NRA's LaPierre quits

[Mono1]

I Love All You Guys.

Especially for your Passion about the 2A. That is the Most Important Thing.
I Joined the NRA in 1994. 30 years ago.

Wayne was in charge then. Clinton was just elected. The Federal Assault Weapon Ban was put in place.

In 1996, the United States Congress flipped RED for the first time in HALF A CENTURY.
Clinton blamed it entirely on the NRA.
Since that time, the Makeup of the Supreme Court has shifted, over time, such that we have now had the Heller, Bruen, et al. decisions which would not have been seen 70 years ago or more. And more to come, hopefully!

I like to believe my contributions over these past 30 years have, in some small way, contributed to that.

Not Changing My avatar just Yet!

 

[Old Dog]

I may be mistaken here, usually so, but when someone resigns they normally don't receive their "golden shower" (parachute) because they walked away on their own choosing.

No, per one website I perused today, WLP is getting a $17 million payout.

I absolutely can't fathom how so many people still want to defend the NRA.

While most NRA members paid dues out of a sense of loyalty to the cause of protecting the Second Amendment and the RKBA, WLP was taking two-week Caribbean vacations on multimillion dollar yachts and spending six figures on clothing or travel every year, the organization racked up legal fees of $97K per day, lost two million members in five years and revenue went down 44% in the past eight years.

The NRA was freakin' INVISIBLE and SILENT in Washington state starting in 2014, when we went from a state in the country's top five of good gun laws (or lack of bad laws) to now one of the top five states with the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country.

Think how bad things would be up here now if it weren't for GOA, SAF, JFPO, WAC, Sporting Systems, FPC and the minority that are actually active in opposing the stupidity. The national organization with the largest number of members and the most annual revenue did nothing for Washington state.

 

[nammac]

I Love All You Guys.

Especially for your Passion about the 2A. That is the Most Important Thing.
I Joined the NRA in 1994. 30 years ago.

Wayne was in charge then. Clinton was just elected. The Federal Assault Weapon Ban was put in place.

In 1996, the United States Congress flipped RED for the first time in HALF A CENTURY.
Clinton blamed it entirely on the NRA.
Since that time, the Makeup of the Supreme Court has shifted, over time, such that we have now had the Heller, Bruen, et al. decisions which would not have been seen 70 years ago or more. And more to come, hopefully!

I like to believe my contributions over these past 30 years have, in some small way, contributed to that.

Not Changing My avatar just Yet!

View attachment 1795830

Agreed. The NRA, regardless of what WLP has or hasn't done, is the 800 pound, pain in the azz gorilla that the anti 2nd Amendment crowd would love to abolish.

But the NRA is in shambles, hemorrhaging members. They need to get their house in order, get their spring cleaning done and then get back to the business of firearms education and protecting the 2nd Amendment.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.

 

[Catbert95]

I got life membership many years ago but haven't given the NRA a dime of my money since. Where were they when all the anti gun legislation happened in Oregon?
Now i only support GOA, SAF, OFF and OSSA with my dollars.
The NRA should have kicked WLP out years ago.

 

[CLRTR999]

NRA needs a good housecleaning, the boss is gone, time for the minions to go as well. They need to regroup and get on with the business of firearms education and Second Amendment protection.

I'll continue to be a member, I'm in there for the long haul, but until I see changes and accountability, my wallet remains closed to them.

The top officers also need to be investigated and prosecuted for the lack of oversight and enablement of corruption that they allowed to occur on their watch, particularly Charles Cotton and David Coy. I'd be perfectly OK with them becoming cellmates of WLP. You can throw Willes Lee, Marion Hammer, and Carolyn Meadows in there with them.

A good summary on the cover-ups by top leadership:

NRA: Meet The New Cover, Up Same As The Old Cover Up | The Firearms Coalition

 

[orygun]

I found out about this last night while waiting for my wife to arrive at the pub where we were going to have dinner. I'd say it's the best news I've heard all year, but in reality it's the best news I've heard in the last couple of years.

I may rejoin the NRA now.

 

[Mikej]

They need to get their house in order, get their spring cleaning done and then get back to the business of firearms education and protecting the 2nd Amendment.

I doubt they remember how to do that. If you consider how many years the crew hasn't been doing what they were supposed to be doing? You don't just light a fire in a cold boiler, pull the throttle back, and speed off down the tracks at 70 MPH.

 

[solv3nt]

I doubt they remember how to do that. If you consider how many years the crew hasn't been doing what they were supposed to be doing? You don't just light a fire in a cold boiler, pull the throttle back, and speed off down the tracks at 70 MPH.

It takes a good leader to be able to pull that off. If they find someone like WLP, they'll be in the same position. If they find someone to lead from the front, then we can hope for reform. I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Mikej]

It takes a good leader to be able to pull that off. If they find someone like WLP, they'll be in the same position. If they find someone to lead from the front, then we can hope for reform. I'm not holding my breath.

Still I feel like it would take time, considering there are likely a bunch of those mug's that are of the same ilk as WLP. I wouldn't expect them to get moving. Hell, wasn't it them that were all in the scam for years too?

 

[solv3nt]

Still I feel like it would take time, considering there are likely a bunch of those mug's that are of the same ilk as WLP. I wouldn't expect them to get moving. Hell, wasn't it them that were all in the scam for years too?

They won't move on their own. It takes a CEO that wants to right the ship to fix things.

 

[CLRTR999]

It takes a good leader to be able to pull that off. If they find someone like WLP, they'll be in the same position. If they find someone to lead from the front, then we can hope for reform. I'm not holding my breath.

Yes. In addition to a new leader - and the right kind of leader - it will also take structural reform from within. There needs to be term limits on all executive positions, and not a situation like we have now where a few cronies at the top shuffle positions between themselves and trade titles with each other every year (see link in above post # 46). Also, the board currently has 76 members, which is ridiculous. They don't need more than a dozen board members, and even that might be a bit much.

 

[Explorer1]

"The NRA was freakin' INVISIBLE and SILENT in Washington state starting in 2014, when we went from a state in the country's top five of good gun laws (or lack of bad laws) to now one of the top five states with the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country. "

I had a "discussion" with some insiders on this when it was happening, asking why. The position was it was a lost cause so they were no going to spend any money when they could get results elsewhere. You may or may not agree but it has some logic behind it. Personally I think this state is a lost cause until it gets a mass management change similar to what the NRA needs.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

"The NRA was freakin' INVISIBLE and SILENT in Washington state starting in 2014, when we went from a state in the country's top five of good gun laws (or lack of bad laws) to now one of the top five states with the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country. "

I had a "discussion" with some insiders on this when it was happening, asking why. The position was it was a lost cause so they were no going to spend any money when they could get results elsewhere. You may or may not agree but it has some logic behind it. Personally I think this state is a lost cause until it gets a mass management change similar to what the NRA needs.

It's not a lost cause in the courts because the law is on our side. It takes time and $ though. And since NRA is handing out their money to their execs and paying for lapierres PERSONAL lawsuits instead of their mission, they have little left to pursue their actual mission.

The organization needs a 100% reboot. Most likely it will be one of lapierres cronies that takes over, leaves the whole corrupt structure in place, and continues to funnel money to LaPierre and others like they did with his sisters company (or whatever it was). It's a complete joke organization imo that believes it's mission is to funnel $ to LaPierre and his chronies. They will fight to keep their corrupt system in place but not fight for what they are there to do.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I tore up my Life Membership YEARS ago, the NRA lost it's teeth and it's mission when Ol' Charley left, and hasn't done anything to forward our RTKBA since! Where was the frickin NRA in the early 2000's, they never bothered to show up, and OryGuns democraps all piled on with their anti gun crap! Where was the NRA when LEVO first started out in OryGun, Crickets! Where was the NRA,......................... I don't buy what their sellin, a state is a lost cause, so we take the fight elsewhere, BULLSH!T, if they will NOT fight the fight on the battlefield in front of them, you don't get to pick and choose when it's YOU on the defensive, bunch of simps on the take, I hope WLP's dick rots off, and he goes away forever, never to be heard from again, phuck that guy!

I seriously doubt the NRA will do what's needed unless or until the courts are finished with them, I see no motivation for them to change anything, such a cash cow, who would give that up? No, it's gonna take a serious asswhoopin within those halls to effect any changes, and I just don't see it happening!

 

[ar addict]

The NRA Supported Gun Control When the Black Panthers Had the Weapons | HISTORY

Back in the 1960s, even the NRA supported gun control to disarm the group.

www.history.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/gun-control-1968/

BEGIN TEXT OF PAGES 22 AND 23 OF NRA'S
AMERICAN RIFLEMAN MAGAZINE, MARCH 1968 EDITION

###

WHERE THE NRA STANDS ON GUN LEGISLATION
97-year record shows positive approach to workable gun laws

By ALAN C. WEBBER
Associate Editor
THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN

"I think it is a terrible indictment of the National Rifle Association that they haven't supported any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country."

"The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns..."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


That flat assertion was made by Senator Robert Kennedy (N.Y.), Jan. 16 in addressing the New York State University law school in Buffalo.

Terming Kennedy's accusation "a smear of a great American organization," NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth pointed out that "The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."

A few days later, Orth seconded the request of President Lyndon Johnson, made Jan. 17 in his State of the Union message, for a curb on mail-order sales.

"The duty of Congress is clear," Orth said, "it should act now to pass legislation that will keep undesirables, including criminals, drug addicts and persons adjudged mentally irresponsible or alcoholic, or juveniles from obtaining firearms through the mails."

"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition..."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


The NRA position, as stated by Orth, emphasizes that the NRA has consistently supported gun legislation which it feels would penalize misuse of guns without harassing law-abiding hunters, target shooters and collectors.

Here is the record over the years:

Item: The late Karl T. Frederick, an NRA president, served for years as special consultant with the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to frame The Uniform Firearms Act of 1930.

Adopted by Alabama, Indiana, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Washington, the Act directly attacks the "mail order murder" to which President Johnson referred in his State of the Union Message. It specifically forbids delivery of pistols to convicts, drug addicts, habitual drunkards, incompetents, and minors under the age of 18. Other salient provisions of the Act require a license to carry a pistol concealed on one's person or in a vehicle; require the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to local police authorities; specify a 48-hour time lapse between application for purchase and delivery.

Item: The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns.

Item: The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition, and prohibits the movement in interstate or foreign commerce of firearms and ammunition between certain persons and under certain conditions.

"NRA supported the original 'Dodd Bill' to amend the Federal Firearms Act..."

—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


More recently, the spate of articles on gun legislation has spread the erroneous impression that the NRA has always opposed Senator Thomas J. Dodd's attempts to keep guns out of the hands of juveniles. This is simply untrue. The facts are these:

The NRA worked closely with the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency, of which Senator Dodd was chairman, in its investigation into the relationship between juvenile crime and the availability of firearms.

The NRA supported the original "Dodd Bill" to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that a purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun.

In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns.

"Senator Kennedy's 'terrible indictment' of the NRA is groundless."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 23


The parting of the ways came only when Senator Dodd introduced still another bill (S.1592) in March, 1965, which drastically intensified his earlier bills. The NRA opposed S.1592 and subsequent bills introduced by the Connecticut Senator. If passed into law, S.1592 would, among other things, have ended all interstate shipments of firearms except to persons holding a Federal firearms license. It also would have prohibited even a Federal licensee from selling a pistol to anyone residing in another State.

NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts. The essential provisions which the NRA supports are contained in 2 Senate bills introduced by Senator Roman L. Hruska (Nebr.) and House bills introduced by Congressmen Cecil R. King (17th fist.-Calif.) and Robert L. F. Sikes (1st Dist.Fla.). These bills would:

1. Impose a mandatory penalty for the carrying or use of a firearm, transported in interstate or foreign commerce, during the commission of certain crimes.

2. Place "destructive devices" (bombs, mines, grenades, crew-served military ordnance) under Federal regulation.

3. Prohibit any licensed manufacturer or dealer from shipping any firearm to any person in any State in violation of the laws of that state.

4. Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:

a. requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the

CONTINUED ON PAGE 23 (text below)
THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN
(March 1968)

purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;

b. providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;

c. requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;

d. prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;

e. providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce;

f. increasing penalties for violation.

Through bulletins to its members, the NRA has often voiced approval and support of State and local ordinances designed to keep firearms out of the hands of undesirables. A bulletin of Feb. 20, 1964 notified Virginia members of the introduction in the Virginia House of Delegates of a bill requiring a 72-hour waiting period for purchase of a handgun. In the bulletin, which outlined the provisions of the bill, NRA Secretary Frank C. Daniel commented as follows:

"A number of States and local jurisdictions have a waiting period of varying length for the purchase of a concealable firearm; and, where intelligently and reasonably administered, it has not proved to be an undue burden on the shooter and sportsman. ... The bill from a technical point of view adequately protects citizens of good character from any arbitrary denial of their right to purchase a handgun. It should be judged on the basis of whether or not a waiting period for the purchase of a handgun is desirable for the State."

The bill was killed in the House Feb. 25, 1964.

When bills were introduced in the Illinois legislature in February, 1965, to provide mandatory penalties for crimes committed while armed with a firearm, the NRA expressed its opinion to Illinois members in these terms:

NRA Secretary Daniel

"The purpose of these bills is to penalize the criminal misuse of firearms and weapons, and not the firearms themselves. This is a sound and reasonable basis for regulation and is aimed in the right direction--that of criminal conduct when armed. Senate Bill No. 351 and House Bill No. 472 are worthy of the support of the sports-men of the State of Illinois."

The bills were passed by the Senate and House but were vetoed by Gov. Otto Kerner a few months later.

Many other instances of NRA support for worthwhile gun legislation could be quoted. But these suffice to show that Senator Kennedy's "terrible indictment" of the NRA is groundless.

###

END TEXT OF PAGES 22 AND 23 OF NRA'S
AMERICAN RIFLEMAN MAGAZINE, MARCH 1968 EDITION

Flame away NRA supporters

 

[YippeeKiYoRed]

"The NRA was freakin' INVISIBLE and SILENT in Washington state starting in 2014, when we went from a state in the country's top five of good gun laws (or lack of bad laws) to now one of the top five states with the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country. "

I had a "discussion" with some insiders on this when it was happening, asking why. The position was it was a lost cause so they were no going to spend any money when they could get results elsewhere. You may or may not agree but it has some logic behind it. Personally I think this state is a lost cause until it gets a mass management change similar to what the NRA needs.

The inside info we got in Oregon regarding BM114 is the NRA felt they were too much of a lightning rod so they should work in the background.

As for lost causes, watch any NFL game where there's 5 minutes left in the fourth and it's a three possession game. The team that's behind will still fight as hard as ever.

 

[3MTA3]

The NRA position, as stated by Orth, emphasizes that the NRA has consistently supported gun legislation which it feels would penalize misuse of guns without harassing law-abiding hunters, target shooters and collectors.

Noted that self defense as well as that 'well regulated militia" stuff was omitted. Sounds more like National Fudd Association to me.

 

[CamoDeafie]

The NRA Supported Gun Control When the Black Panthers Had the Weapons | HISTORY

Back in the 1960s, even the NRA supported gun control to disarm the group.

www.history.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/gun-control-1968/

BEGIN TEXT OF PAGES 22 AND 23 OF NRA'S
AMERICAN RIFLEMAN MAGAZINE, MARCH 1968 EDITION

###

WHERE THE NRA STANDS ON GUN LEGISLATION
97-year record shows positive approach to workable gun laws

By ALAN C. WEBBER
Associate Editor
THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN

"I think it is a terrible indictment of the National Rifle Association that they haven't supported any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country."

"The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns..."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


That flat assertion was made by Senator Robert Kennedy (N.Y.), Jan. 16 in addressing the New York State University law school in Buffalo.

Terming Kennedy's accusation "a smear of a great American organization," NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth pointed out that "The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."

A few days later, Orth seconded the request of President Lyndon Johnson, made Jan. 17 in his State of the Union message, for a curb on mail-order sales.

"The duty of Congress is clear," Orth said, "it should act now to pass legislation that will keep undesirables, including criminals, drug addicts and persons adjudged mentally irresponsible or alcoholic, or juveniles from obtaining firearms through the mails."

"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition..."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


The NRA position, as stated by Orth, emphasizes that the NRA has consistently supported gun legislation which it feels would penalize misuse of guns without harassing law-abiding hunters, target shooters and collectors.

Here is the record over the years:

Item: The late Karl T. Frederick, an NRA president, served for years as special consultant with the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to frame The Uniform Firearms Act of 1930.

Adopted by Alabama, Indiana, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Washington, the Act directly attacks the "mail order murder" to which President Johnson referred in his State of the Union Message. It specifically forbids delivery of pistols to convicts, drug addicts, habitual drunkards, incompetents, and minors under the age of 18. Other salient provisions of the Act require a license to carry a pistol concealed on one's person or in a vehicle; require the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to local police authorities; specify a 48-hour time lapse between application for purchase and delivery.

Item: The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns.

Item: The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition, and prohibits the movement in interstate or foreign commerce of firearms and ammunition between certain persons and under certain conditions.

"NRA supported the original 'Dodd Bill' to amend the Federal Firearms Act..."

—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 22


More recently, the spate of articles on gun legislation has spread the erroneous impression that the NRA has always opposed Senator Thomas J. Dodd's attempts to keep guns out of the hands of juveniles. This is simply untrue. The facts are these:

The NRA worked closely with the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency, of which Senator Dodd was chairman, in its investigation into the relationship between juvenile crime and the availability of firearms.

The NRA supported the original "Dodd Bill" to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that a purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun.

In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns.

"Senator Kennedy's 'terrible indictment' of the NRA is groundless."
—American Rifleman
March 1968, P. 23


The parting of the ways came only when Senator Dodd introduced still another bill (S.1592) in March, 1965, which drastically intensified his earlier bills. The NRA opposed S.1592 and subsequent bills introduced by the Connecticut Senator. If passed into law, S.1592 would, among other things, have ended all interstate shipments of firearms except to persons holding a Federal firearms license. It also would have prohibited even a Federal licensee from selling a pistol to anyone residing in another State.

NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts. The essential provisions which the NRA supports are contained in 2 Senate bills introduced by Senator Roman L. Hruska (Nebr.) and House bills introduced by Congressmen Cecil R. King (17th fist.-Calif.) and Robert L. F. Sikes (1st Dist.Fla.). These bills would:

1. Impose a mandatory penalty for the carrying or use of a firearm, transported in interstate or foreign commerce, during the commission of certain crimes.

2. Place "destructive devices" (bombs, mines, grenades, crew-served military ordnance) under Federal regulation.

3. Prohibit any licensed manufacturer or dealer from shipping any firearm to any person in any State in violation of the laws of that state.

4. Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:

a. requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the

CONTINUED ON PAGE 23 (text below)
THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN
(March 1968)

purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;

b. providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;

c. requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;

d. prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;

e. providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce;

f. increasing penalties for violation.

Through bulletins to its members, the NRA has often voiced approval and support of State and local ordinances designed to keep firearms out of the hands of undesirables. A bulletin of Feb. 20, 1964 notified Virginia members of the introduction in the Virginia House of Delegates of a bill requiring a 72-hour waiting period for purchase of a handgun. In the bulletin, which outlined the provisions of the bill, NRA Secretary Frank C. Daniel commented as follows:

"A number of States and local jurisdictions have a waiting period of varying length for the purchase of a concealable firearm; and, where intelligently and reasonably administered, it has not proved to be an undue burden on the shooter and sportsman. ... The bill from a technical point of view adequately protects citizens of good character from any arbitrary denial of their right to purchase a handgun. It should be judged on the basis of whether or not a waiting period for the purchase of a handgun is desirable for the State."

The bill was killed in the House Feb. 25, 1964.

When bills were introduced in the Illinois legislature in February, 1965, to provide mandatory penalties for crimes committed while armed with a firearm, the NRA expressed its opinion to Illinois members in these terms:

NRA Secretary Daniel

"The purpose of these bills is to penalize the criminal misuse of firearms and weapons, and not the firearms themselves. This is a sound and reasonable basis for regulation and is aimed in the right direction--that of criminal conduct when armed. Senate Bill No. 351 and House Bill No. 472 are worthy of the support of the sports-men of the State of Illinois."

The bills were passed by the Senate and House but were vetoed by Gov. Otto Kerner a few months later.

Many other instances of NRA support for worthwhile gun legislation could be quoted. But these suffice to show that Senator Kennedy's "terrible indictment" of the NRA is groundless.

###

END TEXT OF PAGES 22 AND 23 OF NRA'S
AMERICAN RIFLEMAN MAGAZINE, MARCH 1968 EDITION

Flame away NRA supporters

Seems a more thorough house cleaning is needed, maybe?

 

[CLT65]

So, if the NRA were able to clean house, find some solid leadership who will do the right things for the right reasons, we still need to shut them down? Because of what very different people thought and did in very different times, generations ago? Sounds absurd to me.

I don't care what the NRA did in 1934, or to be honest even in 1968, not terribly relevant today. That was a very long time ago. I care about what they're going to do tomorrow.

They have organization and infrastructure that are invaluable if they can be salvaged and used effectively. I'm certainly not saying that the NRA has always been remotely perfect, far from it, but getting all bitter and defeatist and throwing them in the dumpster seems foolish to me, if there's a chance that it could be reformed into what it should be. I know there are a LOT of people hoping and working to do just that. I hope they can succeed.