TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:

mr.72 wrote:... taking people shooting is not going to inform them that they can use guns for defense.

No one need to be told that firearms can be used for self-defense. Most four-year-olds know it. That's why kids play cops and robbers.

Actually, I disagree here. You are right, most children know this. But most adults ignore this! They forgot! Maybe they were taught differently. The police have guns. This is a safe neighborhood. You are not really at risk! I think once people become aware of their real vulnerability in this society, then naturally they will take precautions to ensure their own safety.

The misconceptions that we have to overcome are

I think you are right about the misconceptions but I think the need to defend yourself and your family will trump all of these and make them irrelevant for the vast majority of people. Those misconceptions only matter when your life is not seen to be at risk. But once you find yourself aware of the chances of you or your family becoming the victim of violence, suddenly you cease to care about these misconceptions. We need to appeal to people's survival instinct plain and simple.

Hey maybe I'm wrong, but who cares. The NRA does not need my $35. If they are that hard up then they are unable to be saved. I am just the sound of one hand clapping here.

I don't believe the gloom and doom about what would happen without the NRA. Without the NRA, an opportunity for some other organization to take on the fight for RKBA might arise. This is not a country of morons and wimps. It's not like all of the current NRA members and other RKBA supporters are just going to go "aw shucks" if the NRA ceased to exist, and then contribute their money to the Brady Campaign.

Mr72 wrote:I don't believe the gloom and doom about what would happen without the NRA.

This not a matter of opinion. You are completely and tragically wrong!!

Mike1951 wrote: This not a matter of opinion. You are completely and tragically wrong!!

Now how could you, or anyone, know what would happen in the absence of the NRA?

Just how long do you think it would have taken to start another organization from scratch and gain sufficient membership to have any influence at all in Washington?

I take you as a newcomer to the cause. I joined after the GCA '68 and became a Life member in 1976. I have seen and been part of the battles both won and lost. Without the NRA, every proposed anti-gun bill would have had a strong chance of passing.

Please don't assume that you know anything about the NRA!

mr.72 wrote:

Mike1951 wrote: This not a matter of opinion. You are completely and tragically wrong!!

Now how could you, or anyone, know what would happen in the absence of the NRA?

Go back to the past and research every piece of anti-gun legislation that was proposed and see who opposed it and lobbied against it. Listen and learn from Mike1951's experience. Go back in history and read about the GCA of 1968. I wish you could see the classified ads in the American Rifleman prior to that law. They would "blow your mind."

mr.72 wrote:

Mike1951 wrote: This not a matter of opinion. You are completely and tragically wrong!!

Now how could you, or anyone, know what would happen in the absence of the NRA?

Its a fleeting thing called "common sense". At one time...many people possessed it, today... "not so much".

It's those folks that somehow "know" if they jump off a cliff...they will be hurt, so they don't experiment with it. Or maybe the last of us who still don't "run with scissors".....I dunno, maybe we're not daring enough.

I guess if the sun failed to shine tomorrow there is some remote possibility the Earth wouldn't get cold (really fast), but the smart money says it will. But hey, you never know!

If we did not have the NRA...would we be in a world of hurt? I'm gonna have to go with YES.

Mike1951 wrote: Please don't assume that you know anything about the NRA!

And this attitude fosters understanding and acceptance of the NRA how, exactly?

This is the very problem with discussing the NRA: It's either the NRA or the highway. There seems to be no middle ground.

brianko wrote:

Mike1951 wrote: Please don't assume that you know anything about the NRA!

And this attitude fosters understanding and acceptance of the NRA how, exactly?

This is the very problem with discussing the NRA: It's either the NRA or the highway. There seems to be no middle ground.

Good! You're catching on! There IS no middle ground!

If you are a gun owner and don't support the NRA, then don't say anything the next time your right is restricted!

flintknapper wrote:

mr.72 wrote:

Mike1951 wrote: This not a matter of opinion. You are completely and tragically wrong!!

Now how could you, or anyone, know what would happen in the absence of the NRA?

Its a fleeting thing called "common sense". At one time...many people possessed it, today... "not so much".

It's those folks that somehow "know" if they jump off a cliff...they will be hurt, so they don't experiment with it. Or maybe the last of us who still don't "run with scissors".....I dunno, maybe were not daring enough.

I guess if the sun failed to shine tomorrow there is some remote possibility the Earth wouldn't get cold (really fast), but the smart money says it will. But hey, you never know!

If we did not have the NRA...would we be in a world of hurt? I'm gonna have to go with YES.

gotta go with that and Mike1951 on this one.

You know what I wish? I wish we didn't need an organization such as the NRA. I wish that every person who ever swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States really meant it.

Nah! Just kidding!!!

The numbers I have seen say there are 40M households with guns in the US. Almost half the households. Easily 100M untapped new NRA members. The one aspect I haven't seen discussed is related to not joining the NRA are those that have guns and do not want to be identified as a gun person or put on any "lists" as a gun owner.

I see it as a condition of our preceived "PC" times and given our times, a valid thought, much the same as I don't openly discuss my CHL. Granted, the CHL "list" probably isn't that private, particularly if the TAIRT amendment is repealed allowing easy access to my personal info, without my permission.

Case in point, my son won't join the NRA because he does want to be 'identified" or "listed" as a gun nut (he really is ).....I'm sure ya'll know what I mean. Brady and MOM's have been successful villianizing the NRA as being outside of the social middlegrounds. It's a reaction to his environment and generation. I don't have an answer. I am a member of the NRA to support 2A advocacy alone. I have no interest in their (our, though I don't really feel vested) internal politics, and certainly agree that individual salesmanship and safety are the most reasonable means to promote new memberships, one new member at a time.

I will try to address this concern in two ways:

1. The right to freedom of association that is guaranteed by the first amendment and affirmed by many Supreme Court rulings prevents government from subpoenaing the membership lists of legitimate organizations -- which the NRA is.

2. If the federal government were to go outside of constitutional boundaries, they have the technical capability to do anything they want. In that case, no secrets will exist in any computer system anywhere. If you belong to an organization, subscribe to a magazine, or have bought any "incriminating" paraphernalia with a check or credit card, you are on The List.

In the second case, all bets are off, and no one will be able to hide.

- Jim

>Case in point, my son won't join the NRA because he does want to be 'identified" or "listed" as a gun nut

With the problems of protecting privacy in this country and the technology available to allow one to be 'tracked, itemized, categorized, and targeted' I think we're already on a 'list' somewhere.

I'm trying to find a real reference, but I saw a posting on another forum referencing an alleged bill that allegedly required credit card companies to supply the federal gov't with our purchase history. The data is already available, the technology is already available, its only a question of whether such an abuse,.err..bill really exists. We already have the technology (OnStar, GPS) to track where you're driving and how fast (on-board automotive 'black boxes'), so in theory we could track a person driving from their home, to the gun show, to McDonalds (to raise your health insurance because you're eating fast food) to the gun range, where some Big Brother version of OnStar could lock you in your vehicle, disable it and send someone to relieve you of that new AR-15 you just bought. Far fetched, probably. Possible, yes. Probable? Well in England they're already using GPS to track how much people drive in order to 'adjust' their gasoline tax appropriately.

If you've ever bought a gun at a dealer, there's a 4473 form record, if you've ever used a credit card at "Big Bob's Gun emporium", there's a record, etc. Talk on your cell phone about guns? someone could be picking that up. Got a CHL? you're on a list (aren't they still public in some states?). Post to an internet forum? you're on a list.

http://www.motorauthority.com/dutch-use ... d-tax.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1419499/posts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.tonyrogers.com/news/onstar.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.wirelessgalaxy.com/researchc ... g-tool.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The real problem is that these sorts of things will happen quietly and will be in place before anyone knows or they'll be sold on whatever the popular rallying call of the day is. ("think of the children", "if it saves just one life....", "public safety", "..aid the war on terrorism").

So, I am getting the message: you are a fool who lacks common sense if you do not swallow the idea that the NRA is the only possible hope for the defense of the 2A in America, is that it?

Good thing they had the NRA when the Constitution was drafted then. Free Americans, on their own, could not possibly support their own rights without the precious NRA, could they?

Those couple of posts in this thread added another reason for me to not join the NRA. Maybe it's NRA members' attitudes that are preventing others from joining. Just a thought.

Listening to some episodes of NRANews.com, I'd be lead to believe that if I don't believe in much of the non-gun related platform of the Republican party, the NRA doesn't want me as a member. Luckelly, I don't care, even if it WAS the case.

This is some of what I was talking about earlier. NRANews.com is a good show, but talking about how stupid liberals are for non-gun related things can only alienate. The NRA shouldn't be an echo chamber; it should be trying to draw more people in.