative Action is the lobbing arm. started in 1975.
    They are the arm, that is fighting the gun grabbers.
  19. Stickhauler, thank you for the correction and my grave error..


    Attached Files:

  20. samuel

    samuel G&G Newbie

    I can tell by reading this that no one really knows what is going on,including me.I will "NOT" give an opinion on something I know so little about.I will keep paying my dues.They seem like they are more pro-gun than anti.