thank you, Rob!

I agree!

WM ... not from where I am sitting. As I said I used to be a member of the NRA and GOA. But pound for pound, if you know what I mean, GOA meets my interest and the NRA doesn't anymore. They seem to have changed their course over the last couple of years or so. I don't like the direction they are going in, so I jumped of that bus if you will. To me it looks like the NRA wants a crisis. That gives them the opportunity to send out more mails asking for more money. But to actually fight for the 2A ... I have not seen much of that in a while. I think they do good work for the youth and promoting shooting sports etc. But that is not what we need most right now I think. We need an organization that actually stands up for the second amendment with all the socialist clowns wanting guns control everywhere. GOA seems to do stand firm. That is why I support them.

you can support GOA WITHOUT running down "the other guy"....

Apparently, they cannot.

I wasn't very old when Charlton Hesston was on TV promoting the gun control act of 68. I had a couple guns given to me by my dad and granddad. Was just at the point I could carry one for deer/elk seasons. Uncle had a WWI surplus 06 he bought from the NRA. Cost 10 bucks and the mailman brought it to his door. My cousin owns that rifle now.

Dad Uncle Grandad all dropped their membership after that. My grandad remembered the NRA involvement in the NFA but said he didn't see a problem at the time. In 1934 my Dad wad one year old. In 1968 I didn't understand all the fuss over filling out a form and having the local gun shop order a firearm for you.

I Joined the NRA in 1974. My Dad Uncle and Grandad all tried to talk me out of it. Said their word was no good, don't trust them. I didn't bring it up after that when I was around my elders.

Along comes Slick Willie Clinton and the instacheck/gun owner registry. ( I know the FBI denies it but I don't believe a word of that. Especially after the revelations on NSA spying)

Guess what? The NRA is all for it. Telling me what a wonderful idea it was. Same thing they say today.

Grandad is dead and I will be surprised if my Uncle or Dad either one are still here in ten years. One thing I know. I wish I had listened to them when they said don't trust the NRA.

How is stating facts, telling the truth, a bad thing?

well, you've alienated a potential ally...

I won't be joining GOA.

(I earlier had said I WOULD, if they ever proved they could accomplish what they promised)

and I think I'll send the NRA another donation every time I hear a GOA member try to burn down the NRA.

it's a small man, who has to run down another to make himself feel superior.

Not running anyone down. Just being objective. And saying what made me leave the NRA. I am not trying to change anyone else course here. Whatever floats your boat is fine by me. And frankly, I rather have someone support an appleseed event then do nothing at all. Every little bit helps.

What I tried to point out is that I am probably not alone and if the NRA are indeed in trouble and I don't think they are, the things I stated above could well be a reason why.
A couple years back I was contemplating to buy a Jeep for my missus as her runaround. The I looked at the changes that Fiat have done to them and decided against being a 2 wheel drive car with a 1 point something liter turbo charged engine in it. As the 4 wheel drive suddenly became an extra on a Jeep. Same thing ... I am not going to talk anyone out of buying one, but it aint for me.

Michael, that's fair enough.

danny, on the other hand...

I seen this and thought to myself that this is exactly the kind of info people need to see. It's a personal opinion but you can vet the facts.

Good article, BUT it has one fatal flaw: the entire article rests on the assumption that the purpose of the NRA is to support the Second Amendment and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms — that simply isn’t true. The NRA is not, and never has been, a Pro-2A organization. The NRA was formed to promote rifle marksmanship — it did that very well and continues to do that better than any other organization. In the course of promoting rifle marksmanship, the NRA also became involved in firearms safety training. It did that very well and continues to do that better than any other organization. BUT THE NRA WAS NEVER MEANT TO SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (at least not beyond the scope of competitive rifle shooting). The first formal position of the NRA on the topic was NRA president Karl Frederick in 1934, during congressional NFA hearings testified “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one. … I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.” The basic position of the NRA has not changed significantly in the 85 years since then. The NRA actively supported the National Firearms Act of 1934 (the first federal gun control law) The NRA actively supported the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 The NRA actively supported the Gun Control Act of 1968 The NRA actively supported the final version of the misnamed Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 including the Hughes Amendment The NRA supported the final version of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 Bottom line: Every single piece of federal anti-2A legislation that has passed the US Congress did so with the support of the NRA — because the NRA still sees the right to keep and bear arms as something that needs to be “sharply restricted and only under licenses” just as it did in 1934.

You can't compare the GOA, SAF and NRA to each other as they operate completely and have totally different areas of strengths.

The GOA and SAF together don't have the clout with politicians the NRA has to shoot down bills before they become law. Just the threat of having t h e NRA against them at election time has had great results in voting down many bills.

The GOA and SAF put their resources into litigation more than lobbying, which is also very important to us.They all compliment each other and if we lose one, there will be a big void for the other two to fill, if it's even possible for them to do so. As of now, take out the NRA and their network of helping get pro- gun politicians elected I don't see the other two being able to fill the void.

When you hear a politician blaming the NRA for blocking a bill it is really voters that those politicians fear. NRA as a club can not vote on anything. What NRA leadership can do is influence members.

So when a new control bill is put forth politicians know they need to get the NRA on board to get it passed. The leadership of NRA then starts telling membership how they need to accept it. Membership is pretty much brainwashed into thinking that anything the club leadership says is wonderful and in the best interest of membership. They get that loyalty by rallying members to oppose SOME gun control legislation.

If you don't think that is true then why is the NRA now saying we need red flag laws and membership is ok with it? NRA leadership was quick to say bump stocks need regulated.

Politically the NRA's influence in government is the ability to convince members to accept more unconstitutional infringement of their right to bear arms. Left leaning politicians are upset with them because they will not tell VOTERS that making semi autos class III firearms is in the nations best interest.

edited.

When the 2nd was written the word militia was understood to be all males 16 and over. That is why the supremes have sort of admitted arming yourself is an individual right.

It was written so that citizens could arm themselves with any arm, including military arms, that they wanted to or felt a need for.


Nothing keeps a government from infringing on liberty like an armed citizenry. The government is SUPPOSED to fear the governed in our country.


QUIT ACCEPTING INFRINGEMENT NO MATTER WHO TELLS YOU IT IS GOOD FOR YOU

danny,

while I agree with you in principal...

that ship has sailed. your pappy and grandpappy who voted for FDR did a lot of the damage.

and not just in reference to the 2nd...

Americans have been losing FREEDOM, since before the ink was dry on the Constitution...and the vast majority want it that way.

we are dinosaurs. we aint gonna change the mammals we're up against.

My dad to young to vote for FDR. My grandad absolutely did not.

Gramma told me stories of people that jumped off the train and came to the house offering labor for a meal. She fed them what she could. They had livestock and a big garden.

Grandad was very adamant that FDR's new deal was the reason the depression got as bad and lasted as long as it did. Told me how some banks went under but others were flush. Never did trust banks or bankers. Used to tell me not to trust anybody that wore a suit to work.

He would have gotten pretty upset if he were alive and somebody suggested he had voted for FDR.

did you read anything else (besides the GOA line) on Henderson?

I'll be looking into this some more...

on the surface, it looks like a convicted felon had a issue with the exact disposition of his [now] prohibited firearms.

as I said, I'll be looking into this further. thanks for the link.

in the meantime, you can research the Heller decision.