BluesStringer
Les Brers
Aside from the personality conflicts present in this thread, when you scrutinize the real topic, the crux of the arguments for or against joining, the best-documented, most well-reasoned choice is clearly not to throw one's money away on a .org that admits itself that it has supported gun control since its inception. There are many links documenting the betrayals of the N R A in the thread, and very few, if any, documenting their successes or living up to being a true 2nd Amendment rights organization that actually fights for its members.
My question is, with the mountain of evidence present in this thread, why would anyone leave to chance that the N R A will now suddenly become something it has never been, a 2nd Amendment protector and preservation organization?
Blues
dcselby1
Denny
Agreed, Rider. They have a lot more clout, I'm sure, then my individual letters and e-mail. If nothing else, buy a life membership and unsubscribe from the e-mails and letters and forget about it.
gejoslin
Illegitimi non carborundu
As y'all can see from my signature I belong to 3 org's. I want to get as much help as I can when it comes to people helping us keep our rights!
But I do more than give my money. I also email, write and call those congress critters. Talk to as many people I can to help them understand the issues that we're
facing today. That will impact the laws and rights that will live with for a long time.
But we have local loosely organized groups that try to get the word out and are just a lot of fun to hang out with!
But I do more than give my money. I also email, write and call those congress critters. Talk to as many people I can to help them understand the issues that we're
facing today. That will impact the laws and rights that will live with for a long time.
But we have local loosely organized groups that try to get the word out and are just a lot of fun to hang out with!
wolf_fire
New member
i spent about 5 seconds researching your question about evidence that the NRA is working for us.
This is the first thing that came across my computer:
Link Removed
The NRA funded the fight in the Supreme Court that ruled the Illinois ban on carrying unconstitutional.
Also, I didn't need to search for this, but the NRA-ILA was instrumental in getting the Firearms Owners Protection Act in 1986 passed. I believe they worked for almost 10 years to get that through.
That's two major victories from a 5 second search and from the top of my head. If anyone wants to dig deeper, and look for more, I'm sure other evidences are out there. But Blues, to say the NRA doesn't fight for our gun rights just because no one has presented evidence to you on this particular forum is absurd.
This is the first thing that came across my computer:
Link Removed
The NRA funded the fight in the Supreme Court that ruled the Illinois ban on carrying unconstitutional.
Also, I didn't need to search for this, but the NRA-ILA was instrumental in getting the Firearms Owners Protection Act in 1986 passed. I believe they worked for almost 10 years to get that through.
That's two major victories from a 5 second search and from the top of my head. If anyone wants to dig deeper, and look for more, I'm sure other evidences are out there. But Blues, to say the NRA doesn't fight for our gun rights just because no one has presented evidence to you on this particular forum is absurd.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
And it shows.
Not N R A's "victory," but thanks for playing. (Look here for documentation of who has valid claim to that victory.)
If you're referring to the same link I just addressed, wrong again. There were actually two cases decided in the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, and N R A only contributed an unspecified amount of donations to one (out of five) of the plaintiffs. Neither case has made it to the Supreme Court yet though, and may well never make it there. Read the link above where it says "Look here" for the details. It may take a few more than five seconds to read it though, so get comfy. (It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to read though.)
Ugh....So you're one of those who think that imposing heavy restrictions and outright bans on full-autos being owned by law abiding citizens is a legitimate authority of the federal government? You think that POS legislation protects your 2nd Amendment rights? Good grief. Thanks for making my point for me. You're right. The N R A did work hard on that gun control legislation. Un-freakin'-believable.
To claim what you've presented here is evidence of the N R A's fealty to the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment is absurd. Grotesquely absurd in fact, because you apparently support the passage of FOPA and the Hughes Amendment.
I'll bet you think Romney was a staunch pro-gun defender of 2nd Amendment rights too, huh?
To the rest of the N R A members, here's another reason right here why I would never associate myself with your gun control organization. Some of your members are so damned ignorant that I feel my IQ lowering just cracking open these sycophant threads.
Blues
gejoslin
Illegitimi non carborundu
Blues, how's it going?
I don't think everyone is trying to say your wrong or the NRA is perfect. (well some do) But we're all human here and we'll make mistakes. Seeing as organizations are run by humans their going to make mistakes. Now I'm not saying the NRA hasn't screw things up, because we can all see they have. They don't do as much as we wish they would or could. But the other org's don't either. No one group or individual is going to fight and win our battle to keep our 2A right uninfringed. That's going to take all of us and all pro 2A supporters. It's going to take us all together to accomplish this battle we're in!
I really enjoy reading your posts. Your very enlighten and by reading what you write it has broaden my scope of knowledge.
Thanks, Jerry
I don't think everyone is trying to say your wrong or the NRA is perfect. (well some do) But we're all human here and we'll make mistakes. Seeing as organizations are run by humans their going to make mistakes. Now I'm not saying the NRA hasn't screw things up, because we can all see they have. They don't do as much as we wish they would or could. But the other org's don't either. No one group or individual is going to fight and win our battle to keep our 2A right uninfringed. That's going to take all of us and all pro 2A supporters. It's going to take us all together to accomplish this battle we're in!
I really enjoy reading your posts. Your very enlighten and by reading what you write it has broaden my scope of knowledge.
Thanks, Jerry
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Pretty good. Thanks for asking. And you?
Well, if this is in reply to my last post, clearly wolf_fire was saying I am wrong, and since I'm not, I replied appropriately.
If you're implying that I feel "attacked" or otherwise persecuted because some don't agree with me, nothing could be further from the truth. I don't react well to outright ignorance though, especially when it's offered in a way that implies that I'm the ignorant party, and claiming that the N R A's support for FOPA '86 falls on the plus-side of their supposed 2nd Amendment "support" is only eclipsed as the most ignorant thing I've read here by tricolordad's claim that the N R A has a "voice" at the UN.
Otherwise, I'm alright with simply conversing about the pros and cons of the N R A, but really, it seems like I'm the only one who remembers what the main question of this thread is, which I answered again with the last paragraph of my last post. (Why would anyone not be a member of the N R A is the question I'm referring to.)
Jerry, it's one thing to support a .org that is simply ineffective at promoting/protecting a legitimate interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, but consistently argues on behalf of that legitimate interpretation, and quite another to support one that has consistently worked against a legitimate interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. I agree with what you put in bold above, it definitely is going to take us all together to restore some semblance of legitimacy to the 2nd Amendment. That's my main problem though. The N R A has consistently, and even self-admittedly, worked for gun control. How is supporting them putting those of us who abhor gun control in any kind of condition of working all together?
And Jerry, while I appreciate the well-intentioned compliment that you think I'm "enlightened," I don't accept it as being true on this subject. I just read. Voraciously. Nothing I say here is the result of it just popping into my head. I have to do hours upon hours of reading to get at the truth of any subject that interests me. My rights interest me more than almost any other worldly subject, and knowing the truth of their source, the truth of the intent of the Bill of Rights and Constitution, and the truth of who supports them of the people and organizations who ask me for money and/or time to join them in protecting them, are all extremely important things for me to know. But I work my a$$ off getting to where I know the intricacies of such well-hidden truths. I'm really not trying to nit-pick, but the word "enlightened" seems to imply knowledge that is engrained or inherent, and that simply isn't the case with me. If this high-school drop-out can uncover the truth with a bit of due diligence, anyone else can too, and as far as I'm concerned, they should. But so many get so defensive and literally intransigent when truths are presented to them, that they then lash out at those telling them the truth, that does indeed get frustrating at times. If I'm "enlightened" about anything, it does come very natural to me to seek truth, recognize it as such when it's presented to me, and incorporate it within my thought-processes going forward. I don't get it at all when truth is rejected simply because one wishes it wasn't the truth. Truth just is. Doesn't change it at all to be defensive or rejecting of it, it's still truth.
Blues
One78Shovel
New member
We are only as strong as our weakest link.
Interesting enough the left likes to paint the picture that our 2A rights would have been no less under attack with Romney as POTUS.
Along those same lines is where exactly do NRA detractors think their 2A rights would be today if the NRA was to have never been? If one thinks we would be better off today well, that takes absurdness to another level beyond any comment in this thread to date.
Sometimes one takes a @ss whooping so as to live to fight another day. Political capital is not unlimited but the NRA is the only 2A group that carries the clout to get there if anyone can.
With that said, the NRA does not appeal to the majority of gun owners and for that, NRA detractors are just 'preaching to the choir' on this board and others when pointing out the faults of the NRA. Why then not have this mass majority come up with a better idea? I think I know that answer.............
-178S
Interesting enough the left likes to paint the picture that our 2A rights would have been no less under attack with Romney as POTUS.
Along those same lines is where exactly do NRA detractors think their 2A rights would be today if the NRA was to have never been? If one thinks we would be better off today well, that takes absurdness to another level beyond any comment in this thread to date.
Sometimes one takes a @ss whooping so as to live to fight another day. Political capital is not unlimited but the NRA is the only 2A group that carries the clout to get there if anyone can.
With that said, the NRA does not appeal to the majority of gun owners and for that, NRA detractors are just 'preaching to the choir' on this board and others when pointing out the faults of the NRA. Why then not have this mass majority come up with a better idea? I think I know that answer.............
-178S
BluesStringer
Les Brers
You call us "N R A detractors" while I consider myself to be a member of a truth squad. You don't like the truth, you can't handle the truth, so you come up with new and exciting ways to put the truth in a negative light. And you're neither creative or particularly good at it.
I wish you had the stones to actually say outright what that last line is intended to imply, but you don't so nevermind. Keep yourself shielded in that N R A-built bunker where the only ordinance being used against you is the truth, and you and 4 million of your self-deceived cohorts will stay safe from having to face the fire.
Do you carry a gun out there in CA? No? And you have the gall to imply cowardice or being anti-gun or somehow otherwise not what actual honest and informed truth-tellers claim to be on this board? And if you are one of the privileged few who are *allowed* to carry, how could you live with yourself knowing how many of your fellow citizens in the state you're supposedly a real 2nd Amendment soldier in can't enjoy the same "rights" that you get to take for granted?
Sell your blatant hypocrisy and thinly-veiled insults somewhere else.
Blues
I believe that what we need right now, more than anything else, is one organization whose leaders have the gonads to go full force after every law that infringes on the 2d Amendment, and the leaders in Washington to back them up.
And when I say every law, I mean every law... Federal, State, County, and City. According to our inalienable, inherent, God-given rights in particular, and as protected by the Constitution of The United States, every law that regulates in any way, the right to keep and bear arms, is by fact no law at all.
Yet I realize that what we need, and what we have are two different things... because until an organization fulfills that requirement, and succeeds, we're still going to be faced with the bs that we're facing right now in this country. Approaching dictatorship and/or anarchy...
I'm in agreement with Blues about the N-R-A. It isn't what it is purported to be.
And when I say every law, I mean every law... Federal, State, County, and City. According to our inalienable, inherent, God-given rights in particular, and as protected by the Constitution of The United States, every law that regulates in any way, the right to keep and bear arms, is by fact no law at all.
Yet I realize that what we need, and what we have are two different things... because until an organization fulfills that requirement, and succeeds, we're still going to be faced with the bs that we're facing right now in this country. Approaching dictatorship and/or anarchy...
I'm in agreement with Blues about the N-R-A. It isn't what it is purported to be.
2
2Awarrior
Guest
Yep. I probably won't live to see such an organization, but I still dream about it. I like to imagine the clout that 80 million gun owners would carry. 80 million united gun owners.
We're all here, we all want our rights and just essentially to be left alone, yet we're all floating around in separate boats. And one of the biggest boats, I fear, is named the "S.S. Complacency".
One78Shovel
New member
:lol:
Talking about hypocrisy
That was a very poor effort there Blues- You can do better when you try.
So worried about California are you? Like California, Alabama by law is 'May Issue' CCW . If you carry, sounds like you may be one of the 'privileged' Alabamians.
Of course, Alabama Sheriffs often are 'Shall Issue' but it still is subjective. No, Alabama is no California for sure. However, they are still 'may' issue. So how did HB582 work for you guys down there? Good thing the NRA is looking out for you folks in Bamer as they support SB 286, sponsored by state Senators Scott Beason (R-17) and Roger Bedford (D-6), seeks to restore and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners in Alabama
http://www.nraila.org/legislation/s...e-senate-floor-next-week.aspx?s=&st=10465&ps=
-178S
One78Shovel
New member
Afraid you will not see that 'one organization' until all of those in our country from the NRA, SAF etc. types to the folks of rural America unite in war. Yes, that is what it will take at this point. Countries have gone to war for far less reasons. Everyone has a melt down point-its human nature. Not sure what the trigger mechanism will be but it will come to fruition.
The 2A community is ripe for a leader. When one comes, we will know it. What would be the impact if such a leader was to empower all us to abide by our inherent human right and not by laws on paper that degrade, then turn around and 'may' restore said right?
If everyone ignored the law would it be sent the showers to bask with Georgia's sodomy laws?
-178S
2
2Awarrior
Guest
I'm surprised to hear Alabama is "may issue". (no, I can't substantiate why I assumed it was "shall issue" - I just did)
Blues, how do they run it, though? By that I mean, in Connecticut, for instance, it's technically "may issue", but they run it as "shall". There's that unspoken but understood promise at the end of the process that says "If you let us break your chops and jump through all the hoops, we WILL issue you a CCW." Is that 'Bama's method?
Blues, how do they run it, though? By that I mean, in Connecticut, for instance, it's technically "may issue", but they run it as "shall". There's that unspoken but understood promise at the end of the process that says "If you let us break your chops and jump through all the hoops, we WILL issue you a CCW." Is that 'Bama's method?
johnbergsing
New member
I'll jump in here. In my (Morgan) county in Alabama, it is simply a matter of filling out the application, your name gets run through the NICs, you pay your $20 annual fee and they print you a pistol license then and there. The entire process takes about 15 minutes.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
If you could name a single county in this state that systematically and nearly universally denies permission-slips, you might be able to actually raise a valid point in comparison to CA, but since you can't, likewise, you haven't.
Still, you miss my point entirely when I mentioned CA's routine and widespread usurpations of 2nd Amendment rights. I oppose all permission-slip laws, whether shall or may issue, and have done everything within my power to relieve Alabama of any vestige of her Code's usurpative assault on all of her citizens' rights, regardless of the fact that I've had and maintained without difficulty a permission-slip since about a month or two after moving here from CA 21 years ago. I don't know a single citizen here who has ever been denied a permission-slip either, but if I did, I would go to the mat for them to get that Sheriff's decision reversed. How is that hypocrisy on my part?
Meanwhile, you sit and b!tch and moan about people who simply don't see the N R A as necessary or particularly effective at helping us maintain or strengthen our liberties. Show us a picture of you in Sacramento fighting for your, or others', rights. Show us posts that chronicle your many travels as a rights-defending Patriot. Show us one single thing besides you insultingly implying that non-N R A-members and/or people who refused to vote for the gun-grabbing, baby-killing, gay-marriage-dictating, bailout-supporting useful idiot Romney are "the left" or "N R A detractors" are somehow responsible for the fix this country is in as regards gun rights. Utterly brainless twaddle.
I've been politically active in this state for a long damned time, and not once has the N R A ever done anything but pay lip-service to any Alabama efforts by gun-owners to strengthen our 2A rights. Grass roots efforts are every bit as legitimate as joining organizations, and to imply that those who choose that path are "on the left" or supporters of gun control and/or Obama is the worst kind of divisive blather. I would say grass roots orgs are more legitimate than any .orgs in fact, because when some nitwit gets a wild hair up their butt in a grass roots org to deviate from the org's stated goals and mission, they can easily be culled from the herd and sent down the road. If you N R A members did that with your .org's high echelon leaders, you'd never hear a single complaint from me. But instead of doing that, you complain about me legitimately complaining about their foolhardy support for gun control!
I have no idea what "HB582" is. I searched for it and found a few state-level bills with that name, but none of them were from Alabama, and none were about guns or gun control. Maybe you can find something to copy and paste about it without giving attribution and pretend you wrote it, and pretend you know what you're talking about?
Man! You are absolutely horrible at this! 286 does quite a few things, some good, some not so good, but one provision is exactly the kind of thing I would expect the N R A to support and is completely unacceptable, and that is the repeal of the state preemption law, making it "legal" for counties, cities and towns to be armed or disarmed by local statute (think: wet/dry counties).
There are some morons in this state who think that if their particular jurisdiction is "gun friendly," then their "rights" will be better-protected under 286, regardless of the fact that the town/city/county next door to them can outlaw the carrying of weapons altogether under the same law. This is exactly the hypocrisy I detest in the gun "community." It's just great as long as your "rights" are protected. Next county over be damned though.
I have no idea how the N R A's "support" for this bill has manifested itself, but whether financial, legal or just their standard ol' lip-service, I'd thank them to GTF out of Alabama and leave us to serve our own best interests. We've got enough problems with well-intentioned 286 supporters who are just innocently and honestly uninformed. We don't need a professional gun control .org feeding their ignorance!
"Good thing" indeed. As per usual, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
As did I assume the same for the first four or five years I lived here. As I said above, I've never known anyone to be denied a permit here. They're easy, cheap and nearly instantaneous to get. I found out the truth of the matter somewhere near or shortly after I first got online in '97. I've been heavily involved in the effort to change it ever since, which, unfortunately, the above-mentioned SB286 does do, but getting rid of the state preemption law is an unacceptable poison pill, so we'll have to go another round or five if/when that one gets shot down, which I'm almost positive it will.
I've lived in three counties since moving here. Had a permission-slip in all three. There's never been any kind of chops-bustin' or hoop-jumpin' at all. The only time I had to wait more than a couple or three minutes was the first application. I hadn't received my permanent driver's license yet, and they wouldn't accept the temporary for issuance of a permission-slip. I got the DL in the mail four days later and got my pistol permit that same afternoon.
The "process" for getting a pistol permit, such as it is, is either a warrant check or a standard NICS check. I'm not sure exactly what the Sheriff's receptionist is checking, but she does it while you're standing right there in front of her at the window, and it usually takes less than a minute. I spend more time signing the three copies and paying my $15 bucks (in this county - it used to only be $10 bucks in the first county I lived in) and waiting for the receptionist to separate the three copies and hand me my copy than waiting for the background "check" to complete.
That said, as easy and cheap as it is here in Alabama, I still oppose all permission-slip systems. A "right" protected by the federal Constitution should be interpreted, enforced and accepted as sacrosanct in every jurisdiction in the country, just like every other "right" was so-accepted up until recent years when 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th Amendment protections have started to catch up with the 2nd as being routinely violated with impunity by various levels of government.
But yeah, for all intents and purposes, this is a "shall issue" state, due in large part to the state preemption law that One78Shovel and the N R A supports denying us the protection of, neither of which surprises me in the least.
Blues
johnbergsing
New member
I couldn't agree more! I have written my reps but they are supporting it!
