The NRA.....lets talk!

[nitrogen]

Hey, I was an anti-gunner until 1994, when I was "witnessed to."

Sure, quite a few liberal minded folks might never "see the light" but you'd be suprised how many people have liberal tendencies that see the gun issue the way most of us here do.

I think there should be a group, much like "gun missionaries". You aren't going to convert EVERYONE to christianity (Including me, I'm Jewish!) but you'll always win people over. The more you talk to, the more you win over. It's a lot like being a missionary, or a salesperson.

You're right about one thing, but I think its for the wrong reason. From personal experience, when I was an "anti" I really don't think it was due to intellectual laziness. I had never dealt with a gun, and to the ignorant, the Brady's arguments make sense. If you've never held or shot a gun, their arguments ring true; because of the way they are made. (Full of appeals to emotion, and other logical fallacies.)

I never shot a gun, never held one, and well, I honestly didn't care. "Sure, ban 'assault weapons' I don't have any, wouldn't shoot any and they look dangerous!"

Sure, there are plenty of idiots who will never change their minds about ANYTHING, but you'd be suprised how many people CAN be won over with logic.

In closing; how many people get converted to Christianity every day? every year? For that fact, what about Islam? Getting people to see your way of thinking is not only possible, but it's necessary; and it's our best means of survival.

Unlike many political issues, the gun issue really is between right and wrong. We all know gun bans have no effect on crime. There are plenty of studies that show that WE are right.

Unlike many other issues, like Taxes, Abortion, Gay Marriage, economic policies, there are no differing poitns of view, differing theories. Ther'es right and wrong here, and I think we underestimate people's ability to see it; due to other disagreements we may have with them.

As to why they would or wouldn't want to deal with us? Let me make a hypothetical point.

Let's say the NRA took the time to take Mark Udall, from NM out shooting last year. They took the time to discuss his concerns about assault weapons, and for the heck of it, we changed his mind. Imagine having 2 A rated candidates, instead of just one?

Imagine that the NRA, and we as voters were able to get 10 more senators to see teh same light?

What happens if in 20 years Mark Udall runs for President, and wins?

Sure, we're never going to get everyone, but you get far more people by at least trying than not trying at all. I feel pretty strongly about this, because I myself saw the light. I cannot be the ONLY PERSON EVER who saw the light.

[TxD]

The NRA, and gun owners need to get something clear: Groups like the Brady campaign, etc have concerns about people's safety. They honestly believe that what they are proposing will help make people safer.

Calling someone that follows the Brady's belief system "Liberal GUN GRABBERS" isn't going to win many converts; it's bullying. It makes us feel better, but that's about it.

Excellent points.

Although the fight with politicians and their law making attempts is important, the battle for our 2nd amendment rights will be won or lost in a grass roots war for the hearts and minds of ordinary people.

Until this is accomplished we will constantly be under attack.

[Taxman]

The problem that I have faced in debating with anti's, is that they are not as "opened minded" as they claim to be. It seems that all of the emotional brainwashing they have undergone has shut down most, if not all, of their rational thought process. I seriously doubt that the NRA could persuade Udall to even have a discussion with them, let alone get him to handle a gun!

[nitrogen]

The problem that I have faced in debating with anti's, is that they are not as "opened minded" as they claim to be. It seems that all of the emotional brainwashing they have undergone has shut down most, if not all, of their rational thought process. I seriously doubt that the NRA could persuade Udall to even have a discussion with them, let alone get him to handle a gun!

I wonder if we have anyone on here who has ever done missionary work; if they can talk about what it's like to do that kind of work. I feel it's very similar.

[bridge]

I am not currently a member but, I plan to join shortly. My main concern with the organization has already been brought up; I'm concerned about the NRA taking too much information out of context in an attempt to play the anti's game. I believe everyone sees through that type of exchange. If they would just stick to the facts and stay on message it provides little fodder for those against guns. Moreover, they should just let the data speak for itself.

Also, a well poised, respected public figure is needed in order to properly convey the information. I've long thought that someone like Tom Selleck would be a good fit. He's no Heston but, I think we can all agree he handled the Rosie episode with integrity. I find it hard to believe the NRA didn't contact him...they probably did. My guess is he just respectfully turned them down.

Finally, after reading this thread, I'm now concerned about junk mail and spam. I deplore it and think it detracts from an organizations reputation. But, all that aside I'll send them my money to ensure someone fights for my rights. It really irks me I (we) need to pour money into a lobby for a RIGHT we've had for 217 years. I'd prefer to be working on and giving money for that cure for cancer or pediatric heart defects.

[nitrogen]

Also, a well poised, respected public figure is needed in order to properly convey the information. I've long thought that someone like Tom Selleck would be a good fit. He's no Heston but, I think we can all agree he handled the Rosie episode with integrity. I find it hard to believe the NRA didn't contact him...they probably did. My guess is he just respectfully turned them down.

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about.

The NRA WILL stop sending you crap if you ask them. I promise :) You just have to email them, give 'em your membership number, and it'll all stop in about a week or so.

[Eagle72]

On reducing the junk mail, this is from the NRA Member FAQ:

Q: How can I reduce the amount of mail I receive from the NRA?
A: Simply email us at membership@nrahq.org or dial 800-NRA-3888 and request to be placed on the "Do Not Promote" list. This will significantly reduce the amount of mail you receive without affecting important mailings, magazine service, or your membership renewal.

If you e-mail be sure to include your member #. I did & it works!

[flintknapper]

For those who do not wish to join for personal or political reasons (but still want to help), you might consider sponsoring someone who does want to.

The cost is minuscule for the good it does. Of course, the best type of member is one who not only contributes in the form of dues and donations, but also takes the time to write political figures and speak to persons you know in your daily lives.

When you think about it, IF every current member could persuade just ONE person to join, we would double our membership. The NRA would then consist of over 8 million members.

O.K. enough of my pleading, back to how we can improve the NRA and reach out to non-members.

[SCone]

Years ago, I tried to make my voice heard to Joe Biden. I wrote his office almost daily. He was a strong supporter of the first so-called "Assault Weapon Ban." Since he was an elected official, I thought, that he could be reasoned with by facts and figures. Leaving aside the personal feelings, I set about presenting him with the facts. After several months of constant correspondance with very little response, I began calling. I think I spoke with every person in both his Washington & Delaware offices. They practically knew my voice.

I was finally told, "Senator Biden will NEVER CHANGE his stand on this issue."

Forget the fact that "assault-type weapons" were used in less than 2% of any crime. Despite the fact that the wording of the ban could include ANY semi-automatic rifle. No matter what the evidence, Joe Biden refused to even consider a change to his vote.

Beyond being able to reason with Senator Biden, there was the lack of response from his office. Nothing in the letters sent by his office sought to explain his position, justify his stance, or even try to understand any other thinking beyond his own.

This is the man that will be second in command of the United States come January 20th. Get ready for sweeping legislation, cooked-up in secret, that will criminalize everything we hold as a "right" guaranteed by our Constitution.

One appointment to the Supreme Court & that right will be stripped forever from our hands.

The ONLY way to fight this plan is with an NRA 20,000,000 members strong with one mindset, one goal, one cause. The absolute protection of the 2nd Amendment.

[John]

SCone, I agree with you. 100%. It's going to take massive membership and that membership needs to be active in the cause. I'd like to see NRA television commercials in strong 2A states. Build up the base. Play the Biden "if that's his baby, he needs help" video... Biden is right, that guy needs the help of every single 2A supporter.

[ghostrider]

>The ONLY way to fight this plan is with an NRA 20,000,000 members strong with one mindset,
>one goal, one cause. The absolute protection of the 2nd Amendment.

One only has to look at places like Canada, England, Australia, etc. There are 2 major factors in why other countries are able to reduce or remove legal gun ownership:

# 1. no constitutional protection
# 2. no equivalent of the NRA

The NRA isn't perfect, and we probably won't agree with everything they do, but supporting the NRA is a critical factor in protecting our rights.

As for the junk mail, I get more junk mail from my mortgage company - and I know they're just looking for money.

[The Annoyed Man]

I don't know if this will play out or not for others going forward, but I personally joined the NRA at a time when firearms ownership was under massive assault, both at the California state level, and the national level. My dad died in 1990, and I inherited an old 1911A1 he had, becoming a gun owner for the first time. I had been mildly anti-gun until then. At first, I was only interested in owning that pistol because it was a memento of my father's life, and it therefor had emotional value to me. But, it did not initially interest me as a gun. By 1992 (Clinton's 1st election), I was starting to get into the fact that I had a pistol and wanted to learn more and more about it. We were being threatened with the first AWB, and I joined the NRA directly in response to that. The rest is history.

You are never going to convert the committed anti-gunner. They are zealots for their cause. They will either prevail, or jump off a cliff to avoid surrender. Those who can be converted are like I was - mildly anti, but not rabidly so. My guess is that there are many millions of people like that today. They are the people who have doubts about EBRs and "plastic pistols," but don't have a problem sport shooting and hunting per se; and they can understand a person's desire to be able to defend the home, but they are concerned about gun safety and children in the house.

The way to convert those people is to reach out to them. Invite them to the range. Let them try an array of different kinds of hand guns and rifles. Let them see for themselves that this is so often a family activity. You want to take your kids to the range and plink with .22s all day? Invite the guy next door and his kids along. Better yet, talk his wife into coming with you. Bring your wife along. Etc. Let them find out about guns in a non-intimidating, family-friendly surroundings. Those are the folks you can convert, and who will eventually join the NRA themselves when they see that it represents their interests.

Whether or not those new folks choose to obtain CCW permits, or own EBRs, or buy hi-capacity magazines is irrelevant. They will come to see any attacks on those things as the slippery slope which threatens their own gun ownership choices.

Another critical group to evangelize are the young, particularly of college age. That is the point in their lives where they are most likely to be rebelling against authority, and actively personally involved in a more libertine lifestyle. Show them how an abrogation of gun rights is the fulcrum which will leverage the loss of their personal freedoms. Get 'em while they are young, and you'll have gun-rights supporters for life.

[jimlongley]

I was a "family" member from childhood, my father kept discouraging my ambition to join on my own because it would be useless to receive two issues of the magazine per month (even if I could donate mine to the library) but I joined shortly after I entered the Navy. I have been a member continuously since then, more than 40 years, and have upgraded a couple of times, to Life, to Benefactor (through donations in my late wife's name), to Endowment.

I am also a life member of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Assn.; The Illinois State Rifle Assn.; and the Texas State Rifle Assn.; as well as a few other organizations interested in preserving our Second Amendment rights.

In my experience I get far more paper from GOA and JPFO and a couple of others, despite ongoing memberships, than I ever did from NRA, and NRA gave me the option, that I took, to stop the mailings, which GOA and JPFO do not.

There have been times when I disagreed with the NRA's stance, policies, or politics, but I feel that that the only way to accomplish change in such an organization is to work from within, not snipe from outside, so I stay a member and write letters, lots of letters, and emails, and make phone calls. I like to feel that I have been an agent of change through my efforts.

I see those who sit outside the organization and say "I don't join because the NRA didn't support my favorite cause." as merely whining and making excuses. If you didn't contribute, you don't have reason to gripe, that's it. If you want to change the NRA, then join up, get others of like mind to do so, gather enough votes, and change it, it has been done before.

And if you want to really get swamped by donation requests, just sign up with the Brady Bunch, even if you don't donate they will send you scads of funny stuff, which costs them money even as you toss it in the landfill.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Hey, I was an anti-gunner until 1994, when I was "witnessed to."

Sure, quite a few liberal minded folks might never "see the light" but you'd be suprised how many people have liberal tendencies that see the gun issue the way most of us here do.

I think there should be a group, much like "gun missionaries". You aren't going to convert EVERYONE to christianity (Including me, I'm Jewish!) but you'll always win people over. The more you talk to, the more you win over. It's a lot like being a missionary, or a salesperson.

You're right about one thing, but I think its for the wrong reason. From personal experience, when I was an "anti" I really don't think it was due to intellectual laziness. I had never dealt with a gun, and to the ignorant, the Brady's arguments make sense. If you've never held or shot a gun, their arguments ring true; because of the way they are made. (Full of appeals to emotion, and other logical fallacies.)

I never shot a gun, never held one, and well, I honestly didn't care. "Sure, ban 'assault weapons' I don't have any, wouldn't shoot any and they look dangerous!"

Sure, there are plenty of idiots who will never change their minds about ANYTHING, but you'd be suprised how many people CAN be won over with logic.

In closing; how many people get converted to Christianity every day? every year? For that fact, what about Islam? Getting people to see your way of thinking is not only possible, but it's necessary; and it's our best means of survival.

Unlike many political issues, the gun issue really is between right and wrong. We all know gun bans have no effect on crime. There are plenty of studies that show that WE are right.

Unlike many other issues, like Taxes, Abortion, Gay Marriage, economic policies, there are no differing poitns of view, differing theories. Ther'es right and wrong here, and I think we underestimate people's ability to see it; due to other disagreements we may have with them.

As to why they would or wouldn't want to deal with us? Let me make a hypothetical point.

Let's say the NRA took the time to take Mark Udall, from NM out shooting last year. They took the time to discuss his concerns about assault weapons, and for the heck of it, we changed his mind. Imagine having 2 A rated candidates, instead of just one?

Imagine that the NRA, and we as voters were able to get 10 more senators to see teh same light?

What happens if in 20 years Mark Udall runs for President, and wins?

Sure, we're never going to get everyone, but you get far more people by at least trying than not trying at all. I feel pretty strongly about this, because I myself saw the light. I cannot be the ONLY PERSON EVER who saw the light.

Excellent!! I also agree with TxD about the grassroots level.

Chas.

[bdickens]

I don't always agree with the NRA either, but I'm still a member.

I don't always agree with my boss, but I still go to work.

I don't always agree with my wife, but I'm still married.