Once more, with feeling: The R doesn’t stand for Republican
First, I disagree with NRA’s compromise here. But the fact is, NRA is a single issue organization. Interesting to me that the criteria for exemption don’t really exempt any gun control groups. I guess any gun control ad would have to include a “paid for by the Joyce Foundation” message.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:58 am
It seems to me the Dimocrats are desperate to get some sort of muzzle on corporate speech in this election cycle. McCain Feingold was that muzzle until SCOTUS struck it down in the Citizens United decision.
Now the D’s are trying to overrule the Nine. Historically, that has not worked very well. But getting a law in place and enforcing it until it is declared as unconstitutional as McCain Feingold would be a big step in retaining a Congressional majority.
Personally, I will not vote for any CongressCreature who votes for that abortion.
Stranger
June 15th, 2010 at 11:37 am
Look, I like guns, too, but the DISCLOSE Act is a serious threat to all advocacy, including Second Amendment advocacy, and NRA knew exactly how much harm it was doing to this country. It is absolutely beyond belief that the NRA jumped on board in exchange for a promise from Congress to regulate THEIR COMPETITION out of existence.
Because really, this is NRA’s attempt to get a monopoly on gun rights advocacy. They want to get rid of those pesky upstarts that keep making them look bad by being more effective. It’s no coincidence NRA demanded that to be exempt, an organization (1) would have to have been in existence more than 10 years, (2) had members in all 50 states, and (3) had more than 1 million members.
Single issue or not, even if you want to see gun rights defended, handing the NRA a monopoly on all political speech on your behalf is not a long term prescription for more freedom.
June 15th, 2010 at 11:41 am
Sorry to rant, but I will say this in addition. I am a middle aged guy who has been a lifetime member of the NRA, until last night. I’ve canceled my membership. I hate to sound like some loud mouth, and I certainly don’t engage in “boycotts,” but I will never give the NRA another penny. The NRA’s time has passed, my funds will go to the alternatives, who have been more effective than the NRA for the past 10 years, anyway.
June 15th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
“The alternatives”??? Who are they? GOA? JPFO?
I was with 80,000 people at the NRA convention in Charlotte this year, but I missed the Gun Owners of America convention and the Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership convention. Weren’t they both held in the 25 person conference room at the Denny’s Restaurant off Route 29?
There is no other viable alternative on pro-gun legislation than the NRA.
The NRA is a gun rights organization, period. They look out for themselves and their members on the gun issue. They aren’t pro-life or pro-business or any other conservative platform organization. That’s why they endorse pro-gun Democrats, too. We DO NOT assume they are a conservative political organization on other issues. As a member of the NRA I have no problem with what they did for themselves. As a Conservative, I would have liked to have seen them oppose this, but do not fault them for what they did in getting an exemption.
I just signed up my Dad for a year of NRA membership, so that will offset your loss. Go start a third political party while you’re at it and see how far you get.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
“The NRA is a gun rights organization, period.”
Then I guess we can agree that the NRA is *not* a freedom oriented organization. It’s simply not their issue. Just gun rights. Heck, they’re not even ‘gun rights’, just ‘pro-gun’ without the “rights” part.
Enforce existing (gun) laws. Keep referring to the nonsensical “Right to Carry Permit” in their literature. Keep endorsing tyrants like Dingy Harry.
I’m not saying they do no good, but what they’ve done here is absolutely despicable.
Being purely “single issue” makes zero sense, even for a large lobbying organization like the NRA. When you are, you have blinders on to the unintended consequences of your compromises.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Ummm…the NRA is not a “gun rights organization period”, it is also a training organization which was the only reason I joined with a life membership. I became a certified trainer to be able to train friends and family in pistol shooting in the hopes that some of them would continue on and get ccw permits and get into shooting. There is more than one way to subvert the gun controllers and big government controllers…getting more people to be actively pro gun is one.
All that said, someone else pointed out the similarity to Quisling. Being second amendment oriented doesn’t mean they shouldn’t paint with a broad brush when something like a first amendment threat comes up. If the bill was a threat to the NRA then it was a threat to everyone and getting their own special clause was just wrong.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
Hey, I was pro-NRA, too, until I saw this move. You say they’re big? Fine. They’re big, and they do jump into the pro-Second Amendment suits, once it’s clear the plaintiffs will win.
You say there are no alternatives? Yes, there are. You can give to any number of Second Amendment groups that don’t have the name recognition the NRA does. Most of them are state groups, and they brought you “shall issue” concealed carry. It wasn’t the “don’t scare the housewives” crowd at the NRA.
The part no one is getting here, is that this is NRA’s bid to make sure there will NEVER be any alternatives to the NRA for Second Amendment advocacy. Not “hey, the NRA is the best game in town and no one can compete,” but rather, the government will stifle political speech enough to make sure no one ever steals the NRA’s thunder, again.
I’m not commenting on how blatantly unconstitutional this legislation will be. Like you said, they’re a “single issue organization, and I don’t really care what they have to say on abortion or the tax code. I’m only outraged by the unbelievable gall the NRA has in trying to get the government to outlaw the political speech of its competition.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
No matter, I’m sure the GOA — with their incredible clout and influence on Capitol Hill — will be able to stop this bill without breaking a sweat.
Who needs the NRA anyway? Now, on to that NFA repeal bill the GOA will surely be able to get passed this session….