Thoughts on the 2nd Amendment Foundation

[Ed L]

I am curious what boardmembers thoughts are on the Second Amendment Federation.

The Second Amendment Foundation is not as big of a name as the NRA nor does it have the membership size, name recognition or political clout of the NRA. But it has a very impressive record of legal actions on behalf of gun owners as well as assisting gunowners with legal issues against unconstitutional and unjust gun laws.

It occurs to me that the SEF is focused on legal actions in defense of the 2nd Amendment while the NRA is involved in many things.

I joined the SEF last year, but never made it to the convention in Dallas as I had planned.

Then this year comes along and I got a 2018 dues statement that did not have a specific amount for yearly dues but listed"

"Your Share of 2018 Budget: $200"
"Total Suggested Contribution: $200"

This struck me the wrong way. I know I get constant requests from the NRA-ILA and the NRA-PVF, but to be told that $200 is my share of the 2nd Amendment Foundation Budget struck me as the wrong way to do it. Conversely, perhaps it is a more straightforward way of securing funding and budgeting, but it just strikes me badly.

Considering the threat we are now facing to gun rights, I think it is important to support both organizations even if it means selling extraneous firearms and supplies to do so.

Anyway, I would like the thoughts of board member's on the 2nd Amendment Foundation.

I don't want to start an NRA vs. SEF debate or thread, or have this degenerate into one. But of course once one starts a thread, you really cannot dictate where the thread goes.

thanks.

[fatdog]

I think it is moronic stupid hamfisted fund raising. So is a lot of what the NRA does. But, I look at what Gottleib and his team have done and consider the legal expenses for their undertaking, and send them some cash anyway every year.

It does strongly make the case that most lawyers are lousy marketeers.

[blues]

I recently joined for five years with a $50 contribution.

In yesterday's mail I received a plea for further donations in the guise of a letter asking me to vote on whether the SAF should continue to fight certain legal battles in court and earmark funds for that purpose. Then it went on and asked for contributions to assist in that regard.

Clearly, the purpose of the letter was not to obtain my vote, which is just a contrivance, but to solicit further donations.

Rather than play these silly games I'd have much preferred to receive a letter stating what the current balance available for legal action is, what the cost of ongoing litigation is, including a summary, and what court costs are anticipated going forward. I'd have been much more inclined to take the solicitation more seriously.

I do think they have done good work and are worth supporting. I just would like to be treated like an adult and not like someone watching a late night TV used car sales pitch.

[Ed L]

I recently joined for five years with a $50 contribution.

In yesterday's mail I received a plea for further donations in the guise of a letter asking me to vote on whether the SAF should continue to fight certain legal battles in court and earmark funds for that purpose. Then it went on and asked for contributions to assist in that regard.

Hey, I got that same letter!

[Drang]

Then this year comes along and I got a 2018 dues statement that did not have a specific amount for yearly dues but listed"

"Your Share of 2018 Budget: $200"
"Total Suggested Contribution: $200"

That's... odd.
I've been alternating donations to NRA-ILA/NRA-PVF and to SAF for years, not to mention wandering by the SAF table at the WAC gun shows and dropping a fin or a sawbuck in the kitty, as funds allow.
I am pretty sure they never hit me up with a "suggested donation" of that much. The "multiple choice" type of thing, yes, but that much out of the gate? No.

Or, I guess it's possible I toss the mailers unread, and missed it.

[GuanoLoco]

NRA and SAF Life Member. I ignore their ‘suggested dues’.

I do periodically donate as I see fit, particularly when the anti’s irritate me, or when they so something I particularly respect.

[SAWBONES]

I became a lifetime SAF member over a decade ago.
I feel it has done good work supporting the Second Amendment.

It's one of the "quieter" 2A rights groups in terms of advertising, though all of the various 2A groups seem to do at least some degree of dishonest or transparently-hypocritical self-promotion (requests for donations disguised as "questionaires") or alarmist mailings (the NRA's modus operandi), or post-joining offers of "services" (with SAF it's promotion of funerary services; maybe I'm just of a "certain age"?).

I support all of them, not because I agree with their politics or with everything they say or publish, but because without them we have no significant political clout.

[perlslacker]

Welcome to political fundraising. By joining SAF, they know that you're more likely to donate so they ask you for money. If you've donated in the past, they are going to ask you for more. This is true no matter who you give to.

My feeling re: the SAF generally is that their focus on litigation is great, but they're essentially trying to fix bad laws that already got passed. If you're looking to prevent those bad laws from getting passed in the first place, the NRA-ILA is pretty much the only game in town. Which is unfortunate because the NRA is...the NRA.

[Chance]

Of the various advocacy groups I've contributed to, pretty much all of them have annoying solicitations. The civil rights organizations seem to be the most aggressive, though that might be my imagination. I take that back: my SO donated to the American Wildlife Fund one time, and I swear she gets a letter from them every week.

I like SAF and have been a life member and steady donor for a while. They focus their efforts on challenging errant legislation and policies in court rather than lobbying, and they seem to pick their fights pretty well.

[Ed L]

I like SAF and have been a life member and steady donor for a while. They focus their efforts on challenging errant legislation and policies in court rather than lobbying, and they seem to pick their fights pretty well.

That is my exactly my impression of them.

While I object to heavy handed solicitations: like a letter telling me that $200 is my share of their budget, unfortunately they have probably found such tactics are necessary. Some people think their yearly membership contributions are all that is needed. This is an expensive fight.

Considering that the stakes are so heavy and the 2nd Amendment Foundation has quite a track record, I am willing to overlook things that would otherwise alienate me. Same with the NRA's ILA and PVF.

I don't feel the need to contribute to every appeal, but I certainly contribute a sizable amount over the course of a year.

[RevolverRob]

As someone who has sat on the other side of the table and been a donation solicitor for quite a while - let me weigh in for a second on the "heavy handed" fund raising tactic.

It works.

Importantly, waving the cash jar in front of someone's face, works better for small cash donations, that soliciting them in a "polite" manner. (Think you'll get more with a kind word and a gun than a kind word alone). The simple fact is, the less money you have in your bank account, the less energy fundraisers can afford to spend on you. And a little extra pressure exerted up front that frees the 5-10-20-500 dollar donations from you speeds the process along. If you've never had to try to raise a bunch of capital for something, it's not easy and the closer you get to the target, the harder it is to get the money (because inevitably folks think "someone else" will cover it).

Let me give you an example, I've got a goal, I need $500,000 and I needed it yesterday. Where am I going to get it? Well, ideally, I'm going to get it from 1 or 2 people with big wallets. But before I can get that cash from them, they need to see me put some money where my mouth is. So, I've got to go work the phones/letters/pump you in person for the cash. Every buck counts, but what I really need is the first 100k, as fast as possible. Better to give you the fast, emotional pitch, and pry whatever you're going to give and maybe a little extra juice from guilt and get it in the pot and move on, than coddle you. Once I get that 100k, my big donors' wallets open up, the goal gets hit, and I send you a thank you letter for your contribution.

I'll also tell you this as someone who has done it, I've never met a person who fund raised successfully who liked having to do it this way. We'd prefer to treat every donation of 50-cents to 50-million with the same amount of respect (and we do try to say Thank You to each one), but the reality is, if I invest the amount of time soliciting 50 bucks from you as I do soliciting 50-million from someone else, I'm a bad fundraiser. I'm working a short clock and a tough game and time is money.

Long story short; if you don't want to get ham-fisted letters from folks asking for money? Give more money. The more zeroes and commas in your check, the faster those little things will go away.

[Ed L]

Long story short; if you don't want to get ham-fisted letters from folks asking for money? Give more money. The more zeroes and commas in your check, the faster those little things will go away.

I would think that they have databases of who gives what and concentrate more on people with a history of giving more.

But I've never done any fundraising, so what do I know?

[RevolverRob]

I would think that they have databases of who gives what and concentrate more on people with a history of giving more.

But I've never done any fundraising, so what do I know?

Actually, it's the opposite. Those who have already given more in the past are likely to continue to give at the same level or above.

The folks that have given less are the ones you want to focus on, you want to get them all to the same base level, ideally.

At least for small donations (read: anything under 5-figures). Big donations are a much more choreographed song and dance situation.

[RoyGBiv]

^^^What is the best way, if even possible at all, to make anonymous contributions?
Anything made electronically requires giving the recipient your contact information.
I definitely contribute less $'s to fewer organizations to avoid the unending follow up solicitations.

[fatdog]

Their fund raising thinking may well be in line with what Rob describes, and their tactics may align with what causes things to flow, but their message and content approach sucks. No, let me say it blows dead bears.

I am not in the non-profit sector, B to B, but I am in a lot of professional organizations with peers who run non-profit marketing programs and all of the successful ones believe in good content marketing and good messaging.

They put their hand out by effectively telling stories. They work hard to profile their consistent donors, and they tailor both their messaging and content to distinct groups within their donor base. And since they started targeted content marketing, their results have gone up.

This SAF approach is pretty 20th century.

[Ed L]

My feeling re: the SAF generally is that their focus on litigation is great, but they're essentially trying to fix bad laws that already got passed. If you're looking to prevent those bad laws from getting passed in the first place, the NRA-ILA is pretty much the only game in town. Which is unfortunate because the NRA is...the NRA.

And this is an important reason to support both organizations.

[11B10]

Hey, I got that same letter!



So did I - I'm sure everyone who donated got it.

As for the NRA, I did the Lifetime deal about 6 weeks ago and haven't heard or seen anything yet. And that is despite a couple phone calls. I don't want anything but a membership card - is that too much to ask for? Apparently.

[SAWBONES]

After originally joining the NRA well over thirty years ago, and starting to receive the flood of (then snail-mail) never-ending come-ons asking (always urgently and dramamtically!) for further financial contributions, I called the NRA offices and spoke to an actual human being, explaining that the continual barrage of requests for money, always represented as emergent and addressing imminent loss of 2A rights, was insulting to the intelligence as well as annoying.

The lady I spoke with told me that the continual mail solicitation approach to fund-raising seemed to work better than any other method for generating income.

I asked at that time to be removed from any and all of the NRA's mailing lists except those pertaining to maintaining my membership and receiving The American Rifleman, and I've never gotten anything else since.

Surface mail and email overtures from SAF, CCRKBA, JPFO and GOA are infrequent enough that they don't bother me, but the NRA's approach was truly annoying.

[blues]

^^^^

I don't get any junk mail from NRA either...and very few emails other than the ones I've specifically requested. Those very few "extras" have not proven problematic as they are rare.

I also effected this by speaking with a rep on the phone a few years back

[Ed L]

As for the NRA, I did the Lifetime deal about 6 weeks ago and haven't heard or seen anything yet. And that is despite a couple phone calls. I don't want anything but a membership card - is that too much to ask for? Apparently.

The NRA does not have my phone number or real email address.

As much as I value what they do, I would get very annoyed if I was getting phonecalls or daily emails.

[11B10]

The NRA does not have my phone number or real email address.

As much as I value what they do, I would get very annoyed if I was getting phonecalls or daily emails.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I haven't received ANYTHING - no calls, letters, emails -NOTHING. I'll be the first to admit that's extremely unusual for the NRA.

[Ed L]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I haven't received ANYTHING - no calls, letters, emails -NOTHING. I'll be the first to admit that's extremely unusual for the NRA.

You were clear enough. I completely misunderstood you.

I have heard horror stories about people getting phonecalls and emails from them and having to requested to be taken off their list.

Now, I would much rather have that problem than have NYC like gun laws on a national basis.

We are all pro-gun rights. But one of the problems when they send too much mail, even when facing a virulent anti-gun campaign as we have now, is that people will start throwing anything they receive away unread. I think a fair amount of NRA members do not renew because they get so used to getting calls mails for early renewals or mails that make it seem that them memberships are expiring when they really aren't that when they start ignoring and throwing everything away, including valid notifications to renew.

[RoyGBiv]

When I first became a member I got a flood of snail mail solicitations. After 2 calls to NRA Member Services and the number they gave me for the entity managing their insurance solicitations, I now get 2 or 3 snail mails a year and maybe 1 email per month.

When I signed up my wife, same thing. She's let her membership lapse, so they're sending her 3 or 4 snail mails a year with offers to re-join.

Tolerable.

[JAD]

I never asked but the NRA never sent me anything after I lifed up.

My charity budget is large for an American but pretty focused. 2A gets a pretty small slice so I keep it to the most effective organization, NRA-ILA.

Now that I look at it Roe v Wade gets more than an order of magnitude more than Heller; it sure is nice when those two issues nest.

[holmes168]

Just joined SAF- seems like a solid organization. Thanks for the mention, I’d not heard of them before.

[11B10]

Now that I look at it Roe v Wade gets more than an order of magnitude more than Heller; it sure is nice when those two issues nest.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't agree more!