National U.S. judge tosses NRA bankruptcy bid, letting New York seek dissolution

[bikemutt]

This is just my opinion but, the NRA has no less access to free speech than it's members do; we live in a free speech country, thank goodness. There's no doubt these days that NRA speech is in favor of conservatives versus progressives; that's the nature of the beast.

What I'm not in favor of, is having mouthpiece (NRA), ostensibly looking out for my best interest as a gun owner, redirect their contributed resources towards toga parties in exotic locations, and things more or less like that.

This matter is ugly, WLP owns it, he needs to go.

 

[EPS]

This is just my opinion but, the NRA has no less access to free speech than it's members do; we live in a free speech country, thank goodness. There's no doubt these days that NRA speech is in favor of conservatives versus progressives; that's the nature of the beast.

What I'm not in favor of, is having mouthpiece (NRA), ostensibly looking out for my best interest as a gun owner, redirect their contributed resources towards toga parties in exotic locations, and things more or less like that.

This matter is ugly, WLP owns it, he needs to go.

Lol you still think you live in A FREE Speech country.
Lol jokes on you..
Don't believe me go on Twitter Facebook
Or just go down town.
And tell everyone what you think and see how fast they close your Twitter account or your Facebook .
Or 20 useless homebody punch you in the face.for going against their way of thinking.

 

[Darren Summers]

No mans power should ever supersede the well-being of those he represents. Too often the wall is hit before we see the curve......in this case WLP has driven a once great organization off the road!!

 

[Caveman Jim]

If you're still a member of the NRA, get ready for a big load in your mailbox. Asking for yet more money.

I opted out of any further communications from the NRA, not because I hate the organization but because I don't want to be hounded for donations. Many people don't know that they can actually do this. Call up CS and opt out of receiving any communications, easy peasy. Donate when you can afford it.

 

[Member 52301]

Some of the facts that WLP admitted to on the stand were shocking. Not reporting free use of mansions and yachts, making very thin excuses for some rampant spending. If he cared about the organization he would depart. I am truly curious how he has convinced the board to allow him to remain.

Maybe he had ties with Jeffrey Epstein and some of his NRA .org buddies did too.

Heck, BILL BARR'S FATHER HAD TIES WITH JE with that one NY school. But too many people are CLUELESS THERE too!

Heck, it is even coming out MORE now but some of us already knew that Epstein's SECOND IN CHARGE executor of his, Epstein's, will - estate and/or some other HUGE JE financial deal was WORKING with and had huge TIES with Bill Gates. ONE of Gate's top men!

Now, some of that came out a couple of years ago after Epstein got 'suicided' or FLED the country and some of us were wondering WHY some big shot with Gates would have ALL OF THAT POWER with Epstein's BUSINESS and ESTATE.

WE wrote about it too. Several of us did.

Now, more of THAT salami comes out BIG time since Gate's wife who wears an upside down CROSS around her neck (Think about what that means now.) IS and has been talking to other people about HOW she did not want or like OLD BILL (Gates not Clinton now. LOL) to have anything to do with EPSTEIN. Divorce proceedings and more. Not just the garbage with just BG's girl friend and other BG's stuff - business ties.

NOTHING would shock me more about WLP and I always thought that he was DIRTY and just another CON MAN when it came to his tax write offs, his political TIES, his retirement, his bennies, his pay, his everything else and with his big, disgusting and stupid mouth LIKE some other important men that I can think of now too.

When NEIL KNOX who is DEAD now spoke about a whole bunch of stuff way back when... I was pretty shocked which is saying a lot for me. LOL Now, even since NEIL KNOX DIED... old WLP and his dirty scum bag friends only got worse and turned into more power control freaks and bigger THIEVES. Kind of like Madoff, eh?!

I do not bet, I never did gamble, but I will bet someone a cup of coffee and a piece of apple pie that MORE DIRTY GARBAGE will come out about old Wayne soon or fairly soon and it will involve TIES with JE too!

IT is a shame what he and his buddies did to the NRA but THEY have themselves to blame since they LET IT HAPPEN for years on end. And even when people spoke up - they NEVER BOTHERED TO LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE - members or former members.

Cate

 

[Member 52301]

Latest: U.S. judge tosses NRA bankruptcy bid, letting New York seek dissolution

I laughed my butt off when I heard it on the radio with the first announcement.

Some VERY SPECIFIC chapters and verses in a specific BOOK came to my mind too.

I am NOT allowed to state them or the BOOK but they pertain to WLP and his dirty ILK who worshipped him like a CULT following some tin star 'god like' figure.

There are or were reasons WHY some of them LET WLP GET AWAY with all kinds of dung too. Blackmail - I bet and TONS MORE. Uh huh.

Cate

 

[Member 52301]

"What concerns the Court most though is the surreptitious manner in which Mr. LaPierre obtained and exercised authority to file bankruptcy for the NRA," Hale wrote in his ruling. "Excluding so many people from the process of deciding to file for bankruptcy, including the vast majority of the board of directors, the chief financial officer, and the general counsel, is nothing less than shocking."

Helluva way to run an organization.

THIS was discussed on here where some poster (?) put up a RADIO LINK and I listened to that since there was NO transcript to read.

They mentioned that NO ONE on the board knew jack squat about what WLP was doing BEHIND THEIR BACKS with the bankruptcy deal and TONS MORE. The board heard about it from some other man or some reporters but I can't think of their names now.

Cate

 

[Dinglenutz]

I do have a question as to what this means for the NRA as an entity. Will the NRA be gutted of the crooks that have been running it and reform, or will it be the end of the NRA and one or more new industry groups will take its place?

 

[bbbass]

"What concerns the Court most though is the surreptitious manner in which Mr. LaPierre obtained and exercised authority to file bankruptcy for the NRA," Hale wrote in his ruling. "Excluding so many people from the process of deciding to file for bankruptcy, including the vast majority of the board of directors, the chief financial officer, and the general counsel, is nothing less than shocking."

Helluva way to run an organization.

He's always run things as his personal fiefdom.

I am truly curious how he has convinced the board to allow him to remain.

The majority on the board were WLP cronies/toadies. It became obvious when WLP was challenged for the presidency by whathisname and he won by a split decision of the board.

 

[WWShooter]

Lol you still think you live in A FREE Speech country.
Lol jokes on you..
Don't believe me go on Twitter Facebook
Or just go down town.
And tell everyone what you think and see how fast they close your Twitter account or your Facebook .
Or 20 useless homebody punch you in the face.for going against their way of thinking.

Free speech has nothing to do with Twitter, Facebook or any of the other social media companies. They are non-government actors and not subject to the First Amendment. As for going to downtown Portland or getting punched in the face, again not government. The First Amendment doesn't say you can say anything you want without consequences, it simply says the government can't retaliate. It's odd that a Second Amendment site has such a poor understanding of the First Amendment.

 

[BrentN]

They are non-government actors

Of course this is technically correct, but the line is blurry, and damn do they seem to have a lot of influence within our government, kind of like lobbyists on steroids. Does one have to collect a paycheck from the government to be a government actor?

 

[WWShooter]

Of course this is technically correct, but the line is blurry, and damn do they seem to have a lot of influence within our government, kind of like lobbyists on steroids. Does one have to collect a paycheck from the government to be a government actor?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Seems pretty clear.

 

[BrentN]

Clear as day. Enjoy yours.

 

[Dinglenutz]

Free speech has nothing to do with Twitter, Facebook or any of the other social media companies.

Sort of true. Here are a few things to ponder.

• We the people generally allow publishers to be held accountable for what they publish. As a consequence, those publishers generally exercise editorial control over their content to prevent liability. With sites like this one, Faecebook, Flitter, and so on special dispensations were granted so that they are not liable for the content they publish but did not create as long as they only exercise editorial control "in good faith". If they go outside those bounds, it's perfectly within their rights but we might want to consider whether we wish to continue to immunize them.
• There is the doctrine of the public commons, where people have a right to gather peacefully and speak freely within the bounds of the law, even though the land is technically private property.

As for going to downtown Portland or getting punched in the face, again not government.

Government's job IS to protect against this and punish anyone who initiates violence though.

 

[Hueco]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Seems pretty clear.

Kinda. Sorta.

Government was the most powerful enterprise the founders ever knew and they wrote protections into the Constitution from said enterprise but also wrote more detailed explanations in other docs, i.e. the Federalist papers.

No where did they seem to consider that a private entity would become so powerful as to amass government level influence (or more).

We live in "the Information Age" and the gatekeepers of such are private companies...that should give anyone some pause...I'd hope that we could agree that, as such powerful entities, they should behave in ways that align with core American values, regardless of whether or not they were the initial target of the founder's focus on power limitation.

 

[gmerkt]

When NEIL KNOX who is DEAD now spoke about a whole bunch of stuff way back when... I was pretty shocked which is saying a lot for me. LOL Now, even since NEIL KNOX DIED..

For those here who don't remember him, Neal Knox was one of the good guys. He was a gun journalist, among other accomplishments he founded Handloader magazine. He was a staunch 2A advocate and was one of two key men who charted the course forward for the NRA as prime defender of 2A rights. He hired LaPierre, who turned around and got Knox bumped from his leadership role at NRA. Basically, LaPierre wanted Knox's job. It was at this point that the NRA became the cash machine for LaPierre and the public relations people.

One of the things we can thank Neal Knox for is getting the 1968 Gun Control Act amended. In 1986, he was instrumental in getting "mail order" ammo back for us, which I've mentioned before. The McClure Volkmer Act, or Firearms Owners Protection Act. He lobbied and pulled strings to get this done.

I do have a question as to what this means for the NRA as an entity. Will the NRA be gutted of the crooks that have been running it and reform, or will it be the end of the NRA and one or more new industry groups will take its place?

Well, if the NRA goes into the hands of a receiver, my impression is that would result in a dissolution. Receivership has been mentioned as a result of the NY AG's efforts. Receivers are usually brought in to liquidate assets. But there are other possibilities. The cake isn't baked yet.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Free speech has nothing to do with Twitter, Facebook or any of the other social media companies. They are non-government actors and not subject to the First Amendment. As for going to downtown Portland or getting punched in the face, again not government. The First Amendment doesn't say you can say anything you want without consequences, it simply says the government can't retaliate. It's odd that a Second Amendment site has such a poor understanding of the First Amendment.

Actually, free speech is enshrined within such places as Farcebook and Twatter, they only have protections as long as they are not a publisher which they clearly are! Moderation that is NOT fairly or evenly done, often at odds with many writers who use those apps, makes this a very clear case for 1st rights and protections! Obummer was the one who pulled the rabbit out of the hat with his E.U. basically stating that publishers could act in what ever manor they wished, that they could publish what ever propaganda they wanted, or were directed/paid to push, and that actual freedom of speech/freedom of the press went out the window!
Normally, I would agree with what you posted, but the facts have been changed, and the only thing that remains is weather or not Congress acts to remove protections for those sights and holds them to the standards of any other publisher!

 

[bkroger86]

Actually, free speech is enshrined within such places as Farcebook and Twatter, they only have protections as long as they are not a publisher which they clearly are! Moderation that is NOT fairly or evenly done, often at odds with many writers who use those apps, makes this a very clear case for 1st rights and protections! Obummer was the one who pulled the rabbit out of the hat with his E.U. basically stating that publishers could act in what ever manor they wished, that they could publish what ever propaganda they wanted, or were directed/paid to push, and that actual freedom of speech/freedom of the press went out the window!
Normally, I would agree with what you posted, but the facts have been changed, and the only thing that remains is weather or not Congress acts to remove protections for those sights and holds them to the standards of any other publisher!

Free speech isn't enshrined in a business, regardless of whether that business is Facebook, Chevron or Northwest Firearms. Each has its own set of rules regarding what communication is allowed and not allowed at that business. For example, if you're a Biden supporting anti-2A liberal who is posting about gun control 24/7 on Northwest Firearms, I fully expect you to be banned from the site.

Also, I don't understand the rationale behind people here wanting Facebook to lose Section 230 protection. Section 230 is designed to provide these sites with immunity from content posted by a 3rd party (a user). If you remove that immunity, their moderation policies will be even more heavy handed. If you want MORE control and less freedom of speech, repeal Section 230.

 

[Ridge Walker]

Free speech isn't enshrined in a business, regardless of whether that business is Facebook, Chevron or Northwest Firearms. Each has its own set of rules regarding what communication is allowed and not allowed at that business. For example, if you're a Biden supporting anti-2A liberal who is posting about gun control 24/7 on Northwest Firearms, I fully expect you to be banned from the site.

Also, I don't understand the rationale behind people here wanting Facebook to lose Section 230 protection. Section 230 is designed to provide these sites with immunity from content posted by a 3rd party (a user). If you remove that immunity, their moderation policies will be even more heavy handed. If you want MORE control and less freedom of speech, repeal Section 230.

I don't understand why they aren't being sued for violating 230. Once they started editing they became publishers and no longer protected. I believe Justice Thomas has said publicly he thought SCOTUS might look at that if it came their way.

 

[Member 52301]

I do believe that the late NEIL KNOX would have been the BEST THING for the NRA many years ago.

Oh well.

Cate