NRA help in Connecticut?

lessthan0

Bulldog Pride
Has anyone heard if the NRA is going to step in and help us here in CT??I have not seen or heard of any help coming our way? I feel as a member we have been left hanging in the wind!

:hang2: :unsure:
 

Has anyone heard if the NRA is going to step in and help us here in CT??I have not seen or heard of any help coming our way? I feel as a member we have been left hanging in the wind!

:hang2: :unsure:
Violate one of the new laws and get arrested and they'd probably be glad to help out. I think they need a case to take to the Supreme Court first.
 
Violate one of the new laws and get arrested and they'd probably be glad to help out. I think they need a case to take to the Supreme Court first.

Cases don't just get "taken" to SCOTUS. They get tried and the party that feels its civil rights were infringed appeals up through a line of appeals courts before it would get anywhere near SCOTUS. Assuming the top-level appeal left the perceived infringements of civil rights upheld, only then would the aggrieved party appeal to SCOTUS, but four Justices there would decide whether or not the appeal had prima facie merit sufficient to accept it and hear it. Four Justices could choose to leave it alone and allow the lower courts' ruling(s) to stand.

Other than that, the N R A is supposed to be a lobbying organization. Their main stated mission has nothing to do with "taking" individual cases to any court, Supreme or otherwise. Their mission is to influence law-makers, and as such, influencing CT and/or NY and/or CO and/or MD law-makers should be right in their wheelhouse if they had the kind of power that people on both sides of the gun rights issue are convinced they have.

Personally, I believe they have next to no power at all, other than to make the same kinds of public statements that millions of citizens send to politicians' email inboxes, addresses and telephone numbers in private. We see how much good that tack does. Virtually zero, or, at best, they result in "compromises" that still make gun-owners the only losers and gun-grabbers the only winners.

It seems in NY they jumped in with out that happening ?

Can you name anything that the N R A has actually done (other than make public statements) in NY? Just curious.

Blues
 
Can you name anything that the N R A has actually done (other than make public statements) in NY? Just curious.

Blues[/QUOTE]



The Washington Times

Thursday, March 21, 2013





The National Rifle Association said Thursday that the group has joined the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association in a lawsuit challenging the state’s new law banning so-called assault weapons and limiting ammunition magazines to a maximum capacity of seven rounds.

“Governor Andrew Cuomo and the New York State Legislature usurped the legislative and democratic process in passing these extreme anti-gun measures with no committee hearings and no public input,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. “This obvious disrespect for New Yorkers and their Second Amendment rights will not be tolerated.”


Read more: NRA joins lawsuit against New York gun law - Washington Times

And we do have a group here in the state doing just that........
I hope the NRA will join in!?


















Group to file lawsuit against the state over new gun laws

Updated: Friday, 05 Apr 2013, 6:06 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 05 Apr 2013, 6:06 PM EDT
Tina Detelj



NEW LONDON, Conn. (WTNH) -- One group in Connecticut is now planning to take the state to court over the new gun law. The President of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League or CCDL spoke to News 8's Tina Detelj.

The fight over gun reform here in the state is far from over. Some legislators are saying the new law is just the beginning and a grass roots group is now planning to sue.

Scott Wilson of New London is the president and one of the founding members of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League.
 
I am a life member and I can say that they are toothless tigers once a law is in place. for example they have never challenged any of the draconian anti gun laws in places like NYC, NJ, DC or chicago. the people in CT will have to band together to fight the government over reach on the new laws.
 
Cases don't just get "taken" to SCOTUS. Can you name anything that the N R A has actually done (other than make public statements) in NY? Just curious.
Blues, I'm not sure but I believe they are bankrolling the lawsuits from the NYSRPA. NYSRPA is the NRA state affiliate.
 
Can you name anything that Bluestringer has actually done (other than rant on internet forums) for the 2A? Just curious.
Yeah, Blues opened my eyes (after countless arguments) to what's happening in this country. My thinking is forever changed by him.
 
Violate one of the new laws and get arrested and they'd probably be glad to help out. I think they need a case to take to the Supreme Court first.

Cases don't just get "taken" to SCOTUS. They get tried and the party that feels its civil rights were infringed appeals up through a line of appeals courts before it would get anywhere near SCOTUS. Assuming the top-level appeal left the perceived infringements of civil rights upheld, only then would the aggrieved party appeal to SCOTUS, but four Justices there would decide whether or not the appeal had prima facie merit sufficient to accept it and hear it. Four Justices could choose to leave it alone and allow the lower courts' ruling(s) to stand.

Other than that, the N R A is supposed to be a lobbying organization. Their main stated mission has nothing to do with "taking" individual cases to any court, Supreme or otherwise. Their mission is to influence law-makers, and as such, influencing CT and/or NY and/or CO and/or MD law-makers should be right in their wheelhouse if they had the kind of power that people on both sides of the gun rights issue are convinced they have.

Personally, I believe they have next to no power at all, other than to make the same kinds of public statements that millions of citizens send to politicians' email inboxes, addresses and telephone numbers in private. We see how much good that tack does. Virtually zero, or, at best, they result in "compromises" that still make gun-owners the only losers and gun-grabbers the only winners.

It seems in NY they jumped in with out that happening ?

Can you name anything that the N R A has actually done (other than make public statements) in NY? Just curious.

Blues
I was more or less being sarcastic and not trying to go through an entire semester of criminal justice in doing so.
 
It seems in NY they jumped in with out that happening ?

Say what...?
NRA itself hasn't done squat in NY, to my knowledge. Their "arm" in NY (whatever that means), the NYSRPA, filed a lawsuit that the government is going to ignore, but that's all I know of.
 
Can you name anything that Bluestringer has actually done (other than rant on internet forums) for the 2A? Just curious.

Hmm....That would be "ranting" on internet gun forums about the 2A. My my, how inappropriate of a topic to feel passionate about on such a forum, huh?

BTW, how'd the N R A let that arms treaty slip through with their "voice" being so influential there and stuff?
Rofl_3e_zpsb267d714.gif


I was more or less being sarcastic and not trying to go through an entire semester of criminal justice in doing so.

Wow. If three relatively short paragraphs is what constitutes an entire semester of higher education in your world, it's no wonder you think that the N R A can just "take" a case to SCOTUS. Buck up there hotrod. I said nothing that you should've taken personally or gotten all smart-ass about.

Yeah, Blues opened my eyes (after countless arguments) to what's happening in this country. My thinking is forever changed by him.

That's among the nicest things anyone has ever said to or about me. Kudos for the kudos, BC. I appreciate it.

Blues
 
Hmm....That would be "ranting" on internet gun forums about the 2A. My my, how inappropriate of a topic to feel passionate about on such a forum, huh?

BTW, how'd the N R A let that arms treaty slip through with their "voice" being so influential there and stuff?
Rofl_3e_zpsb267d714.gif




Wow. If three relatively short paragraphs is what constitutes an entire semester of higher education in your world, it's no wonder you think that the N R A can just "take" a case to SCOTUS. Buck up there hotrod. I said nothing that you should've taken personally or gotten all smart-ass about.



That's among the nicest things anyone has ever said to or about me. Kudos for the kudos, BC. I appreciate it.

Blues

Soooo..you're admitting to preaching to the choir this whole time? Bravo! You sure helped the 2A by wasting your time on those who already vote the same way as you!

Mr. LaPierre had a namepate, chair and floortime in front of the UN...did you? He spoke to them in a UN session, with his voice, therefore the NRA, which he represents, had a voice in the UN. But go ahead, keep preaching to the choir. Doing nothing seems to suit you fine.
 
Wow. If three relatively short paragraphs is what constitutes an entire semester of higher education in your world, it's no wonder you think that the N R A can just "take" a case to SCOTUS. Buck up there hotrod. I said nothing that you should've taken personally or gotten all smart-ass about.

Blues
I may not should have taken offense in your eyes, but I think a lot would agree that you have a very condescending way of correcting people when they don't explain as thoroughly as you might would have. My point was that the NRA will use their attorneys sometimes if a member gets caught up in a legal issue that they believe has "unconstitutional" written all over it.

As for not knowing how "SCOTUS" works, I've spent the last 2 semesters studying the entire US court systems, so I know more about it than I care to. Quite frankly I think people just like saying SCOTUS and POTUS.
 
Well back to the NRA not stepping in to help us out here in CT. I feel abandon by them! The good people of CT join the NRA.......For what? They showed up in the beginning put their 2 cents in and after our idiot politicians passed ridiculous laws haven't heard from them since! Why should we support them to help fight for other states or against the fed laws that are trying to be passed??? Our state now has the MOST restrictive laws in the country! Any new laws passed by the feds will make no difference here!

So NRA step up to the plate here in CT!!!!!

I can't image why anyone here in CT will be willing to contribute to the NRA any more if they will not help us in the time of NEED?!?!

By the way I have emailed the NRA asking when and if they are going to help D A Y S ago..................No Reply! :hang3: :help: :hang3:
 
Well back to the NRA not stepping in to help us out here in CT. I feel abandon by them! The good people of CT join the NRA.......For what? They showed up in the beginning put their 2 cents in and after our idiot politicians passed ridiculous laws haven't heard from them since! Why should we support them to help fight for other states or against the fed laws that are trying to be passed??? Our state now has the MOST restrictive laws in the country! Any new laws passed by the feds will make no difference here!

So NRA step up to the plate here in CT!!!!!

I can't image why anyone here in CT will be willing to contribute to the NRA any more if they will not help us in the time of NEED?!?!

By the way I have emailed the NRA asking when and if they are going to help D A Y S ago..................No Reply! :hang3: :help: :hang3:
Try calling. And while you're at it, see if the NRA can do anything about this damn 15 character limit!
 
Soooo..you're admitting to preaching to the choir this whole time? Bravo! You sure helped the 2A by wasting your time on those who already vote the same way as you!

Umm.....yeah, that's right, everyone already agrees with me on every gun and/or 2nd Amendment issue. Good grief. If that were true, you wouldn't be whining every time I deign to post about, well, gun and/or 2nd Amendment issues.

As far as "wasting" my time "on those who already vote the same way" as I do, your memory is worse than your inability to put forth a cogent argument. Does "I will not vote for Romney" ring a bell?

Mr. LaPierre had a namepate, chair and floortime in front of the UN...did you? He spoke to them in a UN session, with his voice, therefore the NRA, which he represents, had a voice in the UN. But go ahead, keep preaching to the choir. Doing nothing seems to suit you fine.

Umm...."floortime in front of the UN?" More like chair-time in a coat-closet in the UN building somewhere. Pfft. You really ought to study up on what NGOs mean to the power-brokers at the UN. Absolutely nothing is the correct answer, and the proof of that is that the small arms treaty passed just a week or so ago and LaPierre's own government voted for it. He's got exactly the same "voice" at the UN that he has in America. No one in power cares what he says at all.

I may not should have taken offense in your eyes, but I think a lot would agree that you have a very condescending way of correcting people when they don't explain as thoroughly as you might would have.

Condescending? Good grief man, I couldn't have been less personal or matter-of-fact in commenting on your comment. If what I said was thought by you to be condescending or otherwise insulting, you are just looking for something to get offended over. Like I said, buck up there hotrod.

My point was that the NRA will use their attorneys sometimes if a member gets caught up in a legal issue that they believe has "unconstitutional" written all over it.

And my counter-point was that I don't know if that ever happens, but taking individual cases to court is not their mission. They're a lobby organization, not a legal aid .org. What's wrong with pointing that out?

As for not knowing how "SCOTUS" works, I've spent the last 2 semesters studying the entire US court systems, so I know more about it than I care to. Quite frankly I think people just like saying SCOTUS and POTUS.

So now you've got a problem with me abbreviating "SCOTUS" instead of typing out "the Supreme Court" every time I refer to it? Like I said, you're just looking for something to whine about.

And you "know more than you care to" about how the courts work that can snatch your rights away from you with the stroke of a pen? That is a stunning admission. You really shouldn't be discussing constitutional issues anymore. You might learn more than you care to from the highly knowledgeable folks on this forum.

Blues
 
Our state now has the MOST restrictive laws in the country!

Cheer up, we still got it worse than you in NY. And I'll still take NY over NJ and California, and there may be others. And CT is still way better than NY with CCW's.
Actually doesn't sound too cheerful, does it...?
 
Soooo..you're admitting to preaching to the choir this whole time? Bravo! You sure helped the 2A by wasting your time on those who already vote the same way as you!

Umm.....yeah, that's right, everyone already agrees with me on every gun and/or 2nd Amendment issue. Good grief. If that were true, you wouldn't be whining every time I deign to post about, well, gun and/or 2nd Amendment issues.

As far as "wasting" my time "on those who already vote the same way" as I do, your memory is worse than your inability to put forth a cogent argument. Does "I will not vote for Romney" ring a bell?

Mr. LaPierre had a namepate, chair and floortime in front of the UN...did you? He spoke to them in a UN session, with his voice, therefore the NRA, which he represents, had a voice in the UN. But go ahead, keep preaching to the choir. Doing nothing seems to suit you fine.

Umm...."floortime in front of the UN?" More like chair-time in a coat-closet in the UN building somewhere. Pfft. You really ought to study up on what NGOs mean to the power-brokers at the UN. Absolutely nothing is the correct answer, and the proof of that is that the small arms treaty passed just a week or so ago and LaPierre's own government voted for it. He's got exactly the same "voice" at the UN that he has in America. No one in power cares what he says at all.

I may not should have taken offense in your eyes, but I think a lot would agree that you have a very condescending way of correcting people when they don't explain as thoroughly as you might would have.

Condescending? Good grief man, I couldn't have been less personal or matter-of-fact in commenting on your comment. If what I said was thought by you to be condescending or otherwise insulting, you are just looking for something to get offended over. Like I said, buck up there hotrod.

My point was that the NRA will use their attorneys sometimes if a member gets caught up in a legal issue that they believe has "unconstitutional" written all over it.

And my counter-point was that I don't know if that ever happens, but taking individual cases to court is not their mission. They're a lobby organization, not a legal aid .org. What's wrong with pointing that out?

As for not knowing how "SCOTUS" works, I've spent the last 2 semesters studying the entire US court systems, so I know more about it than I care to. Quite frankly I think people just like saying SCOTUS and POTUS.

So now you've got a problem with me abbreviating "SCOTUS" instead of typing out "the Supreme Court" every time I refer to it? Like I said, you're just looking for something to whine about.

And you "know more than you care to" about how the courts work that can snatch your rights away from you with the stroke of a pen? That is a stunning admission. You really shouldn't be discussing constitutional issues anymore. You might learn more than you care to from the highly knowledgeable folks on this forum.

Blues

Lol blues you do make some good points on here but everyone of your posts reads like a law school text book. I've never seen so many long winded posts in my life.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,527
Messages
610,761
Members
74,965
Latest member
Roosince1911
Back
Top