How best to defeat the NRA...

[MCgrease08]

Dude, I'm 30 years old. I have no living memory of this supposed NRA golden age. I don't care what they did in the past, I care what they're doing now, and how badly they're doing it.

I completely understand this position. I'm also in my 30s and I had no use for the NRA or exposure to it in my youth outside of a two day basic Hunter's Ed safety course when I was 12. Which may have been the most boring thing I ever sat through to be completely honest.

The great thing is that like you and me, most of the younger generation of gun owners seem to be much more staunch in their support of the second amendment than some of the older folks. Gun owners under 40 seem to be more "no compromise" types. I'm not sure why that is, but I am glad to see it and I think it's a powerful opportunity to push back against the erosion of gun rights. Young blood must stay active and get involved to make this happen.

Like TriggerTime mentioned, how can we expect anything to change if we're not willing to get involved, get active, and push for stronger resistance to new gun laws? If we write off the NRA completely then we're left with an organization full of grampas and Fudds. (No offense to some of you older guys.)

Yes there are other gun rights groups. Yes they deserve our support too. But the NRA is still the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. It's the organization the anti-gunner vilify. It's the organization that carries the most weight in DC. It's the organization helping drive youth shooting sports to expose kids to marksmanship.

Yes it needs an overhaul. Yes it needs to get leaner and spend money more strategically. Yes it needs to be more aggressive to push against new gun laws. But it's tough to make that happen when the public perception (and likely the reality) is that a majority of members are 60+ year old white guys.

Gun rights are under attack. The anti-gunners will never stop. Writing off the NRA, in my opinion, is a big mistake.

 

[Ziggidy]

^^^ well said^^^

+1

 

[rhino]

I heard something on the radio (WIBC) about Oliver North trying to oust Wayne LaPierre. What's up with that? And if true, isn't that kind of like the tail trying to remove the dog? W LaP's title may be VP, but he's been running the show for a long, long time.

 

[ditcherman]

I completely understand this position. I'm also in my 30s and I had no use for the NRA or exposure to it in my youth outside of a two day basic Hunter's Ed safety course when I was 12. Which may have been the most boring thing I ever sat through to be completely honest.

The great thing is that like you and me, most of the younger generation of gun owners seem to be much more staunch in their support of the second amendment than some of the older folks. Gun owners under 40 seem to be more "no compromise" types. I'm not sure why that is, but I am glad to see it and I think it's a powerful opportunity to push back against the erosion of gun rights. Young blood must stay active and get involved to make this happen.

Like TriggerTime mentioned, how can we expect anything to change if we're not willing to get involved, get active, and push for stronger resistance to new gun laws? If we write off the NRA completely then we're left with an organization full of grampas and Fudds. (No offense to some of you older guys.)

Yes there are other gun rights groups. Yes they deserve our support too. But the NRA is still the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. It's the organization the anti-gunner vilify. It's the organization that carries the most weight in DC. It's the organization helping drive youth shooting sports to expose kids to marksmanship.

Yes it needs an overhaul. Yes it needs to get leaner and spend money more strategically. Yes it needs to be more aggressive to push against new gun laws. But it's tough to make that happen when the public perception (and likely the reality) is that a majority of members are 60+ year old white guys.

Gun rights are under attack. The anti-gunners will never stop. Writing off the NRA, in my opinion, is a big mistake.

Hey now! I'm a first time grandpa of about two weeks (but not a Fudd!!). Ya gotta be careful and not even unintentionally divide the ranks, labels are easily overgeneralized. It's so easy to do, but that will lead to the defeat of the organization more than anything.

My stance is I'm a proud lifetime member but send more money to GOA, and made that decision before I knew any of this going on. It would be a shame to take the framework and guts of this huge organization and let it be minimized to a hunting rights group or whatever.

 

[ditcherman]

I heard something on the radio (WIBC) about Oliver North trying to oust Wayne LaPierre. What's up with that? And if true, isn't that kind of like the tail trying to remove the dog? W LaP's title may be VP, but he's been running the show for a long, long time.

Well, there's this...OL stepping down - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-nra-idUSKCN1S30EQ

 

[DadSmith]

I'm done with the NRA. My money is going to GoA from now on. At least they don't compromise.

 

[croy]

Don't abandon, advocate for change. I think the pressure is building on Lapierre and once he's gone real change can take effect.

 

[wingrider1800]

I completely understand this position. I'm also in my 30s and I had no use for the NRA or exposure to it in my youth outside of a two day basic Hunter's Ed safety course when I was 12. Which may have been the most boring thing I ever sat through to be completely honest.

The great thing is that like you and me, most of the younger generation of gun owners seem to be much more staunch in their support of the second amendment than some of the older folks. Gun owners under 40 seem to be more "no compromise" types. I'm not sure why that is, but I am glad to see it and I think it's a powerful opportunity to push back against the erosion of gun rights. Young blood must stay active and get involved to make this happen.

Like TriggerTime mentioned, how can we expect anything to change if we're not willing to get involved, get active, and push for stronger resistance to new gun laws? If we write off the NRA completely then we're left with an organization full of grampas and Fudds. (No offense to some of you older guys.)

Yes there are other gun rights groups. Yes they deserve our support too. But the NRA is still the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. It's the organization the anti-gunner vilify. It's the organization that carries the most weight in DC. It's the organization helping drive youth shooting sports to expose kids to marksmanship.

Yes it needs an overhaul. Yes it needs to get leaner and spend money more strategically. Yes it needs to be more aggressive to push against new gun laws. But it's tough to make that happen when the public perception (and likely the reality) is that a majority of members are 60+ year old white guys.

Gun rights are under attack. The anti-gunners will never stop. Writing off the NRA, in my opinion, is a big mistake.

I agree 100%. +2

 

[Cerberus]

I completely understand this position. I'm also in my 30s and I had no use for the NRA or exposure to it in my youth outside of a two day basic Hunter's Ed safety course when I was 12. Which may have been the most boring thing I ever sat through to be completely honest.

The great thing is that like you and me, most of the younger generation of gun owners seem to be much more staunch in their support of the second amendment than some of the older folks. Gun owners under 40 seem to be more "no compromise" types. I'm not sure why that is, but I am glad to see it and I think it's a powerful opportunity to push back against the erosion of gun rights. Young blood must stay active and get involved to make this happen.

Like TriggerTime mentioned, how can we expect anything to change if we're not willing to get involved, get active, and push for stronger resistance to new gun laws? If we write off the NRA completely then we're left with an organization full of grampas and Fudds. (No offense to some of you older guys.)

Yes there are other gun rights groups. Yes they deserve our support too. But the NRA is still the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. It's the organization the anti-gunner vilify. It's the organization that carries the most weight in DC. It's the organization helping drive youth shooting sports to expose kids to marksmanship.

Yes it needs an overhaul. Yes it needs to get leaner and spend money more strategically. Yes it needs to be more aggressive to push against new gun laws. But it's tough to make that happen when the public perception (and likely the reality) is that a majority of members are 60+ year old white guys.

Gun rights are under attack. The anti-gunners will never stop. Writing off the NRA, in my opinion, is a big mistake.

I'm 50, have alway been a no compromise type, and judging by at least 50% of the attendees just today about half were much younger than me. Also saw proportionate numbers of various minorities today.

 

[DRob]

I'm an NRA member, I'll stay an NRA member.

 

[GNRPowdeR]

Agreed, but I'm thinking it will require a few more offices cleared than Wayne alone...

For instance - The "Carry Guard" fiasco... Whom was lead? How much has it cost? Where'd the money go?!? Always follow the money...

 

[CampingJosh]

W LaP's title may be VP, but he's been running the show for a long, long time.

Not at all uncommon in a nonprofit organization. The president is a board position, and the chief person on staff will have a title like Executive Vice President (as LaPierre's) or Executive Director. It's the CEO-equivalent position.

 

[CampingJosh]

I heard something on the radio (WIBC) about Oliver North trying to oust Wayne LaPierre. What's up with that? And if true, isn't that kind of like the tail trying to remove the dog? W LaP's title may be VP, but he's been running the show for a long, long time.

Sorry to quote you twice in a row.

For a nonprofit, the primary roles of the board should be (1) policy guidance and (2) oversight of the executive. It is absolutely the role of the president (North) to oust the executive (LaPierre) if there's something fishy going on.

Every NRA employee reports to LaPierre (though that may be several steps up). LaPierre, though, reports to the board.

 

[Ark]

Yes there are other gun rights groups. Yes they deserve our support too. But the NRA is still the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. It's the organization the anti-gunner vilify. It's the organization that carries the most weight in DC. It's the organization helping drive youth shooting sports to expose kids to marksmanship.

Their size only excuses so much poor behavior, and from where I'm standing their supposed results are pretty weak as of late. Big salaries are supposed to bring big talent, and I'm not seeing it.

Major changes need to be made. I'm watching this whole thing closely.

 

[rhino]

Well, there's this...OL stepping down - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-nra-idUSKCN1S30EQ

Ah! Looks like he's stepping down because he got pushed off of the platform by the real power broker. I have no way of knowing what the truth is behind that story, but in general I think it's long past time for someone else to be at the helm of NRA. W LaP should step aside and let someone else take over.

 

[spec4]

Does anyone have a link to exactly what the issues are? I'm in the dark. For sure the liberals love this and will milk it for all it's worth.

 

[Gabriel]

Does anyone have a link to exactly what the issues are? I'm in the dark. For sure the liberals love this and will milk it for all it's worth.

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows exactly what the issues are except those involved. I suspect anything said by parties involved to the public is whatever needs to be said to cover one's ass.

 

[Trigger Time]

If anyone is a member I would urge you to call and email the NRA and actually voice your concerns TO THEM.
Im voicing my desire for LaPierre to step down immediately.

If you are willing to compromise on bumpstocks, you are part of the problem with the NRA.
If you are willing to compromise to expand background checks, you are part of the problem with the NRA.
If you are willing to expand and pass red flag laws, you are pRt of the problem with the NRA.
If you are willing yo say oh well I dont need a suppressor so I dont care if they pass legistlation to take them off the NFA registry, then you are part of the problem with the NRA.
If you are willing to compromise one more GD INCH then YOU are whats wrong with the ****ing NRA and YOU ARE A FUDD!

Wake the hell up people.
We need the NRA, but we need it to be OUR NRA! A modern lean mean freedom fighting machine. We CAN fix the NRA. How do I know? Because look at the money they pull in. Grassroots arent built overnight. GOA (Im a life member and fully support them) doesnt hold a candle to the lobying power of the NRA. How do I know? How many times has the President and VP of the USA came to speak at the GOA national meeting? Exactly ... Zero
Its easier to fix than it is to destroy. We need to tighten up our ranks and stop bashing the NRA as a WHOLE and be laser focused on the real problems inside the NRA. The leadership.
Take them out and fire them or remove them and lets move on and get this **** done BEFORE 2020!!! If we show we are vulnerable and infighting then the anti-gun lobying groups and democrats are gonna pick us off!!!! And theyll do it too because politicians are pansys and they will abandon a weak NRA (congress im meaning)

 

[Gabriel]

I think I might actually still be a member. I can't remember how many years I signed up for last time and I still get their magazine emailed to me (plus I haven't gotten 30,000 letters begging me to renew or the impending loss of our gun rights will be all my fault).

 

[JamesV]

^^
above your name on the magazine is your membership number, it might say "Life" also.