TexasCHLforum.com

The NRA is just like a church. You probably won't find one that mirrors everything you believe or that always does exactly what you would do in every situation, but you pick the one that is most in agreement with your beliefs, and you join in and support them.

While I might not be in lockstep with everything the NRA does, I don't know of any other organization that benefits us (gun owners) as much as they do. So I choose to support them.

Crossfire wrote:The NRA is just like a church. You probably won't find one that mirrors everything you believe or that always does exactly what you would do in every situation, but you pick the one that is most in agreement with your beliefs, and you join in and support them.

While I might not be in lockstep with everything the NRA does, I don't know of any other organization that benefits us (gun owners) as much as they do. So I choose to support them.

well stated

AndyC wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Different era, different country, different culture and a completely different management team.

Really? Pop quiz - who said in 1999: "We think it 's reasonable to provide mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone."

Who said, also in 1999: "We think it’s reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act."

Who, when and give us the proof.

Chas.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12 ... -shooting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NRA sees rise in membership after Connecticut school shooting

AndyC wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

AndyC wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Different era, different country, different culture and a completely different management team.

Really? Pop quiz - who said in 1999: "We think it 's reasonable to provide mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone."

Who said, also in 1999: "We think it’s reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act."

Who, when and give us the proof.

Chas.

I don't bluff, Charles - here you go:

Testimony of Wayne R. LaPierre
Executive Vice-President, National Rifle Association
before the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime
U. S. House of Representatives - May 27, 1999

http://judiciary.house.gov/legacy/lapierre.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No you don't bluff, you just spread GOA garbage by taking his testimony grossly out of context.

I thought this is what you meant, but I wanted to be sure before I responded.

Wayne was testifying against requiring background checks on all transfers of firearms, as proposed by Laughtenberg. This would have applied not only to gun shows, but to all private transfers, including gifts to family members. Yes, he did say he supported background checks on all sales at gun shows, but 1) he was trying to defuse the idea of including private transfers; and 2) no legislation was passed closing the so-called "gun show loophole." It didn't pass because of NRA opposition.

You have to take comments in context. Wayne didn't go out and stump for legislation to require background checks at gun shows, he was testifying before congress in opposition to requiring background checks on all transfers. He was also trying to prevent the creation of a national gun owners database.

The reason I thought this might be the testimony you were referencing is because I recall GOA sending out mailers claiming the NRA was pushing for background checks at all gun shows and they creatively edited his full testimony to create the print equivalent of "sound bites." A lot of people where fooled by GOA's garbage and I suspected that you may have received something from GOA. That testimony and GOA's letters were almost 14 years ago, but some people still believe the NRA campaigned to close the so-called "gun show loophole" when we are the organization that has killed it for years.

GOA spread this false impression years ago and to some degree, people still believe it. Hopefully, reading his entire testimony and putting it into context, makes it clear he/NRA was fighting against further gun laws.

Unfortunately, a lot of people believe GOA's false claims about the NRA and that's like taking Sarah Brady's description of gun owners as gospel.

Chas.

Wayne LaPierre wrote:We think it 's reasonable to make gun show instant checks just like gun store instant checks. What's unreasonable is how Lautenberg could define your Walmart, or your uncle 's skeetshooting range, or your next-door firearms collector, or your local sporting clays competition, or any person or place with 50 or more firearms as a "gun show " subject to intrusive government regulation. That 's crazy!

We think it 's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. What 's unreasonable is letting 6,000 students caught with illegal guns at school go, prosecuting only 13 of them the past two years.

We think it 's reasonable to demand that when a lawful gun buyer passes the criminal background check and purchases a firearm, records of that transaction be destroyed immediately. What 's unreasonable is Lautenberg 's decree that we trust government bureaucrats to compile and keep names and addresses and firearm types of millions of honest, legal gun owners for no legitimate law enforcement purpose.

What's unreasonable is further erosion of privacy, further intrusion into private transactions, and further government penalizing of the law-abiding many instead of the lawbreaking few. America will not tolerate further surrender of precious freedoms in return for nothing but perceived but fictitious promises that make none of us safer.

The Lautenberg legislation is not only unreasonable, it is unworkable . . . unacceptable . . . and to our Founders who gave us the Second Amendment, unthinkable.

And finally --somebody's got to say this out loud: It 's reasonable for well-meaning people to convene hearings like this to find and fashion solutions. What 's unreasonable is when a new level of hate rhetoric becomes acceptable because it 's aimed at honest gun owners, as in the violent language of influential film-maker Spike Lee who last week reportedly said about NRA President Charlton Heston, quote, "Shoot him --with a .44 caliber Bulldog. " By his defiant silence, instead
of the quick apology most American role models would offer, he sanctions hate and bears his share of culpability for the kind of violence this body seeks to stop.

On behalf of millions of gun owners who are NRA members, and tens of millions who are not yet, I am asking you to practice yourselves what is so readily preached to us: Be reasonable.

AndyC wrote:I have nothing at all to do with the GOA - I found that link through a simple Google search. I guess we'll have to disagree as to the meaning of his words back then, but I find it interesting that he no longer seems to believe in gun-free school zones - which was a concept of appeasement that many of us argued against till we were blue in the face.

It's interesting that you apparently want to distance yourself from GOA in light of your post quoted below. The NRA opposed the federal gun free school zone act, both times. I'm trying to find out if we were involved in either of the two Supreme Court challenges.

Chas.

AndyC wrote:

TexasCajun wrote:Or to put it a different way: What other organization (pro-2A, pro-self-defense, or otherwise gun-rights-centric) is CURRENTLY funded, staffed, an mobilized to take on the storm that is now upon us? I'm not asking because I want to be a jerk or pile on AndyC. I want to hedge the bet if possible. If I can throw another couple of bucks at another organization that's going to join in the fight on my behalf, I'm willing.

Gun Owners of America (GOA) or Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). I don't think either of them have an record of conceding anything - rather, they seem to rightly believe that the word "compromise" means ONLY giving something in order to GET something in return.

Crossfire wrote:The NRA is just like a church. You probably won't find one that mirrors everything you believe or that always does exactly what you would do in every situation, but you pick the one that is most in agreement with your beliefs, and you join in and support them.

While I might not be in lockstep with everything the NRA does, I don't know of any other organization that benefits us (gun owners) as much as they do. So I choose to support them.

BINGO! We have a winner! Well said.

BigGuy wrote:I'd made up my mind to join, but think I'll wait the see what they say Friday.

Just joined. A coworker, currently addressing a problem at one of our sister sites, just texted me and told me he also joined.

Not a big fan of "lobbying" in general...along with the fact I usually am very guarded with giving out any personal information out to anyone, but... another joining the cause... we can't afford to stand around on the sidelines and watch what happens anymore.

http://www.france24.com/en/20121223-us- ... un-control

AFP - The NRA, the most powerful gun lobby in the United States, ruled out any support Sunday for greater regulation of firearms or ammunition magazines after the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre.

Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said planned legislation to outlaw military-style assault weapons and large-capacity magazines was "phony" and would not work.

He repeated the NRA's call to place an armed guard in every school and argued that prosecuting criminals and fixing the mental health system, rather than gun control, were the solutions to America's mass shooting epidemic.

Strange that you have to go to a French news outlet to get an unbiased news piece on the NRA's position and what passes for arguments on the other side.....

The Annoyed Man wrote:http://www.france24.com/en/20121223-us- ... un-control

AFP - The NRA, the most powerful gun lobby in the United States, ruled out any support Sunday for greater regulation of firearms or ammunition magazines after the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre.

Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said planned legislation to outlaw military-style assault weapons and large-capacity magazines was "phony" and would not work.

He repeated the NRA's call to place an armed guard in every school and argued that prosecuting criminals and fixing the mental health system, rather than gun control, were the solutions to America's mass shooting epidemic.

Strange that you have to go to a French news outlet to get an unbiased news piece on the NRA's position and what passes for arguments on the other side.....

TAM, I don't find it simply strange, I find it disgusting as well. The media in the USA, as I have said before, are just a large propaganda wing of liberal-progressive/leftist politics.

Crossfire wrote:The NRA is just like a church. You probably won't find one that mirrors everything you believe or that always does exactly what you would do in every situation, but you pick the one that is most in agreement with your beliefs, and you join in and support them.

While I might not be in lockstep with everything the NRA does, I don't know of any other organization that benefits us (gun owners) as much as they do. So I choose to support them.

Me too.

I am an Endowment Life Member, a certified NRA instructor in Basic Pistol and Personal Protection, and a certified NRA Range Safety Officer. I have participated in the NRA's awards programs and nominated the eventual winner of the annual 2008 Marion P. Hammer Award, our own CompVest.

And I actually made an online contribution to the NRA-ILA this morning. I really did. And I plan to do so next month.

Do I think that the NRA is flawless? Nope. No organization is.

My niche is business process management, and the first thing you have to accept is that history is not sacrosanct: because something was done before is no justification it should be done again. No process is ever perfect; it is always being either improved or degraded.

If improvement stops, the entity fails. That maxim extends to your perishable shooting skills, to your physical fitness, even to the operation of a Fortune 100 corporation.

Andy, I thank you for joining the NRA. I personally appreciate it.

Like any viable organization, the NRA evolves each and every year. Today, it looks very different than it did decades ago.

I'd have to dig through my archives to find all of the articles about EBRs that have appeared in the NRA's American Rifleman magazine, but I do know that the SCAR 17S was on the cover of the March 2011 edition. And if you get the Outdoor Channel and have watched the American Rifleman program, you'll know that the majority of segments feature one or more EBRs.

Nothing in today's NRA is adverse to the EBR.

Ya know, I hate the "EBR" term, but it is what it is.