• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Something to contemplate,

Sean the Nailer

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
  • May 20, 2006
    6,746
    10,329
    Winnipeg, Mb.
    I was forwarded this from Lindy, (some of ya'll might know of him/remember him) and this is written by Duane Liptak from Magpul. Might want to give it a gander:

    Duane Liptak is the Executive Vice President of Magpul. Every gun owner, ?????????? those not particularly fond of the NRA, should read this, bearing in mind that a new "assault weapon ban" has been reintroduced in Congress this month.

    So, it's relatively popular to bash the NRA right now, and we have a lot of folks in our own community that are happy to jump on that bandwagon. I get it. I don't like where we are at with the 2A situation, either, and I wish the NRA could yell "Shall not be infringed," from the mountaintops. But, through my involvement with the org over the past years, and the insight into the DC and state level situations I've unfortunately had to gain while lobbying and managing lobbying efforts, I also understand some things that make me appreciate the strengths of what the NRA actually brings to us, and I felt compelled to share that as a comment on some posts that decried the current state of the NRA. Some folks urged me to make it sharable, so I'm doing so, with some cleaning up of my language.
    1f642.png
    :) I get that some folks will call me full of it, or claim "the NRA is in full damage control" or whatever, but this isn't an NRA statement. This is a statement from me, a very, very zealous advocate for extreme libertarian gun rights, with an understanding of the current political landscape. Take it as you will, but please put aside your prejudices for just a moment to read, because if we can't get everyone pushing in the same direction, we can't beat the disarm America movement, because they are more than willing to get together to achieve our ruin.
    -------------------------------------------------------------
    In any of this commentary, I'm speaking for myself, not for the NRA. I have to use that disclaimer, as I’m speaking out of turn, and this is MY PERSONAL understanding of the events and information, not official NRA position. I suppose some of this information could also be potentially damaging to future efforts because it lays out some reasoning and strategy, but it's to a point right now where people need to understand some things. The NRA is not just your best defense, they are your ONLY defense. FPC does fantastic legal work, as does SAF. GOA is great at grass roots email activation and they file some amicus briefs and lawsuits. All of them have ZERO capability to interact with lawmakers in a meaningful way more than me running up to DC, which I do a couple times a year. No one else does, period, and that’s why I’m on board with helping to steer the NRA rather than bash it.

    I’ll start out by saying I’m about as hard core libertarian on gun laws as it gets, as in mail order suppressed FA belt feds for everyone. Let’s also get out that pretty much everyone in the NRA building is pretty far along that line, as well. I was talking to Chris and crew about strategies to open the registry during the Bumpfire stock litigation while we talked about how to fight some of the things we know are coming. They’re on board, really. Now, the other side of this is that it’s Washington, D.C., and the number one priority of most congress-folk is getting re-elected. To some extent, that’s fine, as they are supposed to be representing the will of their district or state, and votes support that. When they evaluate an issue, they look at how it will help or hurt their re-election, and…what else they can get for it. If they support A, can they get B as an amendment to help their state, can they count on attracting donors with a particular stance, etc. So let’s take a look at the bumpfire stock thing.

    After Vegas, bumpfire stock legislation was drafted, but NRA had the juice to kill it. Then we have Parkland, and the public outcry to the lawmakers is that we have to “do something for the children”, even if it’s meaningless and dumb—because it was kids this time instead of adults in a currently unsympathetic demographic like Vegas. A strong majority of both chambers were willing to pass a bumpfire stock ban as “something”. The language in the legislative ban included binary triggers, cranks, etc., and could also at some point be interpreted by ATF to include ANY aftermarket trigger and even be mangled to include semi autos in general as having the capability to have rates of fire similar to machineguns and thus, be regulated. It would be a disaster. NRA pushed back hard, but guess what…the legislators were reacting to public sentiment, and they had more than enough votes to pass it. It was going to come out of committee. We (Magpul) yelled at our lobbyists to kill it. NSSF was trying to kill it. NRA was trying to kill it. But…Trump apparently dislikes two things in the firearms world: bumpfire stocks and elephant hunting, for reasons that are his own. So a veto was not happening. So…what’s your play? You can say “No bans, not one inch” and send out a fundraising email, and everyone would feel good about the NRA position, but the ban would have passed, and the dems would potentially have everything they needed for a semi-auto ban already in law, ready to be interpreted nefariously. So, the decision to make the push to regulatory was hatched. NSSF was on board, as well, as everyone thought there was a better chance of killing it in regulatory, or at least fighting it as it would be a hell of a stretch to regulate like that. The NRA’s wording was poor from my perspective. Even if they said, “you don’t need legislation because this is a regulatory matter, and regulatory can take a look at it and clarify,” that would have been better. But, they didn’t…for a few reasons. One, I’m sure they hoped that their “support” of a regulatory fix could sour the legislative efforts and then cancel the regulatory look, too. In any case, the legislation was averted by the push to regulatory, and the regulatory ban is narrow and also likely to be overturned. FPC is making good authority arguments in their suit, and the NRA is arguing on “takings”. The Dems have reintroduced the legislative ban in the house this session, because they wanted the “other” stuff that was also intentionally included. As long as the regulatory ban lasts while legal arguments are happening, the bill can probably be killed. Is that a trade or a compromise? No. It’s not a trade if a dog turd sandwich is being forced down your throat, and it’s pretty much a done deal, but you manage to get away with only taking one bite instead of the whole thing. But, the left LOVES it when the NRA does such things because they have trolls that are helping to divide the gun community, although we do a great job of it ourselves.

    The stronger the NRA is, the stronger the positions can be. The more members the NRA has, the more pressure they can bring in discussions about elections and the more support that stronger positions have when talking to politicians. The more money they have, the more we can spend in elections. Is the NRA perfect? Oh, heck no! No organization is. But they are our only real chance. The NRA, with the help of the NSSF, also, has killed an actual AWB and magazine restrictions on the national level several times in the past few years alone. I, or our lobbyists, have seen it. No one else was even considered part of the conversation, regardless of posturing. We also wouldn’t have FOPA, and if anyone wants to complain about Hughes, which I hate as much as anyone, if you were currently living under GCA ’68, and had the chance to get the FOPA protections, but someone slipped in the Hughes amendment at the last minute to try to poison the bill, you’d still support passing it.

    The NRA didn’t give you GCA ’68. They tried to minimize damage in another time when overwhelming support for even worse gun control existed after Kennedy and King were assassinated. NFA originally included handguns, also, and was in a similar period of hysteria about mob violence. Without the NRA and also the NSSF, we wouldn’t have had the Lawful Commerce in Arms act of 2005, and the entire firearms industry in the US would be out of business by now—sued into bankruptcy just by fending off lawsuits from Bloomberg lawyers.

    There are a lot of wins there, but make no mistake…I want more, too. However…please understand that even with the R majority we had for the last two years…soft Rs like Flake, Rubio, and the other purple district congressmen and senators had us in a bad spot even then. Repealing the NFA, as much as I want that to die, has about 5% support in congress right now. You’re not getting that legislatively unless you change out 95% of congress, no matter how hard we could push for it, or how many “strong statements” anyone makes. We are, in reality, barely hanging on to a slim majority of elected officials at the national level that even believes the 2A is an individual right! The only path to right this course, especially with states like CA, CO, NJ, MA, NY, WA, etc., is through judicial review. And…love Trump or hate him, regardless of anything else he has done, if it were Hillary putting 2, possibly 3 judges on the USSC bench, the 2A would be dead in 10 years. That’s why NRA went all in with him. Not because he was a philosophically pure candidate on all of 2A, but because he was willing to put pro 2A judges on the bench, and because he could win. No one else on our side could, and the alternative—a Hillary presidency—would be disastrous.

    Someone is going to bring up salaries and expenditures and mail solicitations, and such, so let me hit that for a second. Executive salaries in the NRA are not shabby. Agreed. They are, however, less than organizations like the Red Cross, AARP, and other not-for-profit orgs of similar size, and you have to understand that NRA execs are limiting their future options by taking that job. You’re not going from the NRA to Patagonia, REI, or ANY politically sensitive company. But… we can still do better, I think. There is a compensation review coming.

    The organization has already slashed budgets by increasing efficiencies, cutting funding to major habitual contractors, tightening up contracts in general, and all around tightening up the ship. The new Treasurer is a stud. Good things are happening as far as a fiduciary responsibility to the members, as the org knows there is a BIG fight coming in 2020. And rumors of things like cutting off coffee to staff are BS. They just went from a vendor, like many offices use, to a self-administered coffee mess…like many offices use. We have that here. I hate getting junk mail, but they produce results. I’d love to streamline the opt out process for that, plus maybe knock off the renewal notices a month after you renew and things like that, and those are goals of mine, but we also need the cash and members to keep up the fight, and the mailings produce results. Is it enough to offset people who don’t renew to avoid the harassment? I don’t know…but I’d like to look at it. Help to recruit a few new members yourself, and that will help cut down on calls and mailings.

    Anyway, this is a heck of a rant, but I’ve seen too much NRA bashing lately by those who don’t know what’s even going on in DC. It’s a mess. I hate going there. But, the NRA is actually our best advocate there, regardless of what you think about some of the publicly stated positions. Making a press release that says, “We support repealing the NFA and doing away with the 4473 and all other remnants of GCA ’68,” doesn’t actually accomplish anything if you can’t produce results. It actually damages the ability to explain the real down sides of the issues that are at hand, with support, that need to be killed, because you won’t even get to talk to the people on the fence to make your case. Dems tend to ask for “common sense gun reform”, which we know means disarm America. Consider looking at NRA public statements through the same lens, in reverse. Maneuvering the swamp requires talking in less than absolute terms, even when behind the scenes, your goal is absolute. I have friends on the NRA staff. You’re not going to find more ardent supporters of the absolute, not to be infringed 2A than those people.

    One last note on red flag laws…If you take a look at the terms the NRA is talking about, it’s adding the poison pills that make it less appealing to Dems—you know, like due process, and penalties for false reports, which they are really trying to get around with these. There’s not a single person in the NRA building that wants red flag laws--because of the risk of abuse. But...saying “not one inch” and sending out emails saying how strong someone’s stance is (that doesn’t actually accomplish anything legislatively) gives the left free reign to build whatever narrative and language they want. With NRA “supporting” a full due process version, it actually drives hard core Dems sour on an “NRA supported bill”—because they don’t actually want a bill to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill or dangerous people…there are trying to disarm regular Americans. You may also see attempts to tie reciprocity or HPA to it, whether NRA supported, or just through the actions of Republicans. That’s not a “compromise” or “deal”--it’s trying to pull a Hughes amendment on the Dems. To kill just enough support from their hard core that it starts to falter—while they work moderates and weak republicans behind the scenes on the real issues. We’re actually in a really shitty spot with support for UBC and red flag laws in Congress, and without mechanisms like this, they’d pass a horrible version pretty handily in the house, and it is dangerously close in the senate. If we have—God forbid—another shooting, it would sail through.

    I don’t like any of this any more than the next guy, but people bash the NRA a lot without understanding the reality of how the silly reindeer games get played on the hill. Try to at least understand the value that the organization provides, because it is big and very real, and critically important. I want a live tank in my front yard and mail order Solothurn S-18/1000’s from Bannerman’s. But the path to get there isn’t exactly a clear one in the current legislative environment, and without the strength of the NRA helping to pack the courts, shape elections the best we can, fight off bad legislation wherever possible and pave the way to improve rights through the judiciary (we’ve confirmed 85 federal judges in addition to the 2 Supremes with 130 more to go), I fear we won’t have a path to it at all. That’s why I’m a member, and helping to make the organization as right as we can get it is why I got involved.

    I get the frustration. I’m mad that we’re even in this situation. How could we, a republic, born from free men taking up arms against oppression, even be considering some of this nonsense? It baffles me. And, I used to be super frustrated with the NRA, also. Until…I was forced into being involved in politics and seeing how this whole mess works. Now I know what I have to do, and I hope everyone out there who cares about gun rights can get on board, too.

    So, if you want to support GOA or FPC or FPC, or JPFO…that’s fantastic. Join your state organization, also. Be active locally. Let your elected representatives know how you feel on these issues regularly. But…be a member of the NRA, and be active. Vote. Let the board and the staff know where you stand on issues. Help to be a part of the solution. If we, as gun owners, can’t stick together and take advantage of the strengths of all of our organizations where they can do the most good, we will lose this fight. I’m not willing to lose.

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...en-letter-from-nra-board-member-duane-liptak/
     
    I appreciate your point of view with obvious effort.
    Politics is a game I don't play, but I understand that it is necessary due to our current culture makeup.
    It is still very hard to see our rights melt away due to an idiot culture of dreamy utopians in an echo chamber.

    can someone help us to gather together to do our part in a combined, connected effort outside of NRA's working's.

    I support the NRA as I am a member and RSO acknowledged by their instructor. But their is so much more to be done by us the people outside Washington and in the communities before all hell breaks loose (which it will).
     
    thanks for that update. It's good to understand some of the machinations below the surface
     
    This was a good read.

    I totally agree that I may not like everything the NRA does but they are the loudest voice for gun owners.
     
    Politics aside, this is appeasing the firearms community at it's finest. Shall not be infrigned means just that. The .gov has no say over what is and isn't legal. Any organization that says it represents gun owners and allows infringement needs to go away. Lobbyists boil down to legalized bribery and should be legally incarcerated. The rules of the country were written plainly so as not to need "interpretation". Anybody who sees otherwise is an enemy of the state and should be dealt with accordingly.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Flintdog2011
    Politics aside, this is appeasing the firearms community at it's finest. Shall not be infrigned means just that. The .gov has no say over what is and isn't legal. Any organization that says it represents gun owners and allows infringement needs to go away. Lobbyists boil down to legalized bribery and should be legally incarcerated. The rules of the country were written plainly so as not to need "interpretation". Anybody who sees otherwise is an enemy of the state and should be dealt with accordingly.
    I agree, but not playing their game isn’t going to make them quit. They have to be beaten at their own game when possible, but the Republicans totally screwed us with both houses and the White House. They didn’t do shit. When the commies has]d it all we go Obamacare, and we couldn’t even repeal it.

    Civil war and fire is the only thing that will fix it at this point.
     
    I agree, but not playing their game isn’t going to make them quit. They have to be beaten at their own game when possible, but the Republicans totally screwed us with both houses and the White House. They didn’t do shit. When the commies has]d it all we go Obamacare, and we couldn’t even repeal it.

    Civil war and fire is the only thing that will fix it at this point.
    I agree, play their game. Clintoncide them all. It seems you think one side still cares for us. They don't. They care about getting their checks and living the good life while the rest of the states can go to hell. At least with the Dems and their freshmen, you know where you stand. The RINOS are the ones helping to kill this country. Apathy at it's best. Some of these so called gun groups are no better.
     
    I'm going to add this: How many here who bitch/moan/complain/whine/cry/rant/wail/and castigate have actually spent time in your Local, State, or Federal Legislature? How much have you seen how it "operates" (it don't "work") and how much have you actually taken part in?

    I'm not talking about 'phone your representative' or anything like that. I'm actually asking about (at the very least) sitting in the chairs designated to public viewing, or at the other end of the spectrum GETTING INVOLVED with creating a Bill and submitting it for an Act?

    I'm NOT saying that the process is a good one. Though it DOES beat a dictatorship. But I am saying that the process is NOT what most people would imagine it to be. I'll go as far as to add that it is infuriating at the forefront, and just plain dismal in the duration.

    And I won't even think about commenting on "the Opposition", no matter what side is doing the speaking. Therefore,,, if ANYONE were to sit their ass in the public viewing chair for a few hours, and just watch what happens, THEN they could grasp the depth of the article written, that I quoted above.

    As I said in the title....... "Contemplation"
     
    I'm going to add this: How many here who bitch/moan/complain/whine/cry/rant/wail/and castigate have actually spent time in your Local, State, or Federal Legislature? How much have you seen how it "operates" (it don't "work") and how much have you actually taken part in?

    I'm not talking about 'phone your representative' or anything like that. I'm actually asking about (at the very least) sitting in the chairs designated to public viewing, or at the other end of the spectrum GETTING INVOLVED with creating a Bill and submitting it for an Act?

    I'm NOT saying that the process is a good one. Though it DOES beat a dictatorship. But I am saying that the process is NOT what most people would imagine it to be. I'll go as far as to add that it is infuriating at the forefront, and just plain dismal in the duration.

    And I won't even think about commenting on "the Opposition", no matter what side is doing the speaking. Therefore,,, if ANYONE were to sit their ass in the public viewing chair for a few hours, and just watch what happens, THEN they could grasp the depth of the article written, that I quoted above.

    As I said in the title....... "Contemplation"
    Since I feel this is directed at me given the above responses, I'll simply answer this. I have a job in the medical field that doesn't allow for enough time off to go sit in an office or a meeting for several hours. Unfortunately, those of us gainfully employed don't have the luxury of "sitting in the chairs designated to the public. " And before anyone chimes in about taking vacation days, I don't get those either. Sick people don't take vacations.
     
    Maxduty, no,,,, I did not direct that comment at you. I directed that to EVERYBODY who complains about how things are. And yes, I complain too.

    Thing is though, I have done 'both' in the sense of being involved as part of a committee in formulating quorum to submit as a bill. That part was a very big process, to which I was involved for only 4 years. (part of my former job requirement)

    And, due to a personal interest in a matter, I have also spent time helping build a Private Bill. And yes, this can be done when working, too. All it takes is initiative and priorities.

    Again, this is said to ALL.

    Contemplate.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Maxduty
    That's all anyone has to say about this situation? Or since it has been relegated to the second page, it's not even getting seen anymore?
     
    Maxduty, no,,,, I did not direct that comment at you. I directed that to EVERYBODY who complains about how things are. And yes, I complain too.

    Thing is though, I have done 'both' in the sense of being involved as part of a committee in formulating quorum to submit as a bill. That part was a very big process, to which I was involved for only 4 years. (part of my former job requirement)

    And, due to a personal interest in a matter, I have also spent time helping build a Private Bill. And yes, this can be done when working, too. All it takes is initiative and priorities.

    Again, this is said to ALL.

    Contemplate.

    I thought you were Canadian? Haha. I think s large majority of people are not involved because they are busy and don’t know how to get involved. Maybe teach people how to better be involved. Just my .02 cents.
     
    That's all anyone has to say about this situation? Or since it has been relegated to the second page, it's not even getting seen anymore?

    Shit, man. I was hunting this weekend and am just now seeing this. Excellent read, and i gained some insight. It'd be great to talk ideas with the writer, seems like he's got a lot of experience where i don't.

    For the folks bitching about time, I'm sitting in bed at nearly 1am combing through shit, and your state probably records sessions. Texas does, and most cities do, too.

    I've not spent much time in the capitol building, but I've gone through the last few years of my citys archives. I'll graduate to state level one of these days.

    At the end of the day, is being comfortable and lazy worth the hell we'll face later because we were lazy today?

    Consider it your duty to fuck shit up that needs it, and fix shit that's broken.

    If you're not very creative, then just go to the local bar and buy drinks for random people and get them talking about this stuff.
     
    How would you feel about a anti-abortion group that says " take the arms and legs but leave the torso alive, we're ok with that compromise"? And abortion is not even a constitutional right.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Dewey7271
    Excellent read and food for much more thought. I’m just seeing this, so thanks for bringing it back to page one.

    I just have this to say for all the “no compromises” folks. On the surface, I couldn’t agree more, but the reality is that this approach allows you the luxury to sit back and literally do nothing about the situation except bitch online in a forum. Unless you can offer a better path, or any path for that matter, that is real and doable and that you personally are willing to do today, then your words mean little more than a fart in the wind. Outraged indignation, followed by inaction is an easy answer.

    I, for one, appreciate those that actually decided to get up and do something about it and will follow up with my money if my time is not available.
     
    I get his point unfortunately.
    I lament the fact that our Republic has come to the place or even passed the place where “inalienable “ rights must be contested in a political arena. That should not happen.
    I also am disturbed that part of the “turd sandwich” as the author wrote, must be eaten at all.
    The fact that anyone has to fight for one of the amendments speaks volumes about our current state.
    It seems that more liberties, which generations have shed blood and life for, erode every day.
    On the “get active” point. I use NRA Credentials to teach a couple youth organizations. I volunteer. I was a “Second Amendment Advocate” for a gubernatorial campaign (who has since flipped and now espouses Red Flag). I have even testified in state house and senate committees. I phone and send the obligatory letters and emails.
    While I understand compromise and get the point of the author’s letter, I find the fact that it even needed writing concerns me even more.
     
    I get his point unfortunately.
    I lament the fact that our Republic has come to the place or even passed the place where “inalienable “ rights must be contested in a political arena. That should not happen.
    I also am disturbed that part of the “turd sandwich” as the author wrote, must be eaten at all.
    The fact that anyone has to fight for one of the amendments speaks volumes about our current state.
    It seems that more liberties, which generations have shed blood and life for, erode every day.
    On the “get active” point. I use NRA Credentials to teach a couple youth organizations. I volunteer. I was a “Second Amendment Advocate” for a gubernatorial campaign (who has since flipped and now espouses Red Flag). I have even testified in state house and senate committees. I phone and send the obligatory letters and emails.
    While I understand compromise and get the point of the author’s letter, I find the fact that it even needed writing concerns me even more.

    Precisely! I feel like no matter what we do, we are fighting a losing battle. It’s tiring but is the cost of Liberty! Or, should it be? Maybe we make that argument loud and clear. Our rights are inalienable, we shouldn’t have to spend time and money fighting for them because they have already been fought for! No more is what our slogan should be. We must make the gov realize that they work for us, not the other way around. That’s one reason why I could give two shits less about the shutdown and these whining babies. Yeah it sucks but they knew it was a possibility when they signed up for the job. The rest of us deal with this kind of crap all the time and do not have the luxury of always knowing we will be paid at some point and will always have our jobs to walk back into. Yes, Ive been there. It sucks hard, but it’s not struggle that most of America hasn’t experienced. I fully support Trump to keep the gov shut down as long as it needs to be. Heck it needs to be dismantled anyways and perhaps now they will be more willing to listen to the people. Of course, the big players keep getting paid anyways but that’s another matter and should speak volumes to the lower echelons in gov as it is.
     
    I'm going to add this: How many here who bitch/moan/complain/whine/cry/rant/wail/and castigate have actually spent time in your Local, State, or Federal Legislature? How much have you seen how it "operates" (it don't "work") and how much have you actually taken part in?

    On that note, I go to sleep peacefully every night knowing that I have always been doing my part to the best of my efforts in fighting for the rights that matter to us the most. I check SH, Arf, TFL and Glocktalk for latest firemissions and legislative releases. If they are newly created or potentially hot petitions, I would bump those threads and firemission them as well. Then I draft both emails and snail mail letters to the appropriate folks. In this day and age a laptop and small laser printer makes it FAR more easier to do this kind of stuff.

    It does not take me more than 20 minutes to get my ass off the chair and drop off the letters at my local post office. If there is one thing that Netizens are really good at, it is posting the details of new bills and acts before the mainstream media even gets wind of them. Forums like this one provide all the tools necessary to organize very effective means of constructive activism. We need EVERYBODY'S efforts into the second step to actually make it work. Sure we talk a lot of shit here and laugh at all the funny stuff that we post and share, but when it comes time to WORK, I put just as much effort into it as my day job. If, in the future, things get so bad that we have no choice but defend our liberties and right to life through the force of arms, we can march into the fight knowing that we have done as much as possible when there were still peaceful means of resolution. And people who are at one with themselves fight better too.

    I am a member of both the NRA and the JPFO. Now thinking about joining GOA too. Gun owners represent each other. And that is what I aim to do. And that is what all my friends from Sipsey Street aim to do.
     
    Last edited:
    That's all fine, well, and good.

    I truly wish folks in general would grasp the depth of what I'm trying to describe here. I'm not suggesting that attending/partaking in a Town Hall meeting is the same.

    What I am trying to get across, is the attending and the viewing of an actual Legislative procedure. In the 4 hours of them blathering/arguing/testifying/discoursing,,, you'll see about seven-and-a-quarter seconds worth of "we've received 'this many' emails/letters and responses from our constituents."

    And the rest is 'procedural' and infuriating. At the end of the day, the words "and" and "with" will be agreed upon for use the following day. Regarding the discussion of "deck-chair rearranging on the Titanic decks".

    Do More. Ya'll are getting hurt. Suggest that the internet start getting banned, and photocopiers be registered. After all, Freedom of speech only used Quill's, right?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Blue Sky Country
    That's all fine, well, and good.

    I truly wish folks in general would grasp the depth of what I'm trying to describe here. I'm not suggesting that attending/partaking in a Town Hall meeting is the same.

    What I am trying to get across, is the attending and the viewing of an actual Legislative procedure. In the 4 hours of them blathering/arguing/testifying/discoursing,,, you'll see about seven-and-a-quarter seconds worth of "we've received 'this many' emails/letters and responses from our constituents."

    And the rest is 'procedural' and infuriating. At the end of the day, the words "and" and "with" will be agreed upon for use the following day. Regarding the discussion of "deck-chair rearranging on the Titanic decks".

    Do More. Ya'll are getting hurt. Suggest that the internet start getting banned, and photocopiers be registered. After all, Freedom of speech only used Quill's, right?

    If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying:

    1.) What constituents say by e-mail/whatever doesn't really factor into things too much.
    2.) The stuff they're actually talking about is ridiculous nonsense.
    3.) We need a better strategy.

    Did I get that right?
     
    If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying:

    1.) What constituents say by e-mail/whatever doesn't really factor into things too much.
    2.) The stuff they're actually talking about is ridiculous nonsense.
    3.) We need a better strategy.

    Did I get that right?
    For starters, YES.
    But most importantly, for YA'LL to see for YOURSELVES how the process 'functions'. I'd love to use the term - how the process 'works' - but in truth, it doesn't work very well at all. The process itself is stacked against you. A perfect example (iirc) is how the Hughes Amendment was 'slipped in' with other boring detritus that nobody was paying attention to, and everyone just wanted to 'get it over with'....

    (My brain is scrambled at the moment, so bear with me, but whatever the hell the machine-gun ban was, back in '86 or so...) has ANYONE here watched that video?

    Once you see how the system functions,,,, THEN you can start to see the level of work involved to get something done. Thinking that you "saved the world" because you made a phone-call to a representative, six months ago.... is delusional.

    Thinking that you 'saved the universe' because you paid some membership dues, six months ago, is JUST as delusional.

    Look at how far your delusions have gotten you so far, all these decades now. But if you start throwing your money and phone-calls at a DIFFERENT acronym, then everything's gonna be all gooder now?

    Hence why I say, see how the system operates, THEN unify and fight on a consolidated front. Remember what I said to ya'll about having more than 2 options for your Presidential ballot? You don't want 3 or more. Same/Same here.
     
    For starters, YES.
    But most importantly, for YA'LL to see for YOURSELVES how the process 'functions'. I'd love to use the term - how the process 'works' - but in truth, it doesn't work very well at all. The process itself is stacked against you. A perfect example (iirc) is how the Hughes Amendment was 'slipped in' with other boring detritus that nobody was paying attention to, and everyone just wanted to 'get it over with'....

    (My brain is scrambled at the moment, so bear with me, but whatever the hell the machine-gun ban was, back in '86 or so...) has ANYONE here watched that video?

    Once you see how the system functions,,,, THEN you can start to see the level of work involved to get something done. Thinking that you "saved the world" because you made a phone-call to a representative, six months ago.... is delusional.

    Thinking that you 'saved the universe' because you paid some membership dues, six months ago, is JUST as delusional.

    Look at how far your delusions have gotten you so far, all these decades now. But if you start throwing your money and phone-calls at a DIFFERENT acronym, then everything's gonna be all gooder now?

    Hence why I say, see how the system operates, THEN unify and fight on a consolidated front. Remember what I said to ya'll about having more than 2 options for your Presidential ballot? You don't want 3 or more. Same/Same here.

    In short, what he is saying is that we need to learn the “process” in order to be able to better strategize a meaningful system of fighting. He’s right, what everyone has been doing isn’t working and I’m not sure if it’s because it’s just a shitty strategy or they don’t really care. From my observations it’s a little bit of all of the above. The process is purposefully ineffective imo to make themselves look busy when they really aren’t. It aids in their justification that “we” need them. You see what I mean? Truth be told tho, my gripe is I have really no idea what to do. Why? Because I don’t feel like anything we do is going to matter. They don’t care and they don’t want to help us, period. So, knowing that what do you do? You can organize, strategize or whatever until you are blue in the face but if it doesn’t do anything and never picks up support then what does it matter? We already have support from our side, what we need is a way to garner support from the other side. Once that happens the politicians will fall in line.
     
    For starters, YES.
    But most importantly, for YA'LL to see for YOURSELVES how the process 'functions'. I'd love to use the term - how the process 'works' - but in truth, it doesn't work very well at all. The process itself is stacked against you. A perfect example (iirc) is how the Hughes Amendment was 'slipped in' with other boring detritus that nobody was paying attention to, and everyone just wanted to 'get it over with'....

    (My brain is scrambled at the moment, so bear with me, but whatever the hell the machine-gun ban was, back in '86 or so...) has ANYONE here watched that video?

    Once you see how the system functions,,,, THEN you can start to see the level of work involved to get something done. Thinking that you "saved the world" because you made a phone-call to a representative, six months ago.... is delusional.

    Thinking that you 'saved the universe' because you paid some membership dues, six months ago, is JUST as delusional.

    Look at how far your delusions have gotten you so far, all these decades now. But if you start throwing your money and phone-calls at a DIFFERENT acronym, then everything's gonna be all gooder now?

    Hence why I say, see how the system operates, THEN unify and fight on a consolidated front. Remember what I said to ya'll about having more than 2 options for your Presidential ballot? You don't want 3 or more. Same/Same here.

    Ok, what I took away from the initial post was that I don't know shit about the intricacies of legalized bribery and how money makes the world go around in capitol buildings across the country, or how best to use limited resources to accomplish things while operating in the system of today's status-quo.

    My opinion (The one I use to base my actions on) is that what we've got now sucks and we should mostly forget about it. It's so far off course from where it's supposed to be that a rescue mission would be unlikely to succeed and would likely take more time and cost more money to get back on track than to just build another one.

    Translating that into real-world objectives looks a little like this:
    Replace everyone in an elected position with someone KNOWN to be a damn decent individual that loves the CONUS and this country. Preferably people that have never served a day in a public position (.mil excepted).

    Am I wrong in thinking that if good people got elected a lot of this shit could sort itself out over time? (Original post suggests replacing 95% of congress would be a path toward repealing the NFA).

    Obvious hurdles would be in communist strongholds, which is where replacing folks would be pretty difficult. In those cases, we need ways to disrupt their operations and render them ineffective. To that end, I prefer legal strategies that will result in actions/legislation that further cripples them and their infrastructure.

    I think with the right mix of communication platforms we can achieve an unprecedented level of cooperation on political objectives, defense, humanitarian stuff, etc among members of the general public (AKA, We The People). So much so, in fact, that organizations like the NRA don't even need to exist in the political arena anymore.
     
    Ok, what I took away from the initial post was that I don't know shit about the intricacies of legalized bribery and how money makes the world go around in capitol buildings across the country, or how best to use limited resources to accomplish things while operating in the system of today's status-quo.

    My opinion (The one I use to base my actions on) is that what we've got now sucks and we should mostly forget about it. It's so far off course from where it's supposed to be that a rescue mission would be unlikely to succeed and would likely take more time and cost more money to get back on track than to just build another one.

    Translating that into real-world objectives looks a little like this:
    Replace everyone in an elected position with someone KNOWN to be a damn decent individual that loves the CONUS and this country. Preferably people that have never served a day in a public position (.mil excepted).

    Am I wrong in thinking that if good people got elected a lot of this shit could sort itself out over time? (Original post suggests replacing 95% of congress would be a path toward repealing the NFA).

    Obvious hurdles would be in communist strongholds, which is where replacing folks would be pretty difficult. In those cases, we need ways to disrupt their operations and render them ineffective. To that end, I prefer legal strategies that will result in actions/legislation that further cripples them and their infrastructure.

    I think with the right mix of communication platforms we can achieve an unprecedented level of cooperation on political objectives, defense, humanitarian stuff, etc among members of the general public (AKA, We The People). So much so, in fact, that organizations like the NRA don't even need to exist in the political arena anymore.

    No! You are not wrong! I think replacing 95% of them with decent people is the only answer. What you have to ask yourself tho is whether or not that can be done in the current system? I don’t know that it is. It would be a glorious day if we could pull it off tho.

    As a side note, what constitutes a decent person? What we consider decent is completely appalling to the other side. For example, I don’t agree with killing unborn babies except in extreme circumstances where the mothers life is in danger or it’s a rape victim or something crazy like that. The left however, sees no problem with killing them off all under the guise of freedom of choice. My thoughts on freedom of choice begin at doing the deed. You know what you are getting yourself into, using protection or not, you know the possible outcome might be a kid in the oven. That’s your choice, not after the deed has been done.

    As for using babies for stem cell research and crap like that. I love the fact that we can do such things and make huge success stories in science and peoples lives but at what point is that not murder? How is someone aborting a 28 week child any different than someone punching a pregnant woman in the stomach really hard causing her to lose the child? In principle it’s not a lot different but one is going to jail for life and the other isn’t. I’m not sure our ideologies of left and right, if you will, will ever be rectified. I think it will just continue to be more polarized and there is only a couple of options as to how this plays out. The more civilized version is we split the country in half. Extreme lefties on one side, run it how you want, extreme right on the other and they run it how they want. You can still have basic trade and security between the two but as for living there and running it, you would have to go through some kind of process to move from one side of the other. I hope that makes sense. Obviously, the other two scenarios are that we replace members of go over through the process, which is a long shot. Or, well you know the alternative. I really see no other outcomes. Either way the US the way we grew up with it probably has numbered days.
     
    No! You are not wrong! I think replacing 95% of them with decent people is the only answer. What you have to ask yourself tho is whether or not that can be done in the current system? I don’t know that it is. It would be a glorious day if we could pull it off tho.

    As a side note, what constitutes a decent person?

    Do I think we can do it? I know we can, if we work together.

    What constitutes a decent person is something I'm trying to figure out how to describe well. Basically, we have some inalienable rights. Anyone with the aim of infringing on any of those is disqualified from being a "decent person". Everything beyond that, I think, is a matter of local definition.

    For instance,
    In Somewhere, TX, we run off people advocating for recreational abortions.
    In TX, we frown on recreational abortion.

    In CA, they love recreational abortion, and in San Diego, CA, June 24th is a town recreational abortion holiday. They're even OK paying taxes to fund recreational abortions.

    What fucks do I give what THEY think? What fucks should they give what I think?

    What it shouldn't ever be, though, is a federal issue.

    It's up to people in Some Place, Wherever to determine what "decent person" means to them, and vote for people that meet that definition.

    I might say a decent person is:
    1.) Not a person convicted of theft/fraud/bribery/etc
    2.) Loves the constitution
    3.) Loves his city, state, and country
    4.) Well known for his integrity, honesty, etc

    So, Beto would be out from the get go. Why? Weird ties to the mafia (failing item 4), DUI hit/run incident (failing item 4 again), Faking being a Mexican (Failing item 4 again), wants gun control (failing item 2).

    Obama, too. Lying about his name, gun control, ties to marxist political operatives, etc, etc.
    All the bushes, the clintons, etc. Pretty fuckin' much everyone we've got now, I don't think anyone should have voted for.

    You miss any one single thing on that list and you should not get one damn vote.
     
    Do I think we can do it? I know we can, if we work together.

    What constitutes a decent person is something I'm trying to figure out how to describe well. Basically, we have some inalienable rights. Anyone with the aim of infringing on any of those is disqualified from being a "decent person". Everything beyond that, I think, is a matter of local definition.

    For instance,
    In Somewhere, TX, we run off people advocating for recreational abortions.
    In TX, we frown on recreational abortion.

    In CA, they love recreational abortion, and in San Diego, CA, June 24th is a town recreational abortion holiday. They're even OK paying taxes to fund recreational abortions.

    What fucks do I give what THEY think? What fucks should they give what I think?

    What it shouldn't ever be, though, is a federal issue.

    It's up to people in Some Place, Wherever to determine what "decent person" means to them, and vote for people that meet that definition.

    I might say a decent person is:
    1.) Not a person convicted of theft/fraud/bribery/etc
    2.) Loves the constitution
    3.) Loves his city, state, and country
    4.) Well known for his integrity, honesty, etc

    So, Beto would be out from the get go. Why? Weird ties to the mafia (failing item 4), DUI hit/run incident (failing item 4 again), Faking being a Mexican (Failing item 4 again), wants gun control (failing item 2).

    Obama, too. Lying about his name, gun control, ties to marxist political operatives, etc, etc.
    All the bushes, the clintons, etc. Pretty fuckin' much everyone we've got now, I don't think anyone should have voted for.

    You miss any one single thing on that list and you should not get one damn vote.

    Im cool with that!
     
    Translating that into real-world objectives looks a little like this:
    Replace everyone in an elected position with someone KNOWN to be a damn decent individual that loves the CONUS and this country. Preferably people that have never served a day in a public position (.mil excepted).

    Yes, those would be ideals, obviously.
    But how are you going to replace them? Roughly 40% is going to vote Democrat regardless of what you do and roughly 40% is going to vote Republican.
    What elects someone is swaying the roughly 20% in the middle to go one way or the other. Freezing the middle is what elected Clinton by giving them a third party candidate. (This is also my fear for 2020 as I believe that asshole Kasich, who is undergoing his Walter Mitty moment, will run third party, he’s a lying, traitorous bastard when it comes to 2A)
    Also, as you later alluded, money is unfortunately a big key.
    While I am 100% in your camp and do not mean this to disparage, the money is going to swing people. They can buy airtime, radio, lawyers, people and so on. If we are effective, they can even lie like hell about us and get away with it. Certainly we can initiate slander or libel suits but with the court schedules the election at hand will be over and we’ll be yesterdays news at that point.
    All the above can be done but it’ll cost.


    Am I wrong in thinking that if good people got elected a lot of this shit could sort itself out over time? (Original post suggests replacing 95% of congress would be a path toward repealing the NFA)

    Once again, absolutely correct.
    The problem is getting them elected and then stopping the lure of the money once they get there.
    Haven’t you ever wondered how some hick from flyover country with no real skills other than being glib and speaking well gets elected, serves a number of years in Congress at $174000 per year, and walks out a multi-millionaire? I’m a “money guy” and no way can I do that on a regular basis. Yet our elected officials do it one after another and no one says shit. I’d like to see those money trails. It’s not only one party, it’s pretty much the rule.
    That’s my fear. Show a decent guy as you mentioned a piggy bank of legit cash and I fear what happens then. You want my opinion of the core of what’s wrong? Trace and follow the money. It’s not necessarily “bad people” it’s the corruption that ensues once they’ve taken their first 20 pieces of silver.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lash
    Yes, those would be ideals, obviously.
    But how are you going to replace them? Roughly 40% is going to vote Democrat regardless of what you do and roughly 40% is going to vote Republican.
    What elects someone is swaying the roughly 20% in the middle to go one way or the other. Freezing the middle is what elected Clinton by giving them a third party candidate. (This is also my fear for 2020 as I believe that asshole Kasich, who is undergoing his Walter Mitty moment, will run third party, he’s a lying, traitorous bastard when it comes to 2A)
    Also, as you later alluded, money is unfortunately a big key.
    While I am 100% in your camp and do not mean this to disparage, the money is going to swing people. They can buy airtime, radio, lawyers, people and so on. If we are effective, they can even lie like hell about us and get away with it. Certainly we can initiate slander or libel suits but with the court schedules the election at hand will be over and we’ll be yesterdays news at that point.
    All the above can be done but it’ll cost.




    Once again, absolutely correct.
    The problem is getting them elected and then stopping the lure of the money once they get there.
    Haven’t you ever wondered how some hick from flyover country with no real skills other than being glib and speaking well gets elected, serves a number of years in Congress at $174000 per year, and walks out a multi-millionaire? I’m a “money guy” and no way can I do that on a regular basis. Yet our elected officials do it one after another and no one says shit. I’d like to see those money trails. It’s not only one party, it’s pretty much the rule.
    That’s my fear. Show a decent guy as you mentioned a piggy bank of legit cash and I fear what happens then. You want my opinion of the core of what’s wrong? Trace and follow the money. It’s not necessarily “bad people” it’s the corruption that ensues once they’ve taken their first 20 pieces of silver.

    Well, conceptually it's pretty simple, like rolling a boulder up a mountain.

    Currently, there aren't any good options. Lots of Americans realize this, whether democrat, republican, fence sitters, or abstainers.

    There are people in this country that can and should be elected officials, but for one reason or another they don't think they can get there, don't want to go through the media onslaught nonsense, etc.

    The American people aren't really working together on anything at the moment.

    If you can get the American people to work together, we can find good people, convince them to run, and get them elected on local, state, and federal levels. We can fund their way to office, too. Not talking campaigns because we won't need those anymore, I'm talking about travel expenses, filings, etc.

    If you can get good people to run for office and you can get them elected then we've just got to support them when they do things, and put the pressure on when they mess up. It'll work itself out.

    Now, how do you get the American people to work together?

    I don't know.

    I'm willing to try this path, however:
    1.) Do fun and cool shit that involves everybody across all party lines and amplifies their voices as much as possible
    2.) Get people used to doing stuff like that
    3.) Make a LOT OF MONEY
    4.) Use that money to create companies in cities across the country that employ people for the purpose of spreading the American way to their neighbors/etc as a day job/side gig/whatever
    5.) Take all the gains from that in terms of networking and manpower and build a new social network thing that subtracts the discussion aspect of things and instead presents a vote for or against interface to ideas proposed by folks who very well may end up being the "good people" we want to run for office at some point. Whatever passes gets done by everybody.

    With things working that way, people can focus their own efforts onto a pinpoint on a local, state, or federal level. It's like a flashmob that's instantly as big as it needs to be.

    Like I said, conceptually simple.

    Get people to work together, give them tons of money, get them to do stuff.
     
    So, like government, do "we, the people" lead from the top/front, or follow from below/behind? Conceptually at least, the gov't AND the NRA's structure is made up of "the People" , isn't it?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: SilentStalkr
    I was forwarded this from Lindy, (some of ya'll might know of him/remember him) and this is written by Duane Liptak from Magpul. Might want to give it a gander:

    Duane Liptak is the Executive Vice President of Magpul. Every gun owner, ?????????? those not particularly fond of the NRA, should read this, bearing in mind that a new "assault weapon ban" has been reintroduced in Congress this month.

    So, it's relatively popular to bash the NRA right now, and we have a lot of folks in our own community that are happy to jump on that bandwagon. I get it. I don't like where we are at with the 2A situation, either, and I wish the NRA could yell "Shall not be infringed," from the mountaintops. But, through my involvement with the org over the past years, and the insight into the DC and state level situations I've unfortunately had to gain while lobbying and managing lobbying efforts, I also understand some things that make me appreciate the strengths of what the NRA actually brings to us, and I felt compelled to share that as a comment on some posts that decried the current state of the NRA. Some folks urged me to make it sharable, so I'm doing so, with some cleaning up of my language.
    1f642.png
    :) I get that some folks will call me full of it, or claim "the NRA is in full damage control" or whatever, but this isn't an NRA statement. This is a statement from me, a very, very zealous advocate for extreme libertarian gun rights, with an understanding of the current political landscape. Take it as you will, but please put aside your prejudices for just a moment to read, because if we can't get everyone pushing in the same direction, we can't beat the disarm America movement, because they are more than willing to get together to achieve our ruin.
    -------------------------------------------------------------
    In any of this commentary, I'm speaking for myself, not for the NRA. I have to use that disclaimer, as I’m speaking out of turn, and this is MY PERSONAL understanding of the events and information, not official NRA position. I suppose some of this information could also be potentially damaging to future efforts because it lays out some reasoning and strategy, but it's to a point right now where people need to understand some things. The NRA is not just your best defense, they are your ONLY defense. FPC does fantastic legal work, as does SAF. GOA is great at grass roots email activation and they file some amicus briefs and lawsuits. All of them have ZERO capability to interact with lawmakers in a meaningful way more than me running up to DC, which I do a couple times a year. No one else does, period, and that’s why I’m on board with helping to steer the NRA rather than bash it.

    I’ll start out by saying I’m about as hard core libertarian on gun laws as it gets, as in mail order suppressed FA belt feds for everyone. Let’s also get out that pretty much everyone in the NRA building is pretty far along that line, as well. I was talking to Chris and crew about strategies to open the registry during the Bumpfire stock litigation while we talked about how to fight some of the things we know are coming. They’re on board, really. Now, the other side of this is that it’s Washington, D.C., and the number one priority of most congress-folk is getting re-elected. To some extent, that’s fine, as they are supposed to be representing the will of their district or state, and votes support that. When they evaluate an issue, they look at how it will help or hurt their re-election, and…what else they can get for it. If they support A, can they get B as an amendment to help their state, can they count on attracting donors with a particular stance, etc. So let’s take a look at the bumpfire stock thing.

    After Vegas, bumpfire stock legislation was drafted, but NRA had the juice to kill it. Then we have Parkland, and the public outcry to the lawmakers is that we have to “do something for the children”, even if it’s meaningless and dumb—because it was kids this time instead of adults in a currently unsympathetic demographic like Vegas. A strong majority of both chambers were willing to pass a bumpfire stock ban as “something”. The language in the legislative ban included binary triggers, cranks, etc., and could also at some point be interpreted by ATF to include ANY aftermarket trigger and even be mangled to include semi autos in general as having the capability to have rates of fire similar to machineguns and thus, be regulated. It would be a disaster. NRA pushed back hard, but guess what…the legislators were reacting to public sentiment, and they had more than enough votes to pass it. It was going to come out of committee. We (Magpul) yelled at our lobbyists to kill it. NSSF was trying to kill it. NRA was trying to kill it. But…Trump apparently dislikes two things in the firearms world: bumpfire stocks and elephant hunting, for reasons that are his own. So a veto was not happening. So…what’s your play? You can say “No bans, not one inch” and send out a fundraising email, and everyone would feel good about the NRA position, but the ban would have passed, and the dems would potentially have everything they needed for a semi-auto ban already in law, ready to be interpreted nefariously. So, the decision to make the push to regulatory was hatched. NSSF was on board, as well, as everyone thought there was a better chance of killing it in regulatory, or at least fighting it as it would be a hell of a stretch to regulate like that. The NRA’s wording was poor from my perspective. Even if they said, “you don’t need legislation because this is a regulatory matter, and regulatory can take a look at it and clarify,” that would have been better. But, they didn’t…for a few reasons. One, I’m sure they hoped that their “support” of a regulatory fix could sour the legislative efforts and then cancel the regulatory look, too. In any case, the legislation was averted by the push to regulatory, and the regulatory ban is narrow and also likely to be overturned. FPC is making good authority arguments in their suit, and the NRA is arguing on “takings”. The Dems have reintroduced the legislative ban in the house this session, because they wanted the “other” stuff that was also intentionally included. As long as the regulatory ban lasts while legal arguments are happening, the bill can probably be killed. Is that a trade or a compromise? No. It’s not a trade if a dog turd sandwich is being forced down your throat, and it’s pretty much a done deal, but you manage to get away with only taking one bite instead of the whole thing. But, the left LOVES it when the NRA does such things because they have trolls that are helping to divide the gun community, although we do a great job of it ourselves.

    The stronger the NRA is, the stronger the positions can be. The more members the NRA has, the more pressure they can bring in discussions about elections and the more support that stronger positions have when talking to politicians. The more money they have, the more we can spend in elections. Is the NRA perfect? Oh, heck no! No organization is. But they are our only real chance. The NRA, with the help of the NSSF, also, has killed an actual AWB and magazine restrictions on the national level several times in the past few years alone. I, or our lobbyists, have seen it. No one else was even considered part of the conversation, regardless of posturing. We also wouldn’t have FOPA, and if anyone wants to complain about Hughes, which I hate as much as anyone, if you were currently living under GCA ’68, and had the chance to get the FOPA protections, but someone slipped in the Hughes amendment at the last minute to try to poison the bill, you’d still support passing it.

    The NRA didn’t give you GCA ’68. They tried to minimize damage in another time when overwhelming support for even worse gun control existed after Kennedy and King were assassinated. NFA originally included handguns, also, and was in a similar period of hysteria about mob violence. Without the NRA and also the NSSF, we wouldn’t have had the Lawful Commerce in Arms act of 2005, and the entire firearms industry in the US would be out of business by now—sued into bankruptcy just by fending off lawsuits from Bloomberg lawyers.

    There are a lot of wins there, but make no mistake…I want more, too. However…please understand that even with the R majority we had for the last two years…soft Rs like Flake, Rubio, and the other purple district congressmen and senators had us in a bad spot even then. Repealing the NFA, as much as I want that to die, has about 5% support in congress right now. You’re not getting that legislatively unless you change out 95% of congress, no matter how hard we could push for it, or how many “strong statements” anyone makes. We are, in reality, barely hanging on to a slim majority of elected officials at the national level that even believes the 2A is an individual right! The only path to right this course, especially with states like CA, CO, NJ, MA, NY, WA, etc., is through judicial review. And…love Trump or hate him, regardless of anything else he has done, if it were Hillary putting 2, possibly 3 judges on the USSC bench, the 2A would be dead in 10 years. That’s why NRA went all in with him. Not because he was a philosophically pure candidate on all of 2A, but because he was willing to put pro 2A judges on the bench, and because he could win. No one else on our side could, and the alternative—a Hillary presidency—would be disastrous.

    Someone is going to bring up salaries and expenditures and mail solicitations, and such, so let me hit that for a second. Executive salaries in the NRA are not shabby. Agreed. They are, however, less than organizations like the Red Cross, AARP, and other not-for-profit orgs of similar size, and you have to understand that NRA execs are limiting their future options by taking that job. You’re not going from the NRA to Patagonia, REI, or ANY politically sensitive company. But… we can still do better, I think. There is a compensation review coming.

    The organization has already slashed budgets by increasing efficiencies, cutting funding to major habitual contractors, tightening up contracts in general, and all around tightening up the ship. The new Treasurer is a stud. Good things are happening as far as a fiduciary responsibility to the members, as the org knows there is a BIG fight coming in 2020. And rumors of things like cutting off coffee to staff are BS. They just went from a vendor, like many offices use, to a self-administered coffee mess…like many offices use. We have that here. I hate getting junk mail, but they produce results. I’d love to streamline the opt out process for that, plus maybe knock off the renewal notices a month after you renew and things like that, and those are goals of mine, but we also need the cash and members to keep up the fight, and the mailings produce results. Is it enough to offset people who don’t renew to avoid the harassment? I don’t know…but I’d like to look at it. Help to recruit a few new members yourself, and that will help cut down on calls and mailings.

    Anyway, this is a heck of a rant, but I’ve seen too much NRA bashing lately by those who don’t know what’s even going on in DC. It’s a mess. I hate going there. But, the NRA is actually our best advocate there, regardless of what you think about some of the publicly stated positions. Making a press release that says, “We support repealing the NFA and doing away with the 4473 and all other remnants of GCA ’68,” doesn’t actually accomplish anything if you can’t produce results. It actually damages the ability to explain the real down sides of the issues that are at hand, with support, that need to be killed, because you won’t even get to talk to the people on the fence to make your case. Dems tend to ask for “common sense gun reform”, which we know means disarm America. Consider looking at NRA public statements through the same lens, in reverse. Maneuvering the swamp requires talking in less than absolute terms, even when behind the scenes, your goal is absolute. I have friends on the NRA staff. You’re not going to find more ardent supporters of the absolute, not to be infringed 2A than those people.

    One last note on red flag laws…If you take a look at the terms the NRA is talking about, it’s adding the poison pills that make it less appealing to Dems—you know, like due process, and penalties for false reports, which they are really trying to get around with these. There’s not a single person in the NRA building that wants red flag laws--because of the risk of abuse. But...saying “not one inch” and sending out emails saying how strong someone’s stance is (that doesn’t actually accomplish anything legislatively) gives the left free reign to build whatever narrative and language they want. With NRA “supporting” a full due process version, it actually drives hard core Dems sour on an “NRA supported bill”—because they don’t actually want a bill to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill or dangerous people…there are trying to disarm regular Americans. You may also see attempts to tie reciprocity or HPA to it, whether NRA supported, or just through the actions of Republicans. That’s not a “compromise” or “deal”--it’s trying to pull a Hughes amendment on the Dems. To kill just enough support from their hard core that it starts to falter—while they work moderates and weak republicans behind the scenes on the real issues. We’re actually in a really shitty spot with support for UBC and red flag laws in Congress, and without mechanisms like this, they’d pass a horrible version pretty handily in the house, and it is dangerously close in the senate. If we have—God forbid—another shooting, it would sail through.

    I don’t like any of this any more than the next guy, but people bash the NRA a lot without understanding the reality of how the silly reindeer games get played on the hill. Try to at least understand the value that the organization provides, because it is big and very real, and critically important. I want a live tank in my front yard and mail order Solothurn S-18/1000’s from Bannerman’s. But the path to get there isn’t exactly a clear one in the current legislative environment, and without the strength of the NRA helping to pack the courts, shape elections the best we can, fight off bad legislation wherever possible and pave the way to improve rights through the judiciary (we’ve confirmed 85 federal judges in addition to the 2 Supremes with 130 more to go), I fear we won’t have a path to it at all. That’s why I’m a member, and helping to make the organization as right as we can get it is why I got involved.

    I get the frustration. I’m mad that we’re even in this situation. How could we, a republic, born from free men taking up arms against oppression, even be considering some of this nonsense? It baffles me. And, I used to be super frustrated with the NRA, also. Until…I was forced into being involved in politics and seeing how this whole mess works. Now I know what I have to do, and I hope everyone out there who cares about gun rights can get on board, too.

    So, if you want to support GOA or FPC or FPC, or JPFO…that’s fantastic. Join your state organization, also. Be active locally. Let your elected representatives know how you feel on these issues regularly. But…be a member of the NRA, and be active. Vote. Let the board and the staff know where you stand on issues. Help to be a part of the solution. If we, as gun owners, can’t stick together and take advantage of the strengths of all of our organizations where they can do the most good, we will lose this fight. I’m not willing to lose.

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...en-letter-from-nra-board-member-duane-liptak/
    Thanks for the post! Well said some days I was beginning to think I was a Lone Ranger here with some exceptions.
     
    By all means support the gun rights organizations in the state you are in that actually keep a eyeball on legislation that is coming and willing to show up at the statehouse and provide testimony. And preferably has a working relationship with legislators and the National Rifle association and any other organizations that can help yes strength thru numbers. I personally know good number of passionate people and organizations that have devoted a extraordinary amount of personal time and money and toll it takes on their families. They are true PATRIOTS.! And get little recognition don't think that's why do it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sean the Nailer