The NRA's Sorry Tale ...
In its 141st year, the NRA has risen to become one of America's most powerful lobby groups. Now the NRA is responding to a massacre that has President Obama advocating for more stringent gun control. WSJ's Jason Bellini reports. – AOL/WSJ
Dominant Social Theme: NRA has fought hard for gun freedom in the USA.
Free-Market Analysis: This video provides us with a concise history of the National Rifle Association, the most powerful gun lobby of them all in the US. Actually, one could say it is a concise history of the gathering failure of this organization, as it shows clearly how US Second Amendment rights have been reduced over time.
The Second Amendment states clearly that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. You wouldn't know that from the US government's success in abridging those "unabridgable rights." Or the NRA's unfortunate culpability in the process.
The NRA was founded by victorious Civil War soldiers, supposedly to help troops with shooting skills. But given that the NRA has links to the US military – or had them initially – one wonders if the NRA is truly as independent as it pretends to be.
In an article entitled, "NRA Makes a Terrible Deal," we wrote the following:
The answer to the question regarding the NRA may be seen in its background and evolution as America's leading gun-rights organization. Not only is it the nation's largest such organization with some four million members claimed. It also the oldest, being founded after the Civil War by two well known New Yorkers, one of whom was the publisher of the New York Sun.
...The NRA has always been a mainstream organization with a reach that climbs right to the top of the US establishment. But in fact it is the lack of success that the NRA has had in keeping gun control laws off the books that has disturbed many supporters and led to the success of at least two other organizations. Here's one example – apparently from a dissatisfied former backer – posted ... at the DailyPaul.com:
"Yes, the NRA is a FRAUD ! ... Sun, 04/12/2009 – 22:18 ... With over 30,000 gun laws on the books ... the NRA has successfully reversed 2 (partially) pieces of gun legislation. I would give you the batting average of that ratio, but my calculator only goes to the 6th negative decimal. Having a membership of 3.5 MILLION, 550 employees, hundreds of thousands of volunteers and an annual budget of over $120 MILLION...based on their track record...I CALL THAT FRAUD! ... The NRA not only compromises, but they help write almost every piece of anti-gun legislation, just to generate donations. Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership are the only way to go."
The NRA recently called for a police officer in every school to fight gun violence. Rather than advocate an armed citizenry or removal of "gun free" zones around schools, the NRA opted to lobby for an expansion of the military/civil police state, which is already alarmingly large.
This is typical of the perspective of this dysfunctional organization. It surely does not seem to be what it purports to be and those in the US who want to preserve gun rights are probably looking to the wrong advocate if they put their trust in the NRA.
Here's the concise video of the NRA's history. It leaves out a lot but what is included provides us with an instructional – and sorry – tale.
(Video from WSJDigitalNetwork's YouTube user channel.)
Posted by W.Palmer on 12/25/12 01:25 PM
The logic of owning a gun to protect yourself from other people who own guns I would have thought would perhaps invoke a different perspective.
But then I am not an American.
Posted by mava on 12/25/12 12:28 PM
Wow, so many here are against NRA! I thought I will have to be alone.
Like you, I initially supported NRA monetarily, but stopped and left the organization when NRA said that the AWB is fine, we should all bend and take it. Instead of starting a war, a secession, I don't know, something, they just rolled over and presented it as a victory. "Look, we pushed the agreement that you will only be raped for ten years!"
NRA, what part of the word "right" don't you understand?
For me, it isn't a question of money, it is, very much, a question of principles. There shall be NO limitation of the kind of ARMS owned, nor on the number of ARMS, nor on who owns them. The 2-nd doesn't speak of "those passed testing", nor of "those mentally healthy", nor of "arms, except assault weapons", none of that. It says "the right... to bear arms".
Is a nuclear-tipped missile at the hands of our trigger happy president an arm? Yes? Then why is it only murderers like him are allowed to bear it?
Screw the NRA sellouts, they will never ever get a penny from me.
Posted by IndyLyn on 12/24/12 05:03 PM
I WAS a paid up life member of NRA until about six years ago when I discovered Click to view link ... a small organization that has never compromised on the issues of the 2nd amendment ... nor most importantly... the G-d given right to life and self-preservation. Loss of the 2nd Amendment is a prelude to government genocide.
Posted by sobiloff on 12/24/12 05:02 PM
You complain about the NRA, but show me _any_ other organization whose done more to defend our Second Amendment rights. Oh, that's right, there aren't any. Yes, they aren't perfect, but the ill-informed quote from your random Ron Paul supporter is hardly compelling reason to damn the entire organization. For example, when the writing was on the wall and we knew we were going to have to live with some sort of "assault weapon" ban (AWB), who negotiated to get the 10-year sunset in there? The NRA, that's who. They also manage to bottle-up in committee thousands of bills at all levels of government. No other organization has as much legislative influence, but by the same token they can't wave a magic wand and make miracles happen. Instead of taking cheap shots, why not roll up your sleeves and help make them even more effective?
Posted by Bosco Hurn on 12/24/12 04:43 PM
The only reason to join the NRA is to take advantage of the legal insurance they offer to members (at an additional cost).
Legitimately killing someone in self defense may result in both criminal and civil lawsuits which, without legal insurnce, can wipe someone out financially.
Posted by Bobby7 on 12/24/12 03:59 PM
In a lawless state, everyone should be allowed to bear arms!
1 rifle - 1 hand gun!
The guns are to be for protection of family & kin.
A majority of guns for sale today, to the Public, can be taken off the market!
Assault rifles etc are not needed for protection of family & kin.
IF the NO BRAINIER POLITICIANS could spell this out to the American people, there would be NO NEED for all the hysteria about gun control.
Posted by Edgar Friendly on 12/24/12 03:51 PM
The NRA has been a prominent , and much hated, political opponent of the left, AKA, America's communist bloc. Just look at all the hateful vitrol the NRA generated by it's mere existence during the marxist news reporting of the Sandy Hook, connecticut shcool shootings... . a questionable tale if reports of the police and witness reports are to be discounted for the communist bloc's propaganda on this horrible tragedy.
As for any new gun laws; it is difficult for people or governments to put the genie back in the bottle. all states except Illinois, have adopted some form of citizen's concealed carry. it is apparent to all but the most demented that "Gun Free Zones" and psychatric medicine play a central role in all such massacres. The guns are just the props. Don't forget the possiblity, the very real possibility , of these mass shootings being manufactured events designed to strip Americans of thier arms; IE: False Flag Events. The days after the media blitz on the Sandy Hook school atocity, all gun stores in my state had sold out of multi round high capacity cartridge magazines; and almost all types of civilian versions of "Assault rifles" AR-15's; AK-47's Heckler and Koch,Springfield M1A's, AR -10's etc. Most of the ammunition supplies for such rifles were decimated or severely reduced in inventory, depending on the size of the retail concern.
If you look at the amount of citizens in the USA who are armed; it would represent, bu a huge margin, the biggest army on planet Earth. All these people rushing to buy these guns, magazines, and cases of ammunition are
Unlikely intending to turn them in just because the globalist's puuppet ruler for the US is going to use his 'executive' powers to 'pass a law'.
look at the approval rating for congress; it is like 18%!!!
How many real Americans, vs communist bloc peasant type Americans are going to turn in any small arms? regardless of how the NRA enters the fray; millions of Americans will defy any attempt to disarm themselves, local law inforcement will not commit suicide over the muslim/marxist's globalist agenda... and those pushing it may find themselves looking at the business end of one of the millions of such rifles sold here in America during the past fifteen years... this is just the most likely reality to unfold at this point. I truely wish it were not so.
Posted by Friend_of_John_Galt on 12/24/12 03:21 PM
The NRA claims to endorse only those candidates who have a strong record of protecting citizens second amendment rights. But, until recently, NRA endorsed Harry Reid -- who has a record of supporting legislation in the way the NRA approves and who earmarked federal funds for projects (gun ranges) that the NRA supported. But the flaw in this system of endorsing politicians simply on the basis of their past record is that leftists, like Harry Reid, will, when called upon by their party, give up their "values" and roll over to pass legislation counter to NRA interests.
I wouldn't, necessarily, rule out the NRA as being somewhat useful in identifying politicians who might be more likely to support the public's second amendment rights -- but their lack of considering the underlying philosophy of candidates leads them into supporting "sleeper" candidates who will violate the constitution if it fits their political interests of the moment.
As with any organization with millions of members, the appearance of (political) strength probably exceeds the reality of whatever "strength" they may have.
Posted by laceja on 12/24/12 01:01 PM
The NRA joined the PTB long ago. Even though they decided to make their stand based on the Second Amendment, they have always prominently talked about the Americans having the right to have their hunting weapons. This is how you wind up with the terms "assault weapon". ALL weapons are ASSAULT WEAPONS, even a kitchen can be an assault weapon. If any group truly wanted to be a strong representative of Second Amendment Rights, they would tell the truth... The Second Amendment was written specifically so we would have weapons to protect ourselves from an oppressive and dangerous government, which we now have.
I just don't see anyway for Americans to recover our rights peacefully. When you abdicate your rights and allow a group of thugs to legitimize themselves with laws to steal your rights, the only way to remove them is by force. The Second Amendment was meant to keep the government afraid of its citizens, but we've allowed the power of the government to grow beyond the citizens ability to control it. I think the masses have already been so well programmed to accept what the government has to offer, that it is likely not possible to get the masses to accept truth.
Posted by Libertarian Jerry on 12/24/12 12:15 PM
The NRA is like the Republican Party. That is,like the Republicans,they talk about rights and call themselves "conservatives" but they just "go along to get along." Like the Republicans,they(the NRA),give in to a few concessions on their rights and then a few more concessions until the 2nd Amendment is meaningless. It is obvious to any nuetral observer that America is degenerating into a police state. When that happens and guns are outlawed how can Americans protect themselves from their own government? And if people think that it can't happen here then they are fools. Its happening just like its happened throughout history. Just ask the Jews who survived the holocaust or the Russians who survived the Gulags.
Posted by rossbcan on 12/24/12 10:46 AM
DB: "want to preserve gun rights are probably looking to the wrong advocate"
For "advocates" it is "all about perception", the illusion of "adding value". The "value appraisal" is done within the subverted MSM paradigm to which "the unproductive" must appear to "add value".
And, the MSM gun paradigm is that gun owners and those whom advocate rights to personal self-defense are rabid, antisocial, very dangerous individuals whom must be "preemptively" stripped of the ability (weopons) to engage in the "going postal" behavior that is an inevitable consequence of "the nature" of the alleged psychopaths whom would desire weopons,
Gun advocates are also alleged to be insane outcasts, not "trusting" our "neccessary", "altruistic", "fair and balanced", "trust us, we are just-us" "representatives", another completely fake MSM paradigm.
Posted by Ol' Grey Ghost on 12/24/12 10:42 AM
The NRA is a lot like an armed homeowner that meets a burglar at the front door to his house. The armed homeowner keeps walking backwards towards his bedroom and makes a deal with the burglar that the burglar can have the living room and the kitchen if the burglar allows the homeowner and his family to keep the rest of the house. Then the homeowner tells his wife that he was victorious - yeah, right.
The NRA is one of the reasons I made this list of Dire Predictions for 2013...
Click to view link
Can it get any better? Not if we leave the outcome up to the efforts of others...
Posted by taxesbyanyothername on 12/24/12 10:35 AM
Yes the NRA is pretty well worthless. I don't belong to any gun rights groups but if I had to choose one it would be NAGR, National Association for Gun Rights.
Call this nitpicking if you will but in laws individual words make all the difference. The last word in the second amendment to the U. S. Constitution is infringed, not abridged. Similar meanings but not exact synonyms.
All laws limiting weapons (not just guns) infringe upon this right.
Posted by rossbcan on 12/24/12 10:16 AM
when you "trust" others to represent YOUR interests, they will present the "illusion" of doing so while, in actual fact representing their own selfish interests, and, when pushed into a corner regarding their failures will make "$hit happens" excuses.
This is a VERY difficult and hard lesson to learn, especially since an incorrect conclusion is that we are "All Alone". I "learned" this from my conniving / manipulative / lying divorce lawyer, a "lesson" she will come to regret.
Only YOU can KNOW what is really going on, in your environment and, unfortunately, it is "trust no-one", "mistrust your interpretation", TRUST THE FACTS:
Click to view link
From "The Attributes of Man":
Click to view link
"A set of choices learned in the past from considering a similar environment and set of facts. An automatic, previously learned response."
Life is a very busy place; time and energy are scarce commodities. As a consequence, these resources must be conserved and used efficiently. One of the greatest strengths of intelligence is our pattern-matching ability. When we are confronted with a situation matching one we have already learned to deal with, normally we automatically respond out of habit. For example, go to the refrigerator during commercials.
Sometimes, the situation is not exactly the same and our habitual response may be inappropriate, resulting in poor choice. For instance, trust may have been earned in the past and an unusual request granted, based on trust. Trust is a habit which may be used to our detriment. This is the reason that trust is so hard to achieve and so easy to lose.
Habits also explain the astounding learning ability of infants and young children. They have no habits or preconceptions interfering with their discerning of fact and knowledge. As we\ grow older, habits accumulate, interfering with our ability to observe and learn in an unbiased manner.
As with intelligence, if you know someone's habitual response, this ability to predict may be used against them.
Posted by Bluebird on 12/24/12 10:10 AM
True!I have known this for many years. Mr. Heston should have been the red flag people should have noticed. The only person who is going to protect my rights is me. Any group which has grown too large is not a good group, but an enabled one.