What the NRA has done for you.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

DirtyDawg

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
640
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oklahoma
I didn't want to hijack the "how to cancel your NRA membership" thread....but I felt compelled to share this info with readers.

THE NRA


What HARM can they do / have they done?

Let us first consider the “Uniform Machinegun Act of 1932” which provided for the registration of machine guns, that was adopted in a few states (Conn., Va., Md., Ark., and Montana and possibly others) which was developed with the support of the NRA, BEFORE the feds ultimately adopted the “National Firearms Act” in 1934.

The reason this stands out, is that MANY people believe that the “National Firearms Act of 1934 was the pivotal law, the first of the UNconstitutional laws. Thereby “starting” an ever widening path, allowing for further infringements. Not so, the UMA was first.

"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate
and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol, revolver ammunition.

The NRA supported legislation to amend the “Federal Firearms Act” in regard to handguns when it was introduced in August, 1963.

In 1965, the NRA continued its support of an expansion of the above legislation to include rifles and shotguns, as well as handguns.
Additionally the NRA supported the regulation of the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
1. Requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;
2. Providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;
3. Requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;
4. Prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;
5. Providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce, and;
6. Increasing penalties for violation.

NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards.

*****

The NRA has been hard at work, over the last few years, turning a RIGHT (guaranteed by our constitution) into a revocable PRIVILEGE. Many pro-gun people commend them for this. Others see it for what it really is.

The second amendment states. “The right of the people to keep and BEAR arms” It doesn’t say “to keep and display arms” or “to keep and hide arms” or “to keep and lock up your arms” or “to keep and use arms” it says “to keep and BEAR arms” Look it up in the dictionary. To “bear something” means to CARRY it. Any attempt at “interpreting” the meaning of this, is clearly an anti-gun tactic.

*****

“Project EXILE” IS the NRA’s very own project.
NRA'S project (EXILE) supports ALL UNconstitutional gun laws. Handgun Control Inc. supports it TOO. NRA-ILA Executive Director James Jay Baker commented, "I'm glad that the president has finally agreed with the NRA that enforcing federal firearms laws makes sense. We've been pushing for more enforcement of existing laws. Did anyone tell them that ALL of the 20,000 gun laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL??? OF COURSE Handgun Control Inc. supports this NRA project.

*****

Schools
Then NRA Executive Vice President Wayne R. LaPierre, Jr., made these damaging statements during his nationally televised speech at the Denver NRA Members Meeting May 1, 1999. "First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.”

All across the country, school boards and state legislators started doing precisely what LaPierre suggested: shutting down school riflery programs, prohibiting historical firearms displays, forbidding hunter safety training with unloaded guns, and banning gun possession by teachers and other adults with carry licenses. A good example of the long range implications of what LaPierre endorsed back then, is the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech.

Making schools a “gun free zone” where lunatics can murder with impunity, was his response to the Columbine shootings? What happened to advocating responsible carry, by responsible citizens???

*****

LaPierre also blessed gun show background checks by saying: "We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops (charging for NICS
checks) and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers."

The next day President Charlton Heston flatly said on ABC "This Week" that he was "in favor of" gun show background checks. Within weeks, bills for gun show background checks - and "youth gun access" bans - had been submitted in both houses of Congress!

*****

First amendment rights?
Was it the National Rifle Association that had ONE OF IT’S OWN MEMBERS, a pro-gun activist, ARRESTED at its national convention on, April 27, 2003 in Orlando, Florida for handing out PRO-gun freedom literature from an organization known as the Free State Project, Inc. The unlucky NRA member was Timothy Condon, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and Director of Member Services for the rapidly growing Free State Project.

*****

It was NRA PRESIDENT Dr. C.R. (Pink) Gutermuth, who saw "no problem with gun registration," and was head of the Wildlife Management Institute, who became NRA President in 1973.

Part of the problem began during the unlamented regime of former Executive Vice President Warren Cassidy. NRA lobbyists under Cassidy stopped opposing gun control bills and started offering NRA-approved versions of the same legislation. The NRA started WRITING ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION.

Politicians were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called "instant check?" These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting.

Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 as saying: "We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is WHAT WE WANT."

NRA spokesman Bill McIntrye said that the instant background check also in the bill "will be a victory for gun owners.

From NRA Board member Tanya Metaksa.
I think this agreement was a victory for those who see flaws in the current bill. This is a much different Brady bill. This bill sunsets into what we've been supporting for several years [the instant check]. If you look at it in the long range, IT‘S OUR BILL in five years.

*****

Recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. The “Parker v. District of Columbia” case. First by trying to have the case consolidated with NRA controlled litigation, which would have drug this case out for YEARS. When that failed, the NRA got behind, and was pushing for the “DC Personal Protection Act” bill, which would, in effect, remove the law that the “Parker v. District of Columbia” case was based upon. Thereby preventing the “Parker v. District of Columbia” case from going before the supreme court.

Why would they try to derail a case that ultimately DID overturned a gun ban, and potentially settle the long disputed “individual right v. the right of the militia” to keep and bear arms? Because they said it was “too good” and might actually make it before the supreme court? A supreme court (considering the make up of it at present) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN?

And when was the NRA fighting for our rights in this way? Oh ya…..2007.

*****

Lets look at ANOTHER bill backed by the NRA. H.R. 2640, the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act” Admittedly, as always, there are some “supposedly” pro-gun people that are in favor of this. For me, to see the first red flags thrown up, are to look at who is sponsoring/co-sponsoring this bill. Carolyn McCarthy along with Barbara Boxer. Nevermind the far reaching implications, with the potential of opening a Pandora’s box, concerning the mental health issue regarding veterans, as well as anyone else that has seen some kind of mental issue. (children diagnosed with ADD? etc). The UNconstitutional NICS check should not be EXPANDED upon, in the first place.

Oh, and this again IS happening in 2007

*****
Lets not forget the NRA BOARD MEMBER (Joaquin Jackson) who “indicated” that “assault rifles” should only be in the hands of the military and/or law enforcement. But since they ARE legal for civilians to own, then civilians should be limited to 5 round magazines.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think these assault weapons basically need to be in the hands of the military and they need to be in the hands of the police, but uh, as far as assault weapons to a civilian, if you… if you… it's alright if you got that magazine capacity down to five…
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

DirtyDawg

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
640
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oklahoma
cont'd

*****

While reading the following, keep in mind that former NRA board member Russ Howard, RESIGNED from the board. His words, “In the past 5 years I've become increasingly concerned over NRA's penchant for giving UNDESERVED grades to politicians who TRAMPLE on the 2nd Amendment.”


In California JOAN MILKE FLORES VS JANE HARMAN. 36TH CONGRESSIONAL
Flores is an anti-gun Republican who voted FOR the Los Angeles Assault Rifle Ban. Harman is an anti- gun Democrat who got an “A” rating from the NRA. Why an “A” rating? She was ANTI-GUN!!! Who later said that she supports the assault weapon ban.

CHRISTINE REED VS TERRY FREIDMAN (State Assembly)
Reed was an anti-gun C-rated Republican Handgun Control Inc. member who had been mayor of Santa Monica. Reed who should have been an “F”. Freidman was an F-rated incumbent Democrat who authored many anti-gun bills

TRICIA HUNTER: Hunter was state senator whose bid to retain office was based on high-profile attacks on "killer assault rifles". She was rated "A-" by the NRA.

Howard Dean got an A+ from the NRA while governor, he supported the assault weapons ban and Brady bill.

Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA). Did not vote when needed, but was helped by the NRA come re-election.

Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) voted FOR the brady bill (3 times) then was helped by the NRA come re-election.

Congressman Elton Gallegly -- voted FOR the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban and got an A-, and an endorsement. NRA’s Terry O'Grady said, 'Gallegly voted against us on Brady and the Crime Bill, but he's always been with us before. We've decided to forgive him, give him an A- and endorse him. SAY WHAT?

In Virginia, 15 legislators were given A ratings after they voted FOR both the one-gun-a-month ban AND the shotgun ban. 41 legislators who voted for either or both bans got A ratings. 7 got exceptional, "above the call of duty" ratings.

In North Carolina, some districts have two senators. In the '94 elections, District 20 was represented by Ted Kaplan and Marvin Ward. Both favored assault weapon bans, handgun registration, and a one-gun-a-month ban. Their challengers were solid pro-gunners Ham Horton and Mark McDaniels (who fought tooth and nail for CCW). Nevertheless, ILA upgraded both anti-gun incumbents to "A" (one was initially a C), endorsed them, and supported them by mailing orange alert cards to NRA members in their district. Kaplan and Ward lost anyway, as incensed local groups like Grass Roots NC broke ranks with ILA and helped elect the pro-gun challengers.

In NC in 1995, Senator Fountain Odom betrayed the 2nd Amendment by gutting the CCW bill in his subcommittee. The bill had come over in more or less tolerable format from the house. Odom fixed it so that only a few police instructors could give the mandatory training. NRA instructors were prohibited. He also worked to move un-permitted CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, prohibit CCW with any alcohol "remaining" in the body, prohibit CCW in financial institutions, mandate that all training be fully repeated for each renewal, and gut statewide preemption. Limited preemption was restored in the full judiciary committee, but Odom betrayed us again, fixing it so CCW could be prohibited in any "park". Later on the floor, to give ILA cover, Odom amended the training section to allow NRA instructors to do the training. In 1996, Tanya Metaksa gave Odom an A, an endorsement, and an orange ALERT postcard mailing telling NRA members, "Senator Odom has demonstrated his commitment to our right to self-defense...Here's how you can help re-elect Fountain Odom -- a dedicated supporter of your Second Amendment rights. Help the campaign...make a contribution...spread the word to family, friends, and fellow gun owners... Sincerely, Tanya K. Metaksa." Odom's still trampling on our rights. Now he's pushing for a CCW liability law.


In Virginia in 1996, extreme “F” rated gun grabber Congressman Jim Moran faced “A” rated, NRA life member John Otey. The American Rifleman carried the following message: "THIS IS YOUR OFFICIAL PRO-GUN BALLOT FOR THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT: VIRGINIA 8, US CONGRESS…..NO ENDORSEMENT"
NO endorsement for an A rated NRA life member challenging an F- rated gun grabber???

In Virginia, 3 congressmen who voted many times against gun rights and supported the Lautenberg ban, kept their A+ ratings (part of a large club of turncoat A and A+ politicians). Tom Davis got an A after voicing support for Brady and the assault weapon ban and orchestrating a unanimous vote of support for the one-gun-a-month ban as a Fairfax County Supervisor. ·

In Pennsylvania (1993), then Republican Minority Whip Matt Ryan INTRODUCED an assault rifle ban. In 1994, he kept his A+ rating.

In 2006, the NRA rated Ron Paul (arguably the MOST constitutional representative we have in office) with a “B” because he did not follow along in lock step, when the NRA endorsed (what Ron Paul saw) as an UNconstitutional bill. One that the NRA supported. Instead, they endorsed his UNproved, UNtested, DEMOCRATIC opponent.

*******

John Dingell?
The NRA’s Golden Boy? The former NRA Director? The same guy who voted in favor of the 1994 “Assault” weapons ban and then resigned from the Board of Directors the day after the vote? The same Dingell who received the NRA’s Harlon B. Carter Award, despite voting FOR an outright gun BAN? The same Dingell that coined the term "jack-booted thugs" when referring to the BATF? THAT Dingell?

NRA Board of Directors member Larry Craig, was one of the co-sponsors of this bill, “Our Lady of Peace Act” Which was introduced by Caroline McCarthy, and supported by Chuck Schumer along with the usual band of anti Second Amendment slime like, Ted Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln and Richard Durbin.
Don’t know what it is/was? Look it up.

Can’t forget the “help” we got from the NRA. In the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.” Not debating, if setting this kind of precedent with legislation, protecting industries, is right. Not debating whether the industry needed this protection. The point here is, that there was a CLEAN bill (800) on the floor, AT THE SAME TIME. Everyone agrees that either bill (397 or 800) would pass through the senate, with no problem. So it depended on the house. There are always more votes than there are co-sponsors of a bill. S. Bill 800 had over 250 signed on as co-sponsors. MORE than enough to pass it, CLEAN. Why did the NRA CHOOSE to back the anti-gun laden bill, when there was a CLEAN alternative? For a true PRO-gun advocate, this was a no brainer.



The NRA awarded Assemblyman Rod Wright its “Defender of Freedom” Award. This is the same Rod Wright who supported UNconstitutional limits on firearms purchases and background checks. This is the same Rod Wright who authored a bill to increase licensing fees from $3 to up to $100. Never mind the absurdity of bilking peaceable citizens of hundreds of dollars for making a constitutionally protected purchase. This champion of “freedom” apparently thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to license and charge Americans for exercising their rights. The NRA’s “Defender of Freedom” in 2001 voted against gun owners 62 percent of the time

Deborah Danuski, a Democrat from Lisbon, was endorsed by the anti-handgun group, while also receiving an "A-" from the NRA on its report card of candidates. As a matter of fact, in Maine, both the NRA and Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence supported 18 of the same candidates!

In Colorado, where the NRA supported Senator Wayne Allard for office, and even boosted his pro-gun lobby contributions to $37,000 since 1990, Allard stated flatly that he would support federal legislation requiring gun registration for private gun sales at gun shows. Is a legislator who wants to expand gun registration someone who stands up for the rights of gun owners?

From Virginia, where the NRA Political Victory Fund touted the pro-gun “accomplishments” of Delegate Jack Rollison. This is the same Rollison who in a press release had the unmitigated gall to paint Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, who have endorsed his opponent Jeff Frederick, as extremists and “milita-esque” organizations. This is the same Jack Rollison who wants to ban your right to self-defense in any restaurant that happens to sell liquor. And this is the same Jack Rollison who voted correctly on only two out of eight issues important to Virginia gun owners.

The NRA also gave their "Defender of Freedom Award" to one Kevin Mannix, who ran for governor here in 2002. In 1999 Mannix was the architect of the worst piece of gun control legislation in 10 years, in the Oregon House.
 

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,532
Reaction score
9,350
Location
Tornado Alley
I didn't want to hijack the "how to cancel your NRA membership" thread....but I felt compelled to share this info with readers.

THE NRA


What HARM can they do / have they done?

NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards.

I gotta call total and utter B.S. on this one. I remember this going down and while technically true, the author of this statement is leaving a whole lot of information out here. The Brady bunch would be right proud of this. Had this passed and it probably would have, practically ALL ammunition would have been outlawed. The NRA stepped up on this one. What got all this hubub going was an "informative news special" that NBC ran. Before it aired police agencies all over the country were begging NBC not to run it. This ammo wasn't common and neither was the knowlege of it or the capabilities of body armor. Bottom line was they were justifiably concerned that criminals would adjust their tactics and start shooting for the officers head. NBC ran it anyway.

But on the NRA's role here is a little truth for your perusal....



POLICE OFFICER SAFETY
Even before the 1986 law restricting "armor-piercing ammunition," there had never been a case of a police officer killed with such ammunition penetrating a vest. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms studied every police-officer shooting in the years 1985-94 and reported: "No law enforcement officer in the United States has died as a result of a round of armor piercing ammunition, as defined, having been fired from a handgun, subsequently penetrating an officer's protective body armor causing lethal injuries."

Indeed, the BATF concluded that in the period studied, there had not been any instances of officers being killed by any type of handgun ammunition penetrating body armor.

Unfortunately, some public officials have made misleading claims about officer safety. For example, in 1995 President Clinton announced his support for a massive new ban on many ordinary types of ammunition. In the speech, President Clinton spoke emotionally about a Chicago police officer who had been fatally shot because a "cop-killer" bullet penetrated his vest. There was only one problem with the story: It wasn't true. The officer was shot by a criminal who used ordinary ammunition. One shot hit the officer in the head. Another shot went through an opening in the vest. No shot penetrated the vest.

CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION
Although the "cop-killer"-bullet issue had no factual substance, it was politically potent. As with so many other terms invented by gun-prohibition lobbyists, the very name served to bias the debate in favor of prohibition. The national media showed little interest in reporting facts such as the origin of the KTW bullet, or that the KTW was not for sale to the public, or that no police officer had ever been shot at or killed with such a bullet, or that Teflon didn't make bullets more powerful.

Once the bait was set, the switch was made. New York Democratic Rep. Mario Biaggi (who would later leave Congress due to felony convictions involving extensive personal corruption) introduced a bill to outlaw all ammunition capable of penetrating soft body armor if fired from a handgun with a six-inch barrel. This could lead to a ban on most rifle ammunition, since most rifle ammunition will penetrate soft body armor, and many common types of rifle ammunition fit some handguns. Soft body armor is designed to stop handgun ammunition, not rifle ammunition.

When this fact was pointed out, media figures sneered that gun owners wanted to go deer-hunting with cop-killer Teflon bullets — as if deer were wearing body armor.

As the debated continued, the constant repetition of the phrase "cop-killer bullet" helped drive a wedge between Second Amendment groups and many police officers. The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) — the largest rank-and-file police group in the U.S. — had been an enthusiastic supporter of the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners' Protection Act (FOPA), a bill to reform abusive enforcement of the 1968 Gun Control Act.

But after the "cop-killer" controversy, the police group's director switched sides, and announced that FOPA was a grave threat to the lives of police officers. FOPA itself had nothing to do with KTW or Teflon ammunition, but the FOP director's broader point was his anger over the "cop-killer bullet" issue.

Many of the friends of the Second Amendment in Congress and the Reagan White House quietly insisted that something be done to get rid of the controversy.

THE FEDERAL BAN
Accordingly, the National Rifle Association and Representative Biaggi reached a compromise: Instead of a penetration standard (which would ban most rifle ammunition), a content standard was adopted. The sale or import of handgun ammunition with a significant amount of steel, titanium, or other metal core was outlawed. (The relevant federal regulation specifies that: "armor piercing ammunition" is a handgun bullet "constructed entirely" from " tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium," or with certain kinds of jackets on the bullet.)

An important new protection in the compromise bill required that "armor-piercing ammunition" be so labeled. This prevented people from being prosecuted for the unwitting sale of the newly restricted ammunition. For example, some surplus ammunition imported from Czechoslovakia contained a solid core, rather than a lead core, because there had been a lead shortage in the Czechoslovakia when the ammunition was manufactured.

Biaggi pronounced that the compromise achieved everything he had wanted from the original bill. The NRA spread the word that the vote for the compromise would not be scored as a "wrong" vote.

Severe mandatory prison sentences were enacted for use of federally defined "armor-piercing ammunition" in a violent or drug-trafficking crime. The rarity of the actual misuse of such unusual ammunition is demonstrated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms study of firearms crime in 1985-94, which found that there had only been four prosecutions for use of the ammunition in a crime.


More here:
http://old.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel200403010926.asp
 

DirtyDawg

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
640
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oklahoma
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/nra-nevada-endorsements-betray-angle-and-gun-owners

By: David Codrea

-Gun Rights Examiner-

NRA Nevada endorsements betray Angle and gun owners

September 11th, 2010 11:53 am ET

The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund has released its [GRADES FOR THE 2010 PRIMARY--SEE UPDATE BELOW] in Nevada. Absent from their assessment: one of the most important campaigns in the country, the United States Senate race between incumbent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) and challenger Sharron Angle (R). (Click here to review NRA-PVF grades and endorsements.)

We know NRA announced it will not endorse Reid based on his support confirming anti-gun Supreme Court justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. We also know at the time one of their PR flacks said they would not be endorsing anyone in the race, and I pegged that as "weaselly equivocation."

Why?

As a state-level candidate, NRA gave Angle an "A."

At the same time, NRA gave Reid a "B."

In every grading system I've ever seen, "A" wins.

So how does NRA reward that? By giving the Reid campaign thousands of dollars.

Add to this:

Angle unequivocally went on the record with specific answers to tough questions related to the right to keep and bear arms. Reid was confident he could ignore them.

Gun Owners of America endorses Angle and has released a chronological account of Reid's anti-gun votes.

On top of that, Reid approved a campaign ad disparaging the ultimate purpose of the Second Amendment (using a self-proclaimed "NRA member").

This is unacceptable--but not unexpected for those of us who have been following NRA's many ratings "miscalculations" over the years.

So now we have their so-called "Political Victory Fund" afraid to take a stand and produce a political victory. What the hell else do they even exist for? And how does turning their backs on the best gun rights candidate in this race enhance their credibility in any race? The message that sends is, you can do everything in your power to promote that "single issue" they say is all they care about, and they'll still hang you out to dry. That's some loyalty-building.

I don't expect a campaign calling Fairfax will do much good. My experience with Vulcan Chess Masters tells me they're going to dig in their heels and ignore any protests over this, so ultimately, there's really only one thing that will get their attention.

If the mighty "800-Lb. gorilla" is too frightened to get involved because of the chicken-hearted "Majority Leader Chuckie Schumer" excuse (which is what it is), then they're simply unfit to lead. If they insist on being Not Relevant Anymore in key political races, give them their wish.

There are alternatives we could help grow, you know...

"Vote Freedom First." Unless you're afraid to.

Or unless you've got a backroom deal to stay out of things?

UPDATE: NRA added a caveat to their PVF site for the 2010 NV race:

These ratings were for the June 8 Primary and are not General Election Endorsements

OK. Why are other races represented, but not the U.S. Senate primary?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom