The Untold History of the NRA

[birddog]

Well, since the article was quoting the NRA officials from published NRA articles at the time( as Ben has posted previously) then yes, I believe it is accurate.

Did you read the minutes from the meetings with .gov officials?

If ben posted them I must have missed it.

 

[birddog]

A simple yes or no would be a good enough answer, no need to explain anything.

RR, in hindsite my response looks like a piss ant wrote it. My apologies if you were offended, that wasn't my intention.

 

[Hoji]

Did you read the minutes from the meetings with .gov officials?

If ben posted them I must have missed it.

 

[V-Tach]

That is why change is needed..............we all........are working to effect that change. Let's not denigrate each others efforts with a moralistic judgement (If you don't agree with me you are wrong).......or comparative judgement (that's not what I would do)

We are on this ship together and should look for ways to that we can join hands to keep the ship upright and on a steady course...anything less plays into the hands of those we all oppose........

jmho...

 

[Dawico]

LTC West isn't giving up on the NRA and neither am I. Donating? Nope, not a dime till things change in a drastic way......

Change will come......it will be painful and the NRA may or may not survive....but I will stay the course for now...........

I need not justify or explain my position

.

 

[Maverick44]

I harbor no hate for the NRA, maybe for it's board members, but not the organization itself. There are serious issues that have gone on for far too long, and are absolutely unforgivable such as the mismanagement of money and the meaningless compromises the NRA keeps making that gains us NOTHING but more gun laws.

The leadership of the NRA due to their actions, their incompetence, and their lack of commitment for defending the 2nd Amendment against EVERY threat has done more to harm our rights in recent years than the liberals have. The image of the NRA has been forever tarnished and even a full restructuring will not fully remove that ugly stain. This thread and that article are showing us just how long a stain like this can last.

Those who refuse to see these issues and the damage that the leadership has done are just as much a part of the problem as LaPierre and his ilk. Those who attack those who bring forward valid complaints with undeniable evidence do so from a position of ignorance and of fear. Ignorance of the reality of the situation, and fear that the organization they have supported for years is going to fail.

Honest criticism is not hatred or harmful. It is meant to spur change, positive change. Change that will save the NRA from itself and will keep us united as freedom loving Americans. Ignoring the reality of the situation, denying the NRA's shortcomings, and attempting to silence those who choose to not ignore these issues does NOTHING but prevent that positive change from happening. In the long term, you are causing more harm to the NRA simply because you can't handle criticism when it is due. Again, we must stand united and fight against the corruption and the mismanagement that is strangling the life out of the NRA. It is our organization to keep, or to lose.

We have two choices. Fix the NRA and remove the Board of Directors that are leading it astray, or watch it slowly die. There is no third option. If these issues are not dealt with immediately, the NRA will die, or will at least lose so much power that it might as well be dead. I do not wish to see that happen, but I cannot in good faith give financial support to an organization who cannot competently handle money and that has become corrupt to it's very core.

I have little faith that any money I was to donate to the NRA at this point would go towards defending the 2nd Amendment. I am not giving up on the NRA, but I am refusing to put more money in the pockets of the corrupted. I look forward to the day that LaPierre, Cotton, and their ilk are gone and the NRA is defending the 2nd Amendment without compromise. I will happily donate at that point.

 

[RoadRunner]

I harbor no hate for the NRA, maybe for it's board members, but not the organization itself. There are serious issues that have gone on for far too long, and are absolutely unforgivable such as the mismanagement of money and the meaningless compromises the NRA keeps making that gains us NOTHING but more gun laws.

The leadership of the NRA due to their actions, their incompetence, and their lack of commitment for defending the 2nd Amendment against EVERY threat has done more to harm our rights in recent years than the liberals have. The image of the NRA has been forever tarnished and even a full restructuring will not fully remove that ugly stain. This thread and that article are showing us just how long a stain like this can last.

Those who refuse to see these issues and the damage that the leadership has done are just as much a part of the problem as LaPierre and his ilk. Those who attack those who bring forward valid complaints with undeniable evidence do so from a position of ignorance and of fear. Ignorance of the reality of the situation, and fear that the organization they have supported for years is going to fail.

Honest criticism is not hatred or harmful. It is meant to spur change, positive change. Change that will save the NRA from itself and will keep us united as freedom loving Americans. Ignoring the reality of the situation, denying the NRA's shortcomings, and attempting to silence those who choose to not ignore these issues does NOTHING but prevent that positive change from happening. In the long term, you are causing more harm to the NRA simply because you can't handle criticism when it is due. Again, we must stand united and fight against the corruption and the mismanagement that is strangling the life out of the NRA. It is our organization to keep, or to lose.

We have two choices. Fix the NRA and remove the Board of Directors that are leading it astray, or watch it slowly die. There is no third option. If these issues are not dealt with immediately, the NRA will die, or will at least lose so much power that it might as well be dead. I do not wish to see that happen, but I cannot in good faith give financial support to an organization who cannot competently handle money and that has become corrupt to it's very core.

I have little faith that any money I was to donate to the NRA at this point would go towards defending the 2nd Amendment. I am not giving up on the NRA, but I am refusing to put more money in the pockets of the corrupted. I look forward to the day that LaPierre, Cotton, and their ilk are gone and the NRA is defending the 2nd Amendment without compromise. I will happily donate at that point.

Very well said. I agree 100%.

 

[gshayd]

“Shall not be infringed“ Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Research weapons available to, and discussed by, the Founding Fathers and you may realize that they meant everything from muskets, to “high capacity” firearms and cannons. They said any arms available to the government belong the people.

Are bump stocks a waste of ammunition? Sure, potentially. But who is to say what is a waste.

A video I watched recently mentioned how rights come with responsibilities. I have a right to ALL means of defense. I should be allowed to have a tank should I see the need to one and have the ability to buy one. If I go on a rampage and kill people, than there are other other laws I have obviously broken that will rightfully punish me.

The Second Amendment is no different than the First, or others. With great freedom and liberty comes great responsibility.

it didn't say your right to buy bump stocks shall not be infringed. I don't have to do any research to understand the Second Amendment. One word gives me all the information I need. They didn't say rifle, they didn't say pistols. They used the term Arms. Arms is a military term. Which means that the founding fathers intended citizens to be able to bear arms equivalent with what the military had. That meant that as arms technology advanced so should the right to bear arms advance with it. How many bump stocks does the military own? Why should I settle for a bump stock? That s just a pacifier the Govt threw folks so they wouldn't be whiney about not being able to own a full auto rifle. I think we have much better things to expend our energies on that a piece of plastic meant to appease us.

As far as the NRA I think the folks standing outside throwing rocks need to lead, follow or get the hell out of the way so those of us that want to fix the problem can do so. Join the organization that makes you happy if the NRA doesn't.

 

[Big Green]

it didn't say your right to buy bump stocks shall not be infringed. I don't have to do any research to understand the Second Amendment. One word gives me all the information I need. They didn't say rifle, they didn't say pistols. They used the term Arms. Arms is a military term. Which means that the founding fathers intended citizens to be able to bear arms equivalent with what the military had. That meant that as arms technology advanced so should the right to bear arms advance with it. How many bump stocks does the military own? Why should I settle for a bump stock?

I’m pretty sure I said the exact same thing you did...

 

[TX OMFS]

it didn't say your right to buy bump stocks shall not be infringed. I don't have to do any research to understand the Second Amendment. One word gives me all the information I need. They didn't say rifle, they didn't say pistols. They used the term Arms. Arms is a military term. Which means that the founding fathers intended citizens to be able to bear arms equivalent with what the military had. That meant that as arms technology advanced so should the right to bear arms advance with it. How many bump stocks does the military own? Why should I settle for a bump stock?

 

[birddog]

Posts like this make me want to call the NRA and cancel my Lifetime membership.

Posts like this make me wish I'd wake up from this horrible, terrifying nightmare where everything that was once sacred and dear to me died in my arms, and powerless to stop it

The difficult part is waking up and seeing the world we now live in as alien, and the realization it's no dream. It's reality.

 

[birddog]

Yes, I am a Second Amendment Person. Folks can flame away at me if they wish after several decades of dealing with the military I have some pretty thick skin. I can still go down to the gun store and buy firearms. Missed the part about bump stocks in the Second Amendment. The NRA Drama will be rectified as the cash flow is cut by big donors and all the smaller donors who want no more drama. Are you sure God said it and not the devil whispering in your ear?

 

[birddog]

It’s irrelevant whether you thought that bump-stocks were a waste of money and ammunition. The fact is that there were thousands of people who didn’t think they were a waste of money and ammunition and that they executive branch forced citizens that legally owned those devices to surrender or destroy said private property without compensation or become felons. Not to mention that the President did an end runaround Congress to re-define what a machine gun was. Now he’s planning to go after silencers too.

People’s understanding of this is really shallow. How can we get the government to respect the citizens right to exercise the 2nd Amendment when we can’t get an alleged pro 2A president to respect gun owners 5th Amendment Rights? The NRA is just as complicit and the bad thing is is that they are using members money to do it.

Your inability to grasp the meaning of "constructive intent" is one reason we keep hearing this shit. we're seen as selfish and devious nreakers of law who look for ways around it.

If a 10 Peice Chicken McNugget with hot honey mustard would cause an A4 to fire FA, do you expect to be able to excersise that right despite the fact that neither a semi AR or a chick mcnugget is considered a FA weapon

If a DQ sunday could be turned into a 10,000,000 Megaton nuke by mixing one cup of finely ground kitkats, two june bugs, and three strands of great-great-great grandmaws pubic hair, would you whine about that shit too?

If it sounds rediculous, its not nearly as rediculous as your inabilty to comprehend the phrase {constructive intent)


Yes, I know it sounds absurde. Buti ts no more absurde than the ongoing whining "po po be stolenzbump stok, it be stolz!! da whity devil did it, he a po po too! If a

If you want to champion a valid right that's useful and in need, petition Trojan Co. to bring back the Super Thick Bulbous Blaster Monster-Mandingo super sized xxxxxxxxLg from their Punish Dat Putty Good product line. Thats a hell of a lot more useful to me than a damn rinky dink buttstock.

Life was good until kanye and hat fat started gettin paid phat bank. But dayum girl, you had togo and roll with "bump stock"? If that aint some gay ass shit I'm blind. Aint no real man gonna get caught wit it. If youd taken my advice and called it a "bump dat booty baby, back up dat ass" like I said, you'd be rollin phat like a G.

 

[birddog]

Well they would be wrong. I am a firm believer against infringement on gun ownership and the accessories that go with them.

Greek Spartansknew what they were doing after a baby was born.. It'd sho fix a hella lotta probs here, fo damn sure.

 

[Hoji]

Your inability to grasp the meaning of "constructive intent" is one reason we keep hearing this shit. we're seen as selfish and devious nreakers of law who look for ways around it.

If a 10 Peice Chicken McNugget with hot honey mustard would cause an A4 to fire FA, do you expect to be able to excersise that right despite the fact that neither a semi AR or a chick mcnugget is considered a FA weapon

If a DQ sunday could be turned into a 10,000,000 Megaton nuke by mixing one cup of finely ground kitkats, two june bugs, and three strands of great-great-great grandmaws pubic hair, would you whine about that shit too?

If it sounds rediculous, its not nearly as rediculous as your inabilty to comprehend the phrase {constructive intent)


Yes, I know it sounds absurde. Buti ts no more absurde than the ongoing whining "po po be stolenzbump stok, it be stolz!! da whity devil did it, he a po po too! If a

If you want to champion a valid right that's useful and in need, petition Trojan Co. to bring back the Super Thick Bulbous Blaster Monster-Mandingo super sized xxxxxxxxLg from their Punish Dat Putty Good product line. Thats a hell of a lot more useful to me than a damn rinky dink buttstock.

Life was good until kanye and hat fat started gettin paid phat bank. But dayum girl, you had togo and roll with "bump stock"? If that aint some gay ass shit I'm blind. Aint no real man gonna get caught wit it. If youd taken my advice and called it a "bump dat booty baby, back up dat ass" like I said, you'd be rollin phat like a G.

Shall not be infringed. Not “may not be infringed unless constructive intent is arbitrarily determined by a group of circus clowns that hate the Constitution and want to see you ruled rather than governed”

 

[Low_Speed]

Your inability to grasp the meaning of "constructive intent" is one reason we keep hearing this shit. we're seen as selfish and devious nreakers of law who look for ways around it.

If a 10 Peice Chicken McNugget with hot honey mustard would cause an A4 to fire FA, do you expect to be able to excersise that right despite the fact that neither a semi AR or a chick mcnugget is considered a FA weapon

If a DQ sunday could be turned into a 10,000,000 Megaton nuke by mixing one cup of finely ground kitkats, two june bugs, and three strands of great-great-great grandmaws pubic hair, would you whine about that shit too?

If it sounds rediculous, its not nearly as rediculous as your inabilty to comprehend the phrase {constructive intent)


Yes, I know it sounds absurde. Buti ts no more absurde than the ongoing whining "po po be stolenzbump stok, it be stolz!! da whity devil did it, he a po po too! If a

If you want to champion a valid right that's useful and in need, petition Trojan Co. to bring back the Super Thick Bulbous Blaster Monster-Mandingo super sized xxxxxxxxLg from their Punish Dat Putty Good product line. Thats a hell of a lot more useful to me than a damn rinky dink buttstock.

Life was good until kanye and hat fat started gettin paid phat bank. But dayum girl, you had togo and roll with "bump stock"? If that aint some gay ass shit I'm blind. Aint no real man gonna get caught wit it. If youd taken my advice and called it a "bump dat booty baby, back up dat ass" like I said, you'd be rollin phat like a G.

Most of your post doesn’t deserve a response but as far as your constructive intent comment. I grasp the meaning. I just don’t believe that it applies to anything that I said. The rest of your comment as much meaning as a cow fart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Low_Speed]

Shall not be infringed. Not “may not be infringed unless constructive intent is arbitrarily determined by a group of circus clowns that hate the Constitution and want to see you ruled rather than governed”

^ What he said!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[birddog]

Shall not be infringed. Not “may not be infringed unless constructive intent is arbitrarily determined by a group of circus clowns that hate the Constitution and want to see you ruled rather than governed”

Most of your post doesn’t deserve a response but as far as your constructive intent comment. I grasp the meaning. I just don’t believe that it applies to anything that I said. The rest of your comment as much meaning as a cow fart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point, different circuits as well as Supreme Court judges have always struggled with differing interpretations of statutory language e the shift from the use of common law terminology to the widespread acceptance of attemp repeated attemps to resolve the matter of differences in intepretation and focusing instead on plain language and legislative intent. semantics vs legislative intent. over the meaning of statutory languGW.

 

[Bithabus]

Your inability to grasp the meaning of "constructive intent" is one reason we keep hearing this shit.

A bumpstock does not change a SA rifle to FA. That's the only issue.

 

[45tex]

If after 8 pages of this thread, a member still believes that a bump-stock can make AR15's into a full auto machine guns. I am sorry but that person would be a moron. as in so stupid that he/she is unable to learn even simple concepts.
I believe Trump and his administration lied and made said lie fly in order to trample a portion of the Constitution. This is scary to me.
Once again I never had or wanted a bump-stock. I believe however that if you, including a moron that thinks it makes a gun fully auto, wants one you should have one. And the handicapped shooter for which the stock was invented has been doubly wronged.
OK what was this thread about?