Yeager - The NRA is NOT Anti-Gun

[worddoer]

[video=youtube;v8vFsyyWwzc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8vFsyyWwzc[/video]

I searched everything Yeager and did not find this posted, but I thought it would be good to discuss. That is assuming we can do it logically and calmly and not call each other names.

Here is the response I wrote to Mr. Yeager and my stance on the subject.

----------

Respectfully, I disagree. "They would have been banned, or they could have done something else." Something else is not the best option when that option empowers a un-elected and unaccountable bureaucrat to arbitrarily choose which rights we can and cannot exercise. If we are going to loose our freedom, it should at least be done through a vote of our elected officials who in a small way (through our election process) can be held accountable for their decisions. The very bureaucrats we empower today will be empowered in the future to remove even larger amounts of freedom when the administration changes to an anti gun administration. It may be tomorrow, or years from now, but it will happen. Giving power to bureaucrats instead of requiring our elected officials to decide will only bring about our downfall and is akin to opening Pandora's Box. Yes, something needed to be done, but the right something....and I do not think the NRA's actions were the right something.

----------

Because of the NRA actions, I am going to allow my membership to lapse this year. I do not feel comfortable with an organization that is willing to empower bureaucrats and bypass our elected officials and seemingly ignore the constitution. Even if it's for something I wanted/agreed with. If we are to survive as a nation, we must honor the rule of law instead of bypassing it every time things become difficult.....regardless what side you are on.

If we are to learn from history though, it seems to me that the NRA has created and supported as many destructive things as constructive things. The NRA supported the NFA '34; GCA '68; Hughes Amendment '86; Brady Act '93. I know that they have also stopped anti-gun legislation. I have seen it with my own eyes and I will not deny that. But it seems to me that, at best, the NRA has created as many bad things for gun owners as they have done good things in the last 100 years. To me, that means their bad cancels out their good and they have essentially been completely ineffective at protecting and securing our ability to practice our natural firearms rights in the last 100 years.

I joined the GOA in December and so far, I have been pleased with them. But time will tell if they will stay the course.

I know that others feel differently and I am OK with that. I hope that the NRA realizes what a mess they created and changes their ways.

Edited to add: For those who are staying with the NRA, more power to you! But please, please, please make sure you are doing everything in your power to change the NRA. We need it to support the constitution and honor our natural firearms rights instead of sacrificing some rights to protect some rights.....which is what they have done over the last 100 years.

 

[indiucky]

 

[Vigilant]

So you give up your membership and ask others to change the NRA, rather than become a Life member, and VOTE for change? Each election cycle has pretty much the life history of the board members running for re-election, and those trying to get on the board, align yourself with your candidates, and VOTE change into the organization rather than quit? As far as GOA, what heve they done so far that has pleased you?

 

[bwframe]

Meh, the rest of us will still carry you, just like we always do...

[video=youtube;PrnIVVWtAag]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrnIVVWtAag[/video]

 

[worddoer]

So you give up your membership and ask others to change the NRA, rather than become a Life member, and VOTE for change? Each election cycle has pretty much the life history of the board members running for re-election, and those trying to get on the board, align yourself with your candidates, and VOTE change into the organization rather than quit? As far as GOA, what heve they done so far that has pleased you?

Legitimate question.

I wrestled with what to do....walking away vs. digging in and attempting change. For me, it comes down to 3 things.....

1. I don't want to give money to an organization that is not helping. And in the last 12 months, it seems to me that the NRA is doing more harm than good. And this is during a time when we have supposed conservatives controlling congress and the executive branch. A time when we should be pushing to remove gun-control measures, not permit more of them. I only have so much money to go around, and why would I send it to someone who is not making a long term positive change.

2. Honestly, I am not sure change is really possible at the NRA. I hope it is, but I do not see a high probability that change will happen. Look what happened with the last years election. Several good pro-gun/pro-constitution people were elected. However, the bureaucratic unelected side of the NRA did not change and still continued along their flawed path. You would think if change is possible, it would have happened before in the past. But sadly, the NRA keeps finding itself taking the same flawed path over and over.

3. Thank God I have options. Unlike our government where my vote in this existing government is the only option I have to effect change, I have options when it comes to organizations I support to protect my natural firearm rights. Many have argued that by not supporting the NRA you are dividing our resources and we will then lose the fight. However, I do not believe that as american we must support whoever is the largest. Just like I believe that we as citizens have allowed our government to fall prey to a 2 party system. This only results in us vs. them rather than a honest discussion of ideas and principles. I like options and I feel the GOA supports my viewpoint more closely.



As for what the GOA has done for me so far.....

I have only been with them since December. So they have not had much time to do anything for me. However, I agreed with their stance on the Bumpfire Stock issue. As far as I can tell, they seem to be more involved on the state level with fighting anti-gun legislation and advancing pro-gun legislation. I have not seen much from the NRA on state specific actions, but that could be me.

Again, time will tell if the GOA will stay true to the path. We will see.

 

[worddoer]

Meh, the rest of us will still carry you, just like we always do...

[video=youtube;PrnIVVWtAag]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrnIVVWtAag[/video]

Help me to understand...

Are you saying that I should both financial and morally support an organization that I disagree with? Do whatever it takes to win? Even if I object to it? No other firearms right group has done anything to protect or advance our cause? ONLY the NRA has done anything good for firearms rights?

I am sorry, but I do not think this is the process our founding fathers wanted america built on. If we are not willing to stand for something small, then we are not willing to stand for something big. It is this type of thinking (winning for now at any cost in the future) that brought the NRA into the position of asking that an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat be given the power to arbitrarily decide if we can exercise our natural firearms rights or not.

Our Revolutionary war was based on ideas. The idea "that all men were created equal, that they were endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." This idea was in direct conflict of the equality and ability of the individual to the British Empire. To say that as americans we must all have the same idea of how to protect our natural firearm rights, it is to say that the founding fathers were flawed in thinking of people differently than the monarchy of england. If we cannot think differently than others, then what is the point of this country? That is not freedom or liberty.

 

[Chewie]

I'm not always in agreement with the NRA but at the same time they are a necessity. Look at it as the NRA fighting mostly at the federal level and groups like the GOA fighting more at the state's level. We need both to continue to move towards the final goal. A better option would be to join both and understand there are different fights at different levels requiring different strategies. Kind of like the military, multiple methods with the same goal overall.

 

[JettaKnight]

Meh, the rest of us will still carry you, just like we always do...

THIS.

That reminds me, I need to vote...

Help me to understand...

Are you saying that I should both financial and morally support an organization that I disagree with? Do whatever it takes to win? Even if I object to it? No other firearms right group has done anything to protect or advance our cause? ONLY the NRA has done anything good for firearms rights?

I thought winning was the goal? I.e. maintaining as much fabulous firearm freedom as possible. In that respect, the [modern] NRA is wildly successful. Now, if you want to go full on "founding fathers" and get caught up over one thing while all the rights erode around you...


Wait, what the heck is your point? The NRA did something wrong way back when? The NRA has come a long way from those days, and some might argue have gone to far...


What has the GOA done?


This smacks of the thread gregr started some time ago trying to trash the NRA for trying to win the war instead of focusing on every single battle.

 

[worddoer]

I thought winning was the goal?

Do you believe there is a right way and wrong way to win? This may be our disagreement at the foundation of our ideas. I believe that winning is only helpful if it can be done correctly while supporting and maintaining our constitution and the rule of law. Would you support a dictatorship if that dictatorship allowed its citizens to express their natural firearms rights? I mean, you won...right? You got what you wanted for firearms. Would you support a football team that used sledgehammers on the other players. It would hurt people and be breaking the rules, but they would win....right? And "winning was the Goal".....right?

get caught up over one thing while all the rights erode around you...

So we should support the NRA even when they are one of the causes of my rights being eroded? I am sorry, but I will not support anyone who erodes my rights. Regardless if they are popular or large organization.

The NRA has come a long way from those days, and some might argue have gone to far...

Gone to far? How can the NRA go to far when they have not worked tirelessly to remove the gun control measure that they themselves supported in the past. I have not seen a major push by the NRA to repeal the NFA '34; GCA '68; Hughes Amendment '86; Brady Act '93. I will admit they have help with preventing additional legislation. Prior to the Bumpstock issue, they were at best holding steady. But not so good at taking ground back.

What has the GOA done?

What has the NRA done in the last 12 months? What firearms rights are we able to now practice that we could not prior. We have a republican congress and executive branch. What is their agenda of repealing their own past mistakes?



Is it your contention is we should support a flawed organization regardless of the damage it does to your firearms freedoms over time because it is the socially acceptable thing to do in the firearms community? That idea is what I am asking others to think about. Ultimately you have to vote with your money and time on what you think will enhance our firearm freedom the most. I am comfortable with my decision. Others will need to decide from themselves.

 

[Expat]

I am certain in my mind that we would have had some really bad gun control enacted into law after Newtown if it wasn't for the NRA.

 

[worddoer]

I am certain in my mind that we would have had some really bad gun control enacted into law after Newtown if it wasn't for the NRA.

However, as far as I can tell, that is holding ground. Not gaining back the ground that was already lost. But you are correct that the NRA deserves kudos for that.

 

[worddoer]

Here is an open invitation.....

My membership does not expire until later in the year.

If someone can show me the NRA's plan (what they plan on doing and how they are planning on doing it) on how they are going to remedy their past mistakes (NFA '34; GCA '68; Hughes Amendment '86; Brady Act '93), then I will look at keeping my membership. It does not need to have every small detail, but at least show me a rough game plan. I know this will not be an overnight battle, but without a game plan of some sort, then this is very, very unlikely to happen.

I will keep and open mind and if there is a plan of action on restoring the firearms rights we have already lost (the ones that the NRA mistakenly gave away), then I will support them and give them credit for that.

I have searched on my own, but have not been able to find such a plan.

 

[JettaKnight]

Do you believe there is a right way and wrong way to win? This may be our disagreement at the foundation of our ideas. I believe that winning is only helpful if it can be done correctly while supporting and maintaining our constitution and the rule of law. Would you support a dictatorship if that dictatorship allowed its citizens to express their natural firearms rights? I mean, you won...right? You got what you wanted for firearms. Would you support a football team that used sledgehammers on the other players. It would hurt people and be breaking the rules, but they would win....right? And "winning was the Goal".....right?

OK, how is the NRA winning in the wrong way? Be specific, cite examples within the last decade.

So we should support the NRA even when they are one of the causes of my rights being eroded? I am sorry, but I will not support anyone who erodes my rights. Regardless if they are popular or large organization.

That's a bit of victim blaming: The NRA is not the ones eroding your freedom.

Gone to far? How can the NRA go to far when they have not worked tirelessly to remove the gun control measure that they themselves supported in the past. I have not seen a major push by the NRA to repeal the NFA '34; GCA '68; Hughes Amendment '86; Brady Act '93. I will admit they have help with preventing additional legislation. Prior to the Bumpstock issue, they were at best holding steady. But not so good at taking ground back.

What has the NRA done in the last 12 months? What firearms rights are we able to now practice that we could not prior. We have a republican congress and executive branch. What is their agenda of repealing their own past mistakes?

You can't dredge up failures from the 60's then limit wins to 2017 only.

Plus, you dodged my question: What has the GOA done?

Is it your contention is we should support a flawed organization regardless of the damage it does to your firearms freedoms over time because it is the socially acceptable thing to do in the firearms community? That idea is what I am asking others to think about. Ultimately you have to vote with your money and time on what you think will enhance our firearm freedom the most. I am comfortable with my decision. Others will need to decide from themselves.

Suit yourself.

Most of us view the GOA as belligerent and ineffective.

 

[Steel and wood]

I got a lifetime NRA 5 years ago. After there stand on bump fire and the ncis fix, I joined the GOA in December with there lifetime.
So I will spend my money with the goa,not the nra-ila.

 

[Leadeye]

I always ask myself what's working best for me, my single vote here in the state of Indiana or the money I contribute to lobbyists that work on my behalf in dc.

I always come up with the same answer.

 

[DanVoils]

I always ask myself what's working best for me, my single vote here in the state of Indiana or the money I contribute to lobbyists that work on my behalf in dc.

I always come up with the same answer.

Okay, I'll ask, what is that answer? (When did this turn into Vague-book?)

 

[bwframe]

Everyone know's Leadeye's most famously used statement, right?

Follow the money.

 

[Floivanus]

OK, how is the NRA winning in the wrong way? Be specific, cite examples within the last decade.





That's a bit of victim blaming: The NRA is not the ones eroding your freedom.



You can't dredge up failures from the 60's then limit wins to 2017 only.

Plus, you dodged my question: What has the GOA done?



Suit yourself.

Most of us view the GOA as belligerent and ineffective.

failures from the 60s? NRA was spending money to try to stop Heller before the SCOTUS said they would hear it, after scotus said they’d hear it, NRA backed it. SAF and GOA were two of the main backers of Heller. Same thing with Mcdonald, that wasn’t NRA. GOA is the only one who keeps filing cases to try and repeal Hughes and are a complete NO compromise stance on the 2nd.

NRA was asking suppressor manufactures to remove their products from NRA shows, and the same with AR15 makers, since the turn of the century. If you aren’t just a trap/skeet shooter, NRA isn’t someone that has your back.

and on the subject of GOA, spend a few bucks, get a cheap patch from copper custom, and GOA will give you a free year long membership.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Most of us view the GOA as belligerent and ineffective.

The GOA is for idealists. The NRA is for pragmatists. I think we've got room for both, but I no longer contribute to the GOA as I didn't see them being particularly effective back in the Clinton AWB/sunset fight.

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

The NRA has had a hand in almost every major gun control act the past 70 years. They may not be anti-gun, but they’re sure as **** pro-money, and they won’t hesitate to sell your rights away if it means their pocketbooks get fatter