Has the NRA Failed The People of the Gun?
- Thread starter Ringo
- Start date
niceshootintex
New member
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Worse than that, they've literally betrayed us.
Sorry, don't have time to read the link right now. TTAG is not on my list of non-betrayers either, but supper-time is on my list of must-do's, so maybe I'll take it in later. However, I did address the question that was asked.
Blues
I can say that, in New Jersey, I don't think the NRA failed us, especially this past year. We elected a new governor last year. The NRA sent two campaign coordinators to assist with organizing the grassroots movement to get the pro 2A candidate elected. I worked with the southern coordinator for five months by interacting with the public at county fairs, sportsman's shows and town events. Public feedback at these event was very positive. I thought we were making a difference. The choice was pretty clear: Phil Murphy, Democrat and carbon copy of Jon Corzine and Jim Florio (creator of the first assault weapons ban enacted in 1990) and Kim Guadagno, Republican, the then Lieutenant Governor.
When it was all over, I was stunned. When looking on Facebook, a number of so-called firearms owners stated they voted for Murphy because he wanted to legalize marijuana. Others commented on getting "more stuff" whatever that means.
Anyway, they did not fail us. We failed ourselves.
When it was all over, I was stunned. When looking on Facebook, a number of so-called firearms owners stated they voted for Murphy because he wanted to legalize marijuana. Others commented on getting "more stuff" whatever that means.
Anyway, they did not fail us. We failed ourselves.
The NRA has done a lot of good in Oregon from time to time. I am a lifetime member as is my wife, but after the "Bump Stock" backsliding we are not supporting them much with donations this year. It might be politically hurtful, but THEY should have considered that.
I personally do not have nor want a "Bump Stock" as it is 'spray and pray' as opposed to aimed fire. Controlled, aimed full automatic fire can be devastating. But it has to be "Controlled and Aimed" but I don't oppose others from owning what they want.
Anyway the NRA never asked me or the Membership at large, they just plowed politically correctly forward. Now they need their hands slapped and a clothespin placed on their tongues.
I personally do not have nor want a "Bump Stock" as it is 'spray and pray' as opposed to aimed fire. Controlled, aimed full automatic fire can be devastating. But it has to be "Controlled and Aimed" but I don't oppose others from owning what they want.
Anyway the NRA never asked me or the Membership at large, they just plowed politically correctly forward. Now they need their hands slapped and a clothespin placed on their tongues.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
"Bump fire" the old fashioned way is definitely spray and pray (belt-loop method etc.).
Accuracy achieved from a shoulder-fired weapon is no less in trained hands than any other weapon with similar rates of fire, bump-stock vs. M4 or vs. a full auto AK for example. When I say "in trained hands," I don't mean military or cop training, I'm simply referring to training one's own body mechanics of firing one vs. the other. A bump-stock does require retraining of body mechanics, but it's hardly a time-consuming learning curve.
I did buy a Slide-Fire Stock off of Armslist a few years ago. It was less than half the MSRP. Practiced enough with it to succeed in putting four consecutive 30-round mags through my rifle without missing a beat. Including the practice beforehand, I don't think I went over 250 rounds, but I know for sure it wasn't over 300. The practice was all just about figuring out the body mechanics. The four-mag consecutive fire was directed at a box placed and stapled to a small stump with a silhouette target stapled to that. I have some experience firing full-auto small-caliber rifles, but not a lot. I stood back from the target approximately 20 yards and let the 120 rounds fly with reloads being done as fast as I could make them. The center mass of the silhouette was virtually one big hole about 10 - 12 inches in diameter. There were several fliers dotting the rest of the target and a handful in the exposed portions of the box too. No way to count how many of the 120 missed altogether. I'm sure there were some, but not many by my estimation.
Next month we will have been in our new home for three full years. I bought and played with the bump-stock probably a year or so before we moved. Never touched it again because I can't justify (to my wife or myself really) the expense of ammo-dumps. I'm holding onto it though because there will probably come a day in the not-too-distant future when they become as valuable as owning a live unicorn. I'm not suggesting that they make an AR or AK into a great military or tactical weapon, I'm just saying that they're no better or worse than any other way of achieving high rates of fire, at least assuming all things being equal, like heavy duty barrels and weapon materials being able to stand up to high heat and rates of fire. And they're legal and there's no Second Amendment-violating tax stamp to get one either for the time being. If I wanted to spend the money on ammo to do it, I bet I could get that big hole in a silhouette down to 6 to 8 inches in center mass at 50 to 60 yards. Maybe better'n that even. I wouldn't really call that spray and pray.
Blues
Accuracy achieved from a shoulder-fired weapon is no less in trained hands than any other weapon with similar rates of fire, bump-stock vs. M4 or vs. a full auto AK for example. When I say "in trained hands," I don't mean military or cop training, I'm simply referring to training one's own body mechanics of firing one vs. the other. A bump-stock does require retraining of body mechanics, but it's hardly a time-consuming learning curve.
I did buy a Slide-Fire Stock off of Armslist a few years ago. It was less than half the MSRP. Practiced enough with it to succeed in putting four consecutive 30-round mags through my rifle without missing a beat. Including the practice beforehand, I don't think I went over 250 rounds, but I know for sure it wasn't over 300. The practice was all just about figuring out the body mechanics. The four-mag consecutive fire was directed at a box placed and stapled to a small stump with a silhouette target stapled to that. I have some experience firing full-auto small-caliber rifles, but not a lot. I stood back from the target approximately 20 yards and let the 120 rounds fly with reloads being done as fast as I could make them. The center mass of the silhouette was virtually one big hole about 10 - 12 inches in diameter. There were several fliers dotting the rest of the target and a handful in the exposed portions of the box too. No way to count how many of the 120 missed altogether. I'm sure there were some, but not many by my estimation.
Next month we will have been in our new home for three full years. I bought and played with the bump-stock probably a year or so before we moved. Never touched it again because I can't justify (to my wife or myself really) the expense of ammo-dumps. I'm holding onto it though because there will probably come a day in the not-too-distant future when they become as valuable as owning a live unicorn. I'm not suggesting that they make an AR or AK into a great military or tactical weapon, I'm just saying that they're no better or worse than any other way of achieving high rates of fire, at least assuming all things being equal, like heavy duty barrels and weapon materials being able to stand up to high heat and rates of fire. And they're legal and there's no Second Amendment-violating tax stamp to get one either for the time being. If I wanted to spend the money on ammo to do it, I bet I could get that big hole in a silhouette down to 6 to 8 inches in center mass at 50 to 60 yards. Maybe better'n that even. I wouldn't really call that spray and pray.
Blues
Well to me any extra movement affects accuracy, obviously not so much with you. I was trained in the Army in a dedicated Automatic Rifle course with a M14A1, a rifle that had the same 22" barrel, but a long muzzle brake which made the barrel appear longer, it had a Bipod, a wooden stock with a very heavy butt and a integral wooden pistol grip, the most forward part of the fore stock was a 'Bakelite' affair with a pulldown vertical grip. the bottom of that fore grip had a swivel and the sling went from the forward swivel thru the fore grip swivel back to the butt swivel and the shooter entwined his left arm in the sling with hand on the vertical fore grip. The shooter had to keep his body directly inline with the bore. Legs straight, the insides of the feet pressed flat on the ground, heels touching. if you superimposed a straight line starting at the muzzle following the bore line it should bisect the heels. You concentrated on several things at once, mainly keeping the rifle steady and your aim and your trigger control ('Fire a burst of three') (No mechanical burst control, all in the trigger finger) So while they only trained 2 or 3% of Infantrymen on the Automatic Rifle it was a qualification course and the test was hard. I forget how many magazine changes we had to do in the test but that was the hardest part for me. The test was timed, all rounds had to be fired and accuracy was scored. (Out to 700 meters, open sights, big targets)
Later I did fire full auto M-16's, and there may have been a Automatic Rifleman's course set up for that for a time, but few that I had seen had burst control as I was taught.
All that just to give you an idea of where my automatic rifle fire ideas were formed. Keeping that rifle steady was important then.
I do have a gimmick in some people's eyes and that is a TacCon trigger which pushes the trigger forward to reset automatically. You must still fire each individual round with a trigger press. Like a slide-fire or bump stock, it takes practice to be one with the technology, but my sights stay steady on target. No flyers. I could likely do as well with enhanced GI trigger, teaching my body to auto reset the trigger, but I'm getting old now and I just don't want to shoot as much and as often as that would take,
I was mad at the NRA just like you over the 'Bump Stock' issue, not because of owning one, but because the issue had already been addressed and settled by the ATF. Then in comes the NRA telling a Obama selected head of the ATF that it would be not just be okay, but NRA welcomed, if the ATF revisited the issue. I did not become a NRA member for that kind of backsliding. They are supposed to be guardians and champions of our second amendment rights. They did not do any 'emergency' polling of the membership, they just arrogantly pushed forward their own politically correct agenda. They are as bad as the "DC Swamp"
Later I did fire full auto M-16's, and there may have been a Automatic Rifleman's course set up for that for a time, but few that I had seen had burst control as I was taught.
All that just to give you an idea of where my automatic rifle fire ideas were formed. Keeping that rifle steady was important then.
I do have a gimmick in some people's eyes and that is a TacCon trigger which pushes the trigger forward to reset automatically. You must still fire each individual round with a trigger press. Like a slide-fire or bump stock, it takes practice to be one with the technology, but my sights stay steady on target. No flyers. I could likely do as well with enhanced GI trigger, teaching my body to auto reset the trigger, but I'm getting old now and I just don't want to shoot as much and as often as that would take,
I was mad at the NRA just like you over the 'Bump Stock' issue, not because of owning one, but because the issue had already been addressed and settled by the ATF. Then in comes the NRA telling a Obama selected head of the ATF that it would be not just be okay, but NRA welcomed, if the ATF revisited the issue. I did not become a NRA member for that kind of backsliding. They are supposed to be guardians and champions of our second amendment rights. They did not do any 'emergency' polling of the membership, they just arrogantly pushed forward their own politically correct agenda. They are as bad as the "DC Swamp"
niceshootintex
New member
B
Bikenut
Guest
Some interesting reading about the NRA:
National Rifle Association'''s Change on Gun Control in 1970s | Time
When the NRA Supported Gun Control
-snip-
The NRA’s opposition to gun control, however, is only a few decades , according to Adam Winkler author of the book Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America. “Historically,” writes Winkler, “the leadership of the NRA was more open-minded about gun control than someone familiar with the modern NRA might imagine.”
Not only did the NRA support gun control for much of the 20th century, its leadership in fact lobbied for and co-authored gun control legislation.
-snip-
Bold added by me for emphasis.....
The NRA originally wasn't, and in my opinion still isn't, truly pro right to keep and bear arms but leans in favor of gun control. I had a very illuminating conversation a while back concerning the NRA's less than enthusiastic perspective on open carry and how the NRA prefers carry permits. And carry permits are not the right to bear arms but are the exact kind of government control that "shall not be infringed" was intended to prevent.
National Rifle Association'''s Change on Gun Control in 1970s | Time
When the NRA Supported Gun Control
-snip-
The NRA’s opposition to gun control, however, is only a few decades , according to Adam Winkler author of the book Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America. “Historically,” writes Winkler, “the leadership of the NRA was more open-minded about gun control than someone familiar with the modern NRA might imagine.”
Not only did the NRA support gun control for much of the 20th century, its leadership in fact lobbied for and co-authored gun control legislation.
-snip-
Bold added by me for emphasis.....
The NRA originally wasn't, and in my opinion still isn't, truly pro right to keep and bear arms but leans in favor of gun control. I had a very illuminating conversation a while back concerning the NRA's less than enthusiastic perspective on open carry and how the NRA prefers carry permits. And carry permits are not the right to bear arms but are the exact kind of government control that "shall not be infringed" was intended to prevent.
Fergie1911
New member
I prefer the GOA than the NRA!! Don't give an inch or they take a mile.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
New Threads
-
-
Mystic Seaport Museum, Shelburne Museum Vermont
- Started by Harry45255
- Replies: 0
-
-
Reloading Newbie Here—What’s the Real Cost Advantage?
- Started by michaelstrahan
- Replies: 4
-
Members online
No members online now.