Voting for NRA Board members

[escapedNJ]

For those that have NRA voting rights... Instead of voting for folks that will get in automatically take a look at Anthony Colandro... He is from NJ but he is very pro gun & wants to shake up the NRA. He has a weekly podcast called Gun for Hire Radio.

Coming from NJ... This guy wants to fight NJ style gun laws... He does everything possible. If you have any question feel free to PM me. Copy & past the URL to learn more about him.

http://gunforhire.com/colandro-for-nra/

[jmra]

Does the NRA need to be shook up?

[Wes]

Ye, and his credentials are great and all but where is some feedback on his beliefs, opinions, and plans for these shake up ideas? There's not really much at that site, that I can find anyways.

[carlson1]

Does the NRA need to be shook up?

This is my question.

[Jumping Frog]

I am not voting for anyone from "New Joirsey", no way, no how. Sorry.

[escapedNJ]

If you want to find out more about him he has a podcast http://gunforhireradio.com/. he owns a firearms training company and also has a gun range. Feel free to ask me a specific question.

I think the comment about not voting for someone from NJ is ignorant. You assume because they are from NJ that they are a moderate when it comes to the 2nd Amendment? I would suggest listening to a few of his podcast to understand how fired up he gets about what happens in states like NJ. If you don't like him after listening to it.. Then it's an educated opinion vs. ignorance.

Does the NRA need some change? From my opinion yes. They have done very little for people in NJ. If you allow states like NJ to have a JUSTIFIABLE NEED for CHL then that comes here. Do you want the fight happening here or in NJ? I rather it be there.

[A-R]

My $0.02 (worth what you paid for it).

Who deserves more of the blame for New Jersey's anti-2A predicament? The NATIONAL Rifle Association or the residents/voters of New Jersey?

I won't dismiss someone just because they're from NJ, but I gotta wonder why they haven't left a failed state and/or what they've personally done to change it (beyond bellyaching about the NRA).

[Jumping Frog]

I think the comment about not voting for someone from NJ is ignorant.

"Ignorant" implies a lack of education or requisite knowledge on a subject.

Labeling me as "ignorant" is actually displaying your ignorance of my background, education, or requisite knowledge.

Years of living in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Maryland have made me well-acquainted with that peculiar species of North Easterner who believes in their heart of hearts that they are a conservative, because they are far to the right of their lunatic, left-fringe, socialist, co-workers, neighbors and family. However, looked at from the perspective of a conservative in the rest of the country (especially the south), they surely are not conservative. Further, years of socialization gets them eventually co-opted by the left. Look at the examples of Reagan-appointed Supreme Courts Justices who swung progressively further left the longer they lived in Washington DC. Don't underestimate the social pressures exerted on the dinner party circuit. I far prefer living right here in Texas, but there are also other conservative places I'd be glad to call home.

So call me "biased" if you want, and I'll gladly accept that I am biased against the North East. However, ignorant is the wrong label. Either way, I am still not voting for him.

BTW, never had the misfortune of living in New Jersey.

[escapedNJ]

making a decision based on where someone grew up is a lack of sophistication so yes... it's ignorant.. I would agree you are right that it's biased as well. Just because someone is educated doesn't mean they can't be ignorant.

[escapedNJ]

My $0.02 (worth what you paid for it).

Who deserves more of the blame for New Jersey's anti-2A predicament? The NATIONAL Rifle Association or the residents/voters of New Jersey?

I won't dismiss someone just because they're from NJ, but I gotta wonder why they haven't left a failed state and/or what they've personally done to change it (beyond bellyaching about the NRA).

I appreciate the point about not dismissing someone just because they are from a certain area....

The NJ voters have a blame, but the NRA should also be representing their dues paying members at the same time. I ask do you want the battle in NJ or Texas? I say I rather let the battle in NJ. If New Jersey completely fails then the Antis will move on to other states.. Texas is already a target.

All I say is if you have some time & you want to laugh and learn a little bit about NJ gun rights and the fight that they continue to bring then take a listen. He isn't trying to bring NJ style ideas to the national agenda he just wants to continue to fight for things like National Reciprocity, AWB bans, etc.

[WildBill]

My $0.02 (worth what you paid for it).

Who deserves more of the blame for New Jersey's anti-2A predicament? The NATIONAL Rifle Association or the residents/voters of New Jersey?

I won't dismiss someone just because they're from NJ, but I gotta wonder why they haven't left a failed state and/or what they've personally done to change it (beyond bellyaching about the NRA).

Who deserves more of the blame for this country's anti-2A predicament? We can't all move to Texas.

[A-R]

My point was the NATIONAL Rifle Association does not control New Jersey. Real change must come from within the local populace.

Perhaps if you could elaborate on what the NRA should do or has previously failed to do in NJ? So far, all I'm reading is generic claims that NRA doesn't care about NJ, which sound more like finger-pointing blame games to me.

What has this person done to improve NJ?

As for fighting battles in NJ vs. Texas ... nice false choice/straw man.

Gun rights is a national issue and the NRA is a national organization. Perhaps this guy should run for the board of a New Jersey gun rights group, if there is such a thing? Or campaign for "conservative" savior Chris Christie?

[Charles L. Cotton]

The NJ voters have a blame, but the NRA should also be representing their dues paying members at the same time.

What do you know about NRA efforts in NJ? If you say nothing, then you are showing your ignorance of NRA activities. You imply that your candidate will be "representing" members in NJ and that shows he's not a good fit for the NRA Board. As Board Members, we have a duty to all gun owners throughout the country and we diligently pursue that duty, regardless what you or anyone else claim. As has already been said, NJ voters determine the NJ legislature, governor, AG and all other elected officials.

All the NRA can do is get information to voters, file and/or support lawsuits, and lobby for NJ Members' rights. We are doing that and anyone who claims otherwise is either mistaken or lying. As an NRA Board Member, I serve on several committees, including the Legal Affairs Committee. I'm also on the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund Board of Trustees. Serving in those capacities I have first hand information about cases (civil and criminal), briefs and money we have poured and continue to pour into NJ fighting for residents Second Amendment Rights. To suggest we are somehow not supporting Members in NJ is garbage.

Any candidate that runs not on his own track record, but by bashing dedicated men and women who work hard for all American gun owners, isn't fit to hold the office they seek.

If New Jersey completely fails then the Antis will move on to other states.. Texas is already a target.

California has long made this unfounded claim and it is no more true for NJ loons that it has been for California loons. Your liberal, anti-gun ideas, philosophy and legislation will not spread to Texas.

Chas.

[escapedNJ]

I lived in NJ, Donate to the Civil Defense Fund every paycheck, & the NRA hasn't done as much as local organizations. I never said that NRA doesn't do anything, but when they finally came out this year to support a NJ Senate Candidate they had two meetings that did nothing to organize people. The grassroots and local groups have done the most. Now the Board member that is from NJ has done great things for NJ (Scott Bach) with his ANJRPC (Which I am a member of as well), but a lot of the things that get done in front of the paying NRA members isn't seen. The NRA could do a better job at notifying it's members of what it's doing and organize more things. Outside of the Civil Defense fund I donate more money to the local organizations because they have shown more.

As for Texas not turning out like California.... Guess what the liberals are working on it for 2016. So sitting here thinking it can't happen is not best way to handle the situation.

I am all for finding the occasional new blood that will push the organization. I think it's fair for people to listen and decide for themselves.. For those of us that are voting members I think it's in our best interest to vote with knowledge versus voting for the incumbent or the celebrity that everyone knows.

I for one am not telling anyone to vote or not vote for him. I am simply saying take a look at him and what he has to say. Heck he has a podcast you can easily hear his opinions. Nothing wrong with being an informed voter... I mean we accuse the other side of not being informed when voting shouldn't we hold ourselves accountable to same expectations.

[Charles L. Cotton]

. . . Now the Board member that is from NJ has done great things for NJ (Scott Bach) with his ANJRPC (Which I am a member of as well), . . .

Scott is a good friend and I am assigned a number of his funding requests for review and recommendation. You might want to ask Scott if he and ANJRPC get a lot of funding and help from the NRA and NRA-CRDF.

I don't object to you supporting any candidate, but I have a strong objection to absurd allegations that the NRA doesn't do anything for NJ. Had you not made such unfounded statements, I wouldn't have posted on this thread.

. . . but a lot of the things that get done in front of the paying NRA members isn't seen. The NRA could do a better job at notifying it's members of what it's doing and organize more things.

Sometimes we cannot openly disclose things we're doing because it would tip off the opposition and give them more time to organize against our efforts. Sometimes there simply isn't a way to get this information out to only our Members. As for "organ[izing] more things," I'm not sure how we could do more in NJ without sacrificing other states. Remember, the NRA must focus resources on federal legislation as well as states. We don't devote a fraction of our resources to Texas that we do in other states because we don't need it. There's only so much we can devote to the states in terms of money and personnel. Would you have us withdraw some or all of our support in California and/or Illinois to increase our efforts to NJ? Those states are at least as bad off as NJ and in some respects they are much worse. I suspect our Members in California and Illinois would object.

As for Texas not turning out like California.... Guess what the liberals are working on it for 2016. So sitting here thinking it can't happen is not best way to handle the situation.

I said nothing about sitting around feeling secure. I'm been legislatively active for over 34 years and I've been doing everything possible to build a strong and responsive firearms community to pass pro-gun bills and kill anti-gun bills. My point is arguing that what happens in NJ will determine Texas' future is bogus and nothing more than an attempt to get Texans to focus on NJ's problems brought on by NJ voters.

I am all for finding the occasional new blood that will push the organization.

Almost every Board election sees new people elected to the Board. These people are almost always people who have a long history of Second Amendment advocacy and most have an excellent track record doing so. When I was first elected to the NRA Board in 2001, I had been legislatively active for 20 years writing some or all of numerous pro-gun bills and working against anti-gun bills. My experience is similar to most Board Members.

We occasionally hear people call for non-specific change on the NRA Board. Well, a majority of Americans bought into the general call for "Change" in 2008 and we got 8 years of the worst excuse for a President the Country has ever seen. I have served on the NRA Nominating Committee twice. (You can only serve once every 5 years and not when you are up for reelection. The Committee has both Board Members and non-Board Members.) We reviewed every single exiting Board Member's service as well as the submitted information/credentials of every person nominated for inclusion on the ballot by NRA Members. We spent hours doing this and the job is taken very seriously. My personal opinion is that sitting Board Members who are doing a good job should not be passed over for nomination simply to get "new blood." That said, the Nominating invariably nominates people who are not sitting Board Members, almost always resulting in more people on the ballot than the 25 open seats. So the often repeated claim that the Committee merely protects the incumbents is yet another lie proffered by the old Knox crowd.

Members also need to realize that new Board Members are like rookies in any profession or activity. It takes time to learn the NRA and become a productive Board Member. Even with my extensive experience when I was elected, I used the first year of my term to learn the ropes and didn't try to inject myself into operations being handled by far more experienced Board Members. In my opinion, in view of the NRA's continuing successes, one should not call for a change in the Board's direction. If the NRA ever becomes ineffective, only then do I believe it is reasonable to call for a change.

I think it's fair for people to listen and decide for themselves.. For those of us that are voting members I think it's in our best interest to vote with knowledge versus voting for the incumbent or the celebrity that everyone knows.

Of course people should make their own decisions as to how they should vote, but they should not be subjected to false allegations about the NRA or sitting Board Members. Claiming that the NRA doesn't do much for NJ and/or that your candidate will take care of NJ are just such allegations.

The undeniable fact is the NRA is incredibly effective at the federal level in the most hostile environment we've seen in decades. In spite of a rabidly anti-gun President, the Sandy Hook tragedy and hundreds of millions of dollars being poured into the anti-gun campaign, no anti-gun laws have been passed. In the vast majority of states, Second Amendment rights are being expanded. Yes, things are bad in California, Illinois and New Jersey, but until and unless the electorate in those states decide to quit electing anti-gun candidates, there is only so much the NRA can do.

Promote whomever you wish for the NRA Board, but don't expect me to stay quiet if you or your candidate do so by making unfounded accusations against the NRA, its Board, or its leadership.

Chas.