Why I don't like the NRA...

[Stomper]

Perhaps Mr. LaPierre rails against the mainstream "Gloria Steinem" brand of feminism, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with women's rights and respect for women, but rather just another radical front for extreme leftist "liberal" agendas?

 

[AGCR]

Perhaps Mr. LaPierre rails against the mainstream "Gloria Steinem" brand of feminism, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with women's rights and respect for women, but rather just another radical front for extreme leftist "liberal" agendas?

Given that the Equal Rights Amendment has been languishing around Congress since 1923, its kinda hard to call any feminists mainstream.

However, the relevant point being, the NRA has become a major stumbling block for people who otherwise have no real problem with guns. I don't argue that the NRA hasn't done good work politically, but pretty much any time I talk guns with people, I'll be asked about them, and as soon as I point out my problem with their social conservatism, I'll get a sigh of relief, cos people are totally sick of gun politics being publicly dominated and tied onto such regressive viewspoints.

 

[bersaguy]

However, the relevant point being, the NRA has become a major stumbling block for people who otherwise have no real problem with guns. I don't argue that the NRA hasn't done good work politically, but pretty much any time I talk guns with people, I'll be asked about them, and as soon as I point out my problem with their social conservatism, I'll get a sigh of relief, cos people are totally sick of gun politics being publicly dominated and tied onto such regressive viewspoints.

Are you for real????

Since when is individual liberty, and social conservatism for that matter, "regressive viewpoints"?

 

[AGCR]

Since when is individual liberty, and social conservatism for that matter, "regressive viewpoints"?[/QUOTE]

It's exactly my concern for individual liberty which puts me at odds with social conservatism.
Expanding the public face of gun culture beyond the NRA which has repeatedly linked itself with exclusively Republican and conservative causes is the best way to ensure the gun rights movement stays relevant. I realize that every time I march with the Pink Pistols in the Gay Pride Parade and we get cheered by people who would never vote for a Republican in 1,000 years, to cite just one example.

 

[dario541]

Actually, those who hate the NRA are in good company: Obama Bin Laden, Bill & Hitlery Clinton, Diane Frankenstein, Sarah Brady, and ALL the socialist, dictatorial freedom hating nations of the world. Other people who would have also hated the NRA were those "lovers" of freedom such as Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Tojo, Idi Amin and Fernando Marcos. I'm sure that NRA haters can find many other such allies around the world today. Boo on the NRA! Hooray for the Gun Grab!

 

[WAYNO]

Actually, those who hate the NRA are in good company: Obama Bin Laden, Bill & Hitlery Clinton, Diane Frankenstein, Sarah Brady, and ALL the socialist, dictatorial freedom hating nations of the world. Other people who would have also hated the NRA were those "lovers" of freedom such as Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Tojo, Idi Amin and Fernando Marcos. I'm sure that NRA haters can find many other such allies around the world today. Boo on the NRA! Hooray for the Gun Grab!

+1.

I severely mistrust the motives of anyone who would frequent a gun-owners forum, and profess hatred for the NRA. :huh:

WAYNO.

 

[dario541]

I remember a few years ago when the American Legion asked Diane Feinstein if the "Assault Rifle" ban should be repealed. Instead of answering the question, she went on a tirade against the NRA! Good company for other anti-NRA people!

 

[AGCR]

Wow...

So let me get this straight... I'm sure you vote, correct? And, I bet you vote pretty much a left leaning ticket which included Obama, correct?
And, you did this even though you know for a fact that Obama, and most all liberals like him have an etched in stone voting record AGAINST firearms freedoms wherever, and whenever they get the chance yet you still voted for them - endorse them for their "socially Progressive" ideology, correct?

Yet, you hold a hard line against the NRA for what you perceive as them supporting a few (what you title as) socially regressive positions.

So... What you do is turn a blind eye (or at least take a neutral position) to your leftists politicians of choice very open, and obvious anti gun, anti 2nd Amendment positions, yet when it comes to those (NRA, etc) that are at the forefront of defending your right to bear arms, be you a Pink Pistol or some goofy "terrorist motorcycle group" (of sorts) or just an average straight guy, then you get all high principled about it and do not do that 'blind eye' thing you do on behalf of your leftists politicians that want your 2nd Amendment Right stripped from you, or at the very least marginalized to a meaningless sentence of an archaic origin.

Set aside your disdain for those portions of the NRA that do not meet your "socially progressive" standards and embrace that portion of the NRA that defends your pink pistol right to keep and bear arms.

It's obvious you are that lenient of your "socially progressive" politicians who would just love to take your hand guns from you be they Pink or not.



Perhaps what you REALLY SHOULD BE DOING is RANTING to your "socially progressive" politicians about how they are way out of line by going after your pink pistols, your black rifles, and your blued shot guns.


I strongly suggest that the next time the Pink Pistols want to do something productive for their GUN RIGHTS that they should not go and enter some gay parade where that are just another group on a homogenized crowd of gays, but go by yourselves as the Pink Pistols and camp out in front of your "socially progressive", liberal politicians office who has a "etched in stone" record of being anti-gun.

This will do far more for your right to keep and bear arms than you railing against the NRA and those who support it in spite of their gender.

Believe it or not there are gay gun guys, and women in the NRA.
The NRA does not discriminate though you appear to have a need to believe so...

To answer the numerous charges and questions.
1. I don't "hate" the NRA." I didn't even start this thread, but I do have problems with them, as stated, for historically associating their stances with exclusively Republican Party politics and, as noted in the writing of LaPierre and others, socially conservative causes. This impacts me because as a firearms advocate in an urban area where such sympathies are scarce, I must constantly deal with the assumption that because I'm armed to the teeth, I must also be a homophobic bigot who only knows what Rush has to say on any given subject. When I demonstrate myself to be entirely different, the gun issue becomes no problem.
2. For example, I was asked to be involved in an NRA training of workers at Powells Books last year by their union rep because many of their presumably liberal employees felt uncomfortable, not with GUNS, but by being associated with the NRA. As my magazine is somewhat well known locally, I gladly signed on and the event was so successful they had to add two extra classes.
3. Which brings me to the point: I'm not here because I expect to make everyone a heavily armed gender-queer-quasi-socialist like myself. I just like being involved in the local gunculture. My main activities are projects like the Powells workshops which make gun politics more acceptable to urban folks who the NRA has completely alienated. That demographic sector is the future and if the NRA can't figure out how to relate to it they will become irrelevant eventually. There are occasional signs they may come around, such as liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava and Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand on the east coast who have been praised by the NRA. I'm not an idealogue. I won't be too proud to join the NRA if they start getting their act together.

4. Yes, I did reluctantly vote for Obama. Sorry about that. I joined the GOA as an act of repentance. To quote an article I wrote explaining my decision,
"I wanted my vote to be a steel-toed boot in the face of Republican politicians who lied their way into a preemptive war, trampled roughshod over habeas corpus, injected steroids into an already massive federal bureaucracy and ran up national debt like they had lifted daddy's platinum card."
5. Also, if you think a gay rights march is homogenous, you've never been to one. The Pink Pistols are a proud part of that diversity. Besides such actions, the PPs have been involved in many others, such as combating the recent Seattle public parks ban.
<broken link removed>
And of course I'm aware many of my queer brothers and sisters are in the NRA. Some of the Pinks I know are- others refuse for the reasons I stated.

 

[AGCR]

What do you mean an "aside and not a whole article? "Aside from where? What article?
Not form the book above.
I've read that book, own that book and you are quite inaccurate.
What "aside not a whole article are you quoting?

Please site the article?


Totally inaccurate.

You see, the challenge you have, is that you are so far out from even beginning to be close to the mainstream that you will never, ever be satisfied. And, my friend you better get used to that as this society will never meet you waaay out there.
Embrace your freedoms

So what???
PETA IS anti gun... PERIOD.

To continue:
6. The particular LaPierre quote was a brief dismissing remark against feminism. I checked the book out from the library for an article I wrote in 2005 so I don't have it in front of me. Regarding his other stances, on page 129, LaPierre links groups as dissimilar as Soviet Communism, PETA and Ben & Jerry's ice cream(!) as all hating freedom. You agree with that? I know actual communists, PETA kids and, I'm sure, people who like ice cream or at least support B&J style hippy capitalism, and while I might disagree with them, I'm not going to try to link their motivations as being so sinister. However, such fear mongering is a great fundraiser for the NRA.

7. I know PETA as an organization probably has an anti-gun stance, but I know that doesn't mean their members necessarily are. Just as the ACLU is 2nd A neutral on a national level they are increasingly gun friendly on a state basis, so I don't judge them across the board.

8. And finally, I never claimed to be mainstream. None of my gun toting heros who fought social conservatism were, from John Brown to Eleanor Roosevelt, so thank you for the compliment.

 

[SonicBlue03]

To continue:
6. The particular LaPierre quote was a brief dismissing remark against feminism. I checked the book out from the library for an article I wrote in 2005 so I don't have it in front of me. Regarding his other stances, on page 129, LaPierre links groups as dissimilar as Soviet Communism, PETA and Ben & Jerry's ice cream(!) as all hating freedom. You agree with that? I know actual communists, PETA kids and, I'm sure, people who like ice cream or at least support B&J style hippy capitalism, and while I might disagree with them, I'm not going to try to link their motivations as being so sinister. However, such fear mongering is a great fundraiser for the NRA.

hahahaha, did he really accuse Cohen and Greenfield as being freedom haters?

I've spent time actually talking to Ben Cohen in person after he spoke at length about how they got into business, the success, failures, and eventual buy-out by Unilever. To say he hates the freedom of America is like saying LaPierre hates Jews.

 

[Trlsmn]

I am more than willing to back up everything I write or say. For example, Wayne LaPierre complaining about feminism see:
LaPierre & James Baker. Shooting Straight: Telling the Truth About Guns in America. Regnery Publishing, Washington DC, 2002. p.3.
It's an aside, not a whole article. LaPierre considers women with guns an acceptable role within his idea of gender norms. Actual social equality with men, that is, "feminism" he appears not to find so appealing.
For LaPierre in a surreal diatribe against against social just activism, see the same book, p. 129.

Re. PETA. People who are anti-hunting are not automatically anti-self defense. One of my good friends here in town here is one of the girls you see chaining herself to fur store doors and she's totally pro-gun.

And regarding AGCR's associated group listing, what's so odd about them?

I must point out that you just backed up what you said with your own summary and analysis of the articles (opinion) and not the actual text of the articles. Since you offered to back it up please post the actual text.

-Trlsmn

 

[JAFO]

If you want to change the NRA your only hope is to do it from within. If you want the NRA to support your social agenda or lifestyle choices that are not 2nd amendment related you are out of luck. If you want the board of directors to be made up of people who don't answer questions about their own beliefs if they don't align with yours good luck. Conservatives are the majority when it comes to 2nd amendment supporters. Conservatives quite often have Conservative values. I do not support dumbing down or PCifying individual board members. Most seem to do a good job of taking on the 2nd amendment issues. If you are a liberal and want to become a regional rep of the NRA you will have my support as long as you stick to the 2nd amendment and don't try to make the NRA something it is not. You can have the ACLU for picking and choosing 'rights' to support.

 

[ZeroRing]

If you want to change the NRA your only hope is to do it from within. If you want the NRA to support your social agenda or lifestyle choices that are not 2nd amendment related you are out of luck. If you want the board of directors to be made up of people who don't answer questions about their own beliefs if they don't align with yours good luck. Conservatives are the majority when it comes to 2nd amendment supporters. Conservatives quite often have Conservative values. I do not support dumbing down or PCifying individual board members. Most seem to do a good job of taking on the 2nd amendment issues. If you are a liberal and want to become a regional rep of the NRA you will have my support as long as you stick to the 2nd amendment and don't try to make the NRA something it is not. You can have the ACLU for picking and choosing 'rights' to support.

Well said.

 

[AGCR]

The information I've provided on LaPierre's statements is from a review of his book I wrote for the first issue of AGCR in 2005. I've provided specific citation, but don't personally own a copy.
The book is worth checking out, but its a very mixed bag. Part useful history of gun control mixed with hysterical and badly researched social commentary. The type of material termed "garbage" by a much more intelligent social observer William Weir in his "A Well Regulated Militia: The Battle Over Gun Control" 1997 (author's note). which I highly recommend and covers the NRA's failings in great detail.

 

[AGCR]

If you want to change the NRA your only hope is to do it from within. If you want the NRA to support your social agenda or lifestyle choices that are not 2nd amendment related you are out of luck. If you want the board of directors to be made up of people who don't answer questions about their own beliefs if they don't align with yours good luck. Conservatives are the majority when it comes to 2nd amendment supporters. Conservatives quite often have Conservative values. I do not support dumbing down or PCifying individual board members. Most seem to do a good job of taking on the 2nd amendment issues. If you are a liberal and want to become a regional rep of the NRA you will have my support as long as you stick to the 2nd amendment and don't try to make the NRA something it is not. You can have the ACLU for picking and choosing 'rights' to support.

That's the problem, of course. The NRA has ALREADY gone out of its way to be associated with issues having no direct relevance to the 2A. I'm just pointing that out because their ill considered choices now make it that much harder to win support for gun rights among the most rapidly growing segments of the population. And if I had the time, I'd love to change them from within.

 

[fingolfen]

That's the problem, of course. The NRA has ALREADY gone out of its way to be associated with issues having no direct relevance to the 2A. I'm just pointing that out because their ill considered choices now make it that much harder to win support for gun rights among the most rapidly growing segments of the population. And if I had the time, I'd love to change them from within.

Could you provide some concrete examples? Based on recent correspondence, GOA seems to be far more focused on what could be viewed as issues with no “direct relevance” to the Second Amendment (though they'd argue that point). Conversely, the NRA has been focused almost solely on issues relating directly to the right to keep and bear arms. For example – the Tihart Amendment, the recent Amtrack legislation, and most importantly the Heller and McDonald cases before the Supreme Court (and the cases working their way through the lower courts to reach that point). Going forward I expect a challenge to recent California ammunition bans.

As to your second point – “most rapidly growing segments of the population” – which ones are those? According to the most recent Gallup poll:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx

Conservatives are now the single largest ideological group in the nation at 40%. Moderates come in next at 35% with liberals making up only 21%.

 

[pistolero57]

After being encouraged by me, my girlfriend suggested exactly this at her work place. She's an engineer for a small company {<20 employees} who's office manager had a fit on learning she {girlfriend} was carrying at work. The office manger tried really hard to establish a no firearms office policy but was unsuccessful partly due to my supplying local ccw laws and links {courtesy of the NRA} to stories on the Oklahoma case of a company being sued for firing employees who had guns in their cars. And it probably didn't hurt that the CEO from California was fired and replace by a guy fron Texas

Along the same line of thought, if a burglar's family can sue me for shooting him in my house, shouldn't I be able to sue his family for the damage, loss and trauma to my household?

Yeah, I think so. You should be able to sue:

1. The parole or probation officer if the guy's on parole or probation already.
2. The guy himself for endangering you and your family.
3. The guy's wife/girlfriend/family for not notifying authorities that he was engaging in illegal acts.
4. The local police or sheriff's departmenrt for not protecting you.

And so on. Just make a long list and hire the meanest attorney in the territory.

 

[Trlsmn]

The information I've provided on LaPierre's statements is from a review of his book I wrote for the first issue of AGCR in 2005. I've provided specific citation, but don't personally own a copy.
The book is worth checking out, but its a very mixed bag. Part useful history of gun control mixed with hysterical and badly researched social commentary. The type of material termed "garbage" by a much more intelligent social observer William Weir in his "A Well Regulated Militia: The Battle Over Gun Control" 1997 (author's note). which I highly recommend and covers the NRA's failings in great detail.

So from this post I am left with the impression that unlike your statement about backing up your words when actually asked to you don't.

Your statement "I am more than willing to back up everything I write or say." Now has the same effect as:

"I stand behind my words 100% until I have to."

 

[AGCR]

Could you provide some concrete examples? Based on recent correspondence, GOA seems to be far more focused on what could be viewed as issues with no "direct relevance" to the Second Amendment (though they'd argue that point). Conversely, the NRA has been focused almost solely on issues relating directly to the right to keep and bear arms. For example &#8211; the Tihart Amendment, the recent Amtrack legislation, and most importantly the Heller and McDonald cases before the Supreme Court (and the cases working their way through the lower courts to reach that point). Going forward I expect a challenge to recent California ammunition bans.

As to your second point &#8211; "most rapidly growing segments of the population" &#8211; which ones are those? According to the most recent Gallup poll:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx

Conservatives are now the single largest ideological group in the nation at 40&#37;. Moderates come in next at 35% with liberals making up only 21%.

This "piece of static" has been successful in promoting gun culture in places the NRA has no traction. I can see why that would be "annoying" to some.

Also, I'm not going to defend the GOA. Joining was a spur of the moment choice I can't say I regret, as it has been educational, but I won't be renewing.

I'm not arguing the NRA hasn't done good work politically. I fully appreciate they have. Again: My problem is their hysterical rhetoric, which links innocuous social movements (as I cited, even Ben&Jerry ice cream) with sinister forces gathering to take away our freedom. And I can cite many specific examples. In 1985 the NRA attacked an anti-gun police chief, not for his anti-gun views, but because of some rather milquetoast criticism he made of the War on Drugs. (William Weir. "A Well Regulated Militia: The Battle Over Gun Control. 1997. p.109) The NRA also come out against civilian review panels over police departments, offending anyone who wants to see a measure of local oversight on cops. (Weir, 109-110) Of course there's the recent alarmist graphic novel the NRA put out which I'd love to get a hold of.<broken link removed>
But again, my main problem with them is the NRA's slavish devotion to Republican politics, most embarrassingly exemplified following George W. Bushes 2004 speech at their national convention when LaPierre called the president who through his actions demonstrated complete contempt for the US Constitution, a great "friend of freedom." (Rodrigo Bascunan & Christian Pearce. Enter the Babylon System: Unpacking Gun Culture from Samuel Colt to 50 Cent." 2007. 119-120.) or
http://www.scribd.com/doc/185259/Bush-Administration-vs-the-US-Constitution-Scorecard
or
http://www.scn.org/ccapa/pa-vs-const.html

and finally, sorry I wasn't more clear what I meant by largest growing social segments. I was referring to urban populations in general who are less likely to vote Republican or have conservative leanings. It's a tendency easily observable in bumper stickers as you drive around the county.

 

[AGCR]

So from this post I am left with the impression that unlike your statement about backing up your words when actually asked to you don't.

Your statement "I am more than willing to back up everything I write or say." Now has the same effect as:

"I stand behind my words 100% until I have to."

The beauty of written words is they say the same thing consistently. When I cite a particular page of a book as reference, it will be there forever. Any literate person can follow my sources which I have repeatedly provided, both printed and electronic. What, do I need a signed affidavit from Charlton Heston to prove that the NRA has repeatedly aligned with conservative causes beyond gun issues?