That’s just depressing. I can find no fault with the basic premise of the article.Originally Posted by BillSWPA
That’s just depressing. I can find no fault with the basic premise of the article.
”But in the end all of these ideas just manufacture new criminals when the problem isn't a lack of criminals.” -JRB
As a Benefactor member...hard agree. The NRA's basically stood still, if not moved a little left, in the time since I joined around 2000. They've in no way kept up or even tried to keep up with most rank-and-file gun owners, especially those outside of the one core activity that the NRA seems to think everyone does - which is hunt deer from a blind using a 30-30. Or, shoot NRA bullseye with an 80+ year old USGI M1911/M1911A1 with a honking huge set of sights on it. And maybe the odd fella who wanders around shooting critters with a .500 X-Frame S&W Revolver.
Good read, however I don't know if I would say, or attribute, that the perception of the NRA is some sort of Fudd Hivemind. Foundationally Fudd, perhaps? Although I do believe the moniker does have some merit.
I think they've, mildly, backed off the Cult of the Black Rifle since the Trump Administration, but they certainly had a very non-Fudd arc. Folks can criticize the Firearms Policy Coalition for fear mongering, and most companies and influencers can be rightly accused of pandering; but remember Dana Loesch or NRATV? That cringey stuff did no favors to the general purpose of 2A support or education and the goal definitely didn't include Uncle Ed and his M70 from the Nixon era. I'm just a dude but I would have used the tumultuous times of the Obama administration for ambassadorship and clarity, not banging pots and pans together.
The NRA spent the past two decades capitalizing on any drama, rallying the echo chamber, and assisting in a cultural push that made the NRA appear like a GOP PAC. Fuel for the fire was free, so the obscene amounts of money were way too tempting.
This is a very non-caffeinated post, so forgive quick jumps or mild hyperbole. But the current leadership should get a proper reap/sow ratio for mismanagement and harm to "gun culture".
Last edited by PNWTO; 02-24-2023 at 01:10 PM.
The implication that Jason is leaving because of some impending doom is just wrong. He got a really good opportunity elsewhere. Jason is my friend, and I'll miss working with him, but he's leaving on good terms.
Do you subscribe to our alerts? https://www.nraila.org/grassroots-alerts/ Or follow us on social media? We're pretty hardcore.
Since I've been at ILA (2010) I've drafted or worked on every single constitutional carry bill that has become law (I only caught the tail end of shall issue with Wisconsin and Illinois). We've fought every attempt to regulate hardware more strictly. My former boss made the wrong call on bump stocks and ERPOs, but we course corrected there pretty quickly. We opposed the bump stock rule (I wrote our comments) and we've opposed every single state ERPO law (I personally helped kill an effort by the Uniform Law Commission to create a bad model ERPO law).
We just filed a challenge to the pistol brace rule with the largest brace manufacturer and a coalition of 25 states.
We won Bruen last year, which has opened up the possibility of effective legal challenges to numerous gun control laws.
We have numerous challenges filed to carry, AW, and magazine bans across the country. Not long ago we successfully enjoined CA from enforcing its mag ban for a whole week (freedom week).
We have the only effective pro-gun election operation in the country. It's by far the most expensive part of what we do, but it's also the most important. Litigation and legislative wins are impossible without first electing pro-gun candidates. No other gun group even tries beyond dumping a relatively small amount of money into a few ads. Most other groups also have no real lobbying presence. Most don't even employ a single registered federal lobbyist.
If by "moved to the left" you mean that we've recently cut way back on anything that looks partisan like NRATV, then that's certainly the case. When I started, we endorsed over 60 Ds in the US House. We need to get back to the point where it is ok for some Dems to be openly pro gun (other than Jared Golden). If Bloomberg continues to withdraw from Dem politics, then now might be the time for the return of the pro-gun Dem.
Last edited by joshs; 02-24-2023 at 01:16 PM.
Again, Josh, thanks for weighing in.
”But in the end all of these ideas just manufacture new criminals when the problem isn't a lack of criminals.” -JRB
I know Charles Cotton a tiny bit... from a handshake and posting/discussions on his TX forum. Lawyer, ex cop, staunch 2A supporter. Can't say I know him well, but, I hold on to the belief that he's doing all he can to make positive things happen. As much as the linked piece rings true to this Benefactor member, one who has been donating to SAF and not NRA recently, I hope there can be a way through for NRA that leads to WLP being gone without the dissolution of the NRA. Hope is not much of a plan though.
I'm familiar with some charity practices from the early 90's where donors could "earmark" donations for a specific sub-organization in that charity... what I've seen (old news, granted) is that budgets are baked and more earmarked money for one sub-organization simply means less "budgeted" money, yielding zero gain for an earmarked donation.
I have no idea whether that's the case with ILA.... If someone could convince me otherwise, I would consider a direct donation.
@joshs Thank you for all that you do. Maybe you get Ouiments job? (if you want it)...
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
ILA has separate funding. We have our own fiscal team per the bylaws that established ILA within the main association. So, ILA is part of the whole (c)(4) NRA, but it has its own funding. We can also use (c)(4) funds for a broader amount of our work. https://donate.nraila.org/donate
For donating to election work, giving to the PAC (NRA-PVF) is the most effective way. Those funds have the least restrictions for election use.
The most restrictive alternative is giving to NRA Freedom Action Foundation, which is a 501(c)(3) related organization that has a board comprised mostly of ILA staff. FAF funds were originally used mostly for voter registration (remember Trigger the Vote with Chuck Norris and R. Lee Ermey), but FAF is now used more to fund pro-2A litigation. https://www.nrafaf.org/donate/
And, thanks!
Will the NRA Range survive this year? I sure hope so, but I'm skeptical.
https://nraindanger.wordpress.com/20...harles-cotton/
Reply With Quote