Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 175

Thread: Ollie North ousted from his NRA role

  1. #21
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by JDD View Post
    Please don't insult our intelligence.

    The whole Maria Butina association (and her guilty plea) is not a good look for your organization (and I speak of the broad NRA umbrella). Even if I was to believe your lawyers and accountants statements that everything was on the up and up. After all, WLP would not do anything fast and loose with the cash would he? It is not like the NRA has not recently had a president that had previously explained - under oath - how he illegally used money gained from selling weapons to a country that had just taken a bunch of US Diplomats hostage, and illegally channeled it to a group of less than savory characters. When I say that I don't believe your organizations statements, it is because your organization has gone out of its way to be unbelievable.
    You implied that foreign funds had been used for political purposes. I'm telling you that's false. If you're insinuating that I'm lying, fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDD View Post
    President Trump is demonstrably a terrible president for our gun rights. We are well into the third year of his presidency, it is a bit late for your organization to talk about this being the start his pro-gun administrative agenda (especially given what a minor win the pull-out of the ATT was) when he has already taken positions that have established terrible precedent. I don't care at all about bump stocks, but I care a whole hell of a lot about the idea that an executive order can outlaw stuff in a hurry. What if next time it is pistol stabilizing braces? More importantly though, you have demonstrated that the NRA is eager and willing to cozy up to a political party that gives it nothing in return.
    I disagree. We have two more pro-gun SCOTUS justices and 100 lower court judges who would have been appointed by Clinton, but for Trump. Pro-gun regulatory action was effectively limited by not having an ATF director. If you see a confirmed director in the near future, that means a regulatory agenda is more possible.

    Trump didn't use an executive order to ban bump stocks. ATF promulgated a regulation in compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act. While we opposed the proposed and final regulations(I even wrote these comments that make that very clear), in terms of precedent, if anything this makes it more difficult to administratively ban items as "machineguns." In the past, ATF has simply reclassified items based on administrative fiat with no attempt to comply with the APA. They did so with what is arguably the first "bump stock." https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...011-02-28.html Even though they made no attempt to promulgate a new rule, a favorable panel of the 11th. Circuit Court of Appeals still upheld the reclassification. I know I've explained in other threads that this is why we made the internal decision not to pursue litigation over the final rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDD View Post
    What have we seen in the last 2.5 years? We had republican house, senate, and presidency. Nation-wide concealed carry reciprocity as a start? Anything? No, we -gun owners- were taken for granted as the NRA doubled down on supporting politicians who give absolutely zero kittens about our rights outside of using the 2nd Amendment as a get out the vote.

    While I appreciate your work on behalf of the Second Amendment, you severely understate my level of frustration.
    The president and other Republicans can't automatically get us the 60 votes needed in the Senate. The only thing likely to shake out national reciprocity (other than somehow getting to 60 pro-gun votes in the Senate) is winning Rogers v. Grewal https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search....%5C18-824.html

    If Congress is just normalizing what is already legal in every state, it will be a much easier lift to get to 60 votes.

    The things that they can do (appointments) they are doing at an unprecedented rate. Trump has substantially transformed the federal judiciary in a single term.

    With the opposition candidates for president already racing to see who will support a ban on the most guns, who are we supposed to support as an alternative?

  2. #22
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Name:  40FB48E6-8545-4CBA-BEC7-3EC41D0D586D.jpeg
Views: 507
Size:  63.0 KB

  3. #23
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Quote Originally Posted by joshs View Post
    While ILA is part of the same corporate entity (501(c)(4)) as "main" NRA, we do have separate finances. Money donated to ILA will get spent on legal, legislative, or political activities...I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have any other questions.
    Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I appreciate the information and will be certain to send future contributions to ILA and PVF. Honestly, I can't remember the last time I sent money to NRA main organization, so it seems like what little money I have given has gone to where it would be used the best.

    EDIT: So, I did think of one more question. Is there some arm of the NRA that is particularly tasked with outreach to gun-neutral populations? Strategically, it appears to me that the standard NRA battle plan is to energize the base and maximize the vote from the pro-gun community. While that has worked to some degree in the past, I worry that the pro-gun community will just be too small in 30 years. Hopefully, I'm overlooking something and there really is more effort on outreach than I'm aware of.
    Last edited by pangloss; 05-12-2019 at 08:14 PM.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by pangloss View Post
    EDIT: So, I did think of one more question. Is there some arm of the NRA that is particularly tasked with outreach to gun-neutral populations? Strategically, it appears to me that the standard NRA battle plan is to energize the base and maximize the vote from the pro-gun community. While that has worked to some degree in the past, I worry that the pro-gun community will just be too small in 30 years. Hopefully, I'm overlooking something and there really is more effort on outreach than I'm aware of.
    That right there is my largest concern for the future of gun ownership.
    I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream.

  5. #25
    While pangloss asks the important questions for the future, I'll ask the obvious about the now: what, if anything, is going to be done about the mess with WLP that got dumped in our laps today?

    North needed to go, in my opinion, simply because of the bad optics he provided for the organization, but these leaks are just as bad if not worse because they show a continuing rot with its roots coming out from WLP's desk. Evidently, North was also one of the few people who cared enough about the future of the organization to want to even try to do anything about it.

    I've been a pretty stalwart defender of the NRA for the last few years, but there's only so much I can do. I can only try to get people to understand how Washington works so many times, or point out how utterly useless GOA is as an organization in comparison by pulling out their tax returns, or put up with infotainment like MAC and his now-targeted-advertising of the "Negotiating Rights Away" page on Facebook, or try to convince people that money spent on ILA isn't money spent on the NRA, or explain what a horrifically bad idea it is to transfer everyone from one boat to another in the middle of the 2020 offensive, or explain the legal implications of the bump stock decision and NRA's decision not to challenge it, etc., etc., etc.

    The financial emergency and Wayne's corruption have to be addressed, and they need to be addressed now. If the NRA's leadership does not address it because nobody wants to scuff WLP's $20,000 shoes, the State of New York will probably do it and sink the entire organization, and even if NRA-ILA survives the death of its parent org, the clout it has will be severely diminished and we'll all be worse off for it.

    Tell me something is in the works to unfuck this situation. It's getting a little too difficult at too critical a time to ignore all of this.
    Last edited by einherjarvalk; 05-12-2019 at 10:26 PM.

  6. #26
    Site Supporter Drang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pugetopolis
    Quote Originally Posted by joshs View Post
    PVF is a segregated fund (political action committee) that can directly contribute to and and endorse candidates for office. In certain cases, PVF may also be able to fund ballot initiative fights in certain states. In other states, we will set up a committee if required under state law (it seems like we've had to setup one in Washington state every election cycle to oppose ballot initiatives).
    I've been pretty critical of those who interpret every loss in the legislature or the ballot box as evidence that NRA has "sold us out", but it maybe cut WLP's salary and spend some of the savings on more active lobbying in the states?

    Maybe Marion Hammer doesn't need to be paid so well, either what with being the only NRA paid state lobbyist...

    (Yes, I realize you have no say about their salaries)
    Last edited by Drang; 05-13-2019 at 01:39 AM.
    Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
    “It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
    Glenn Reynolds

  7. #27
    Site Supporter Trukinjp13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    On the topic of Trump not being fun friendly in his decisions. He has really for the most part towed the line that the NRA has built. So has he merely based his decisions on what the NRA says?

    So if said NRA had a non corrupt truly 2a friendly President maybe the POTUS would tow a harder line. Actually be pro gun. If he is simply a blind sheep maybe we just fight to give better direction.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by einherjarvalk View Post
    While pangloss asks the important questions for the future, I'll ask the obvious about the now: what, if anything, is going to be done about the mess with WLP that got dumped in our laps today?
    North needed to go, in my opinion, simply because of the bad optics he provided for the organization, but these leaks are just as bad if not worse because they show a continuing rot with its roots coming out from WLP's desk. Evidently, North was also one of the few people who cared enough about the future of the organization to want to even try to do anything about it.
    Very well said. I'm convinced that the NRA needs new leadership NOW. The board may have full faith in WLP but I sure dont. Those leaked expense letters are going to be a hard pill to swallow for NRA members.

  9. #29
    Site Supporter $teve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Nashville
    After reading the WSJ article the financial irregularities alleged really do not seem excessive to me. As the Executive VP in a major sized operation i would expect these types of expenditures to be in greater excesses then what is being reported. My opinion about this matter, the NRA would have never become what it is today without Wayne LaPierre's vision and guidance.

  10. #30
    Site Supporter Drang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pugetopolis
    Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
    “It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
    Glenn Reynolds

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •