Posted on 09/07/2007 11:24:04 AM PDT by looscnnn
That JPFO and the NRA have different views on "gun control" is no secret; you can read our position -- and view supporting evidence -- at http://www.jpfo.org/alert20061211.htm . You can also read an article on the NRA's recent alignment with gun-prohibitionist Carolyn McCarthy at http://www.jpfo.org/smith-nra.htm .
And now, NRA Director Joaquin Jackson has publically stated that magazine capacities should be limited to five rounds and that "assault weapons [sic] should be limited to military or police." That's right -- a director of the supposedly pro-gun NRA wants to take YOUR semi-automatic rifles away.
Don't believe us? Think it's just a rumor? View the evidence for yourself at http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalks/archives/movies/jackson5_44k.mov (we also have it mirrored on the JPFO site at http://www.jpfo.org/joaquin.mov ).
Already the NRA apologists are coming out of the woodwork. Anyone who points out the hypocrisy of Jackson's position are denounced as "wackos", "black helicopter paranoids," and "just trying to make a buck."
It's time to "Humiliate and Repudiate" Joaquin Jackson and the NRA. Go to http://www.jpfo.org/handbill-joaquin.jpg to see our latest handbill. Print it out and distribute it to those who still believe the NRA is working in the interest of gun owners. They are not.
If you value the truth more than betrayal and want an aggressive defense of your natural and Second Amendment rights, visit http://www.jpfo.org/member.htm to learn how you can join JPFO. We encourage you to use our "gun control" destroying books and videos ( http://shop.jpfo.org ) and get on board with us today.
- The Liberty Crew
PS Don't forget that you can view all our "Humiliate and Repudiate" handbills at http://www.jpfo.org/freebies.htm
Thks, but it is about the GCA ‘68 and I was asking about GOA supporting FOPA of ‘86.
Sorry - misunderstood your post.
how in hell did this tool end up at the NRA ?”
The same way hippy’s are now running our Govt.
The same way Islam takes over other countries
The same way McCain is a Rep.
When revolvers were six shooters but you had to leave the chamber under the hammer empty if you didn’t want stray shots going through your leg and your horse, they used to say five shots were enough and if you needed more you had a different kind of problem.
Thank you for doing the research.
If in those three pages they do not have a method for removing a member for cause, IMO, they should.
This isn’t a diverse group like the GOP. This is a gun rights organization. It should be cohesive. ‘Diversity’ of opinion really doesn’t have a place here.
so true
How many store robberies and home invasions involve more than one criminal?
They can write whatever laws they want, I’m keeping what I have!
I am sure that you didn’t do it on purpose, but when you italicized both sentences, you made it appear that I said that the Constitution was not sacrosanct. I’d just like it on the record that I did not say that.
I understand that bylaws must be followed. I am questioning whether there is a mechanism for removing someone who is unfit and if not, why not?
If I am doing harm to the reputation or the mission of the group, I would expect that they could remove me. Is that an unreasonable expectation?
Good God. What an idiot.
I prefer procedure too.
Also gives them the time to print petition info in one of their monthly magazines (voting member edition).
If you are dissatisfied with the NRA Bylaws, why not join and work to join the? You can you know. But again, procedure.
From GOA:
“...And GOA spent more money than any other group to successfully pass the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.”
Life member of GOA here. As well as NRA.
Post 212 should read “...join and work to change them?”
I have been a member off and on but am not presently as I am not very happy with them at all.
As to the changes, don’t you think that it is just plain common sense to have a provision to remove someone who is detrimental to the group’s effort?
My local group set up our by laws that way so we could never be taken over by anyone hostile to our goals and objectives and we didn’t need high priced lawyers and millions of dollars to do it.
And yes, our group has been very effective in stopping anti gun legislation in the State even when we had to overcome the NRA’s efforts to push bad legislation.
And no, there is not one paid person in our group. It is an all volunteer effort. Sometimes I think that those getting paid don’t really want to solve the problem because it would mean the end to their big paychecks and perks.
Ding...Ding...Ding. We have a winner! Somewhere up the thread I likened it to Je$$e Jackass and the race issue.
No problem.
I neither agree, nor disagree with you. I personally favor a "Board of Governors" as opposed to a Board of Directors. 50 plus one "at large." One from each state. This way members could become acquainted with "their" Governor, instead of 75 plus one at large Directors scattered all about the country.
It may take NRA longer to accomplish this "expulsion," but if it is done it will be done in accordance with members views and not by a select few.
Thanks, I had never seen/heard that. With that info, I guess the questions are:
Are either/both actively trying to correct their mistake of backing the bill?
Are either/both actively trying to eliminate NFA ‘38/GCA ‘68?
I know JPFO is trying, not just all three, but all gun control.
But anyone that is pro-RKBA is my friend, even if I disagree with the way they go about things.
GOA's take on '86 FOPA is that "...we got more than we gave."
The NRA is the 800 pound gorilla. I do wish they would act more like King Kong than a monkey...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
