TexasCHLforum.com

The NRA did win McDonald for us, that is beyond any kind of a doubt. What is also beyond any kind of a doubt is that the SAF got the case to the Supreme Court so it could be won. If the USSC hadn't give some of SAF's/Gura's time to the NRA the case would have been lost because the argument made by SAF/Gura was rejected by 8 out of 9 justices while the NRA's argument was the deciding factor to win the case. I could go and show how the NRA's brief was a deciding factor in Heller, but its easier to demonstrate with McDonald. I do disagree with the NRA not mentioning the SAF at all in many cases when they talk about Heller and McDonald because I am one of those Whole Truth types. I will also point out that the NRA is the "big dog" when it comes to gun rights and if you want to make a change to how they act, vote for new leadership within the group. The NRA isn't perfect, the SAF isn't perfect, TSRA isn't perfect, but when you combine their efforts you really do see progress. Heller and McDonald would have been really different if the NRA hadn't done their part, in fact we could have easily lost both cases (especially McDonald). Now I am a member of both the SAF and the NRA because I see both as being valuable what groups are you a member of?

Ameer wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:Guess who gets my vote?

Kinky Friedman?

ROFLMAO ... No, guess again.

First off I have to address the disinformation regarding the NRA and SAF, and for the record I am a member of both organizations.
1. For Heller the NRA did appose the case at first, for sanity reasons. No one in their right mind wants to go to court unless they are a lawyer, simply because courts can frequently be very unpredictable. Imagine what would have happened if the USSC had ruled exactly opposite of the way they did with Heller, that is what the NRA was afraid of. When the case did make progress the NRA did support it as best they could considering they were not a party to the case.

2. Regarding McDonald the NRA and SAF both had cases that were similar that were, if I'm not mistaken, combined at one point in time. When the Appeals Court ruled and McDonald was accepted by the USSC the NRA did petition to argue in that case. Some people, myself included at that time, felt the NRA was stealing the SAF's thunder but their argument for incorporation was the one that 4 of the justices signed off on, while the fifth justice on our side signed off on the SAF's argument. So when it comes to McDonald the SAF got the case to the Supreme Court, but the NRA actually won that one.

Now back to the subject of the thread: Perry has a proven pro-gun track record while White has a proven anti-gun track record, and Glass has only proven that she can make campaign promises. Guess who gets my vote?