Maybe that's why he's got the insufferable elitist attitude that only military and cops should be allowed to own certain kinds of guns.
Posted on 10/19/2007 8:47:31 AM PDT by mvpel
Ping!
bump
No relation to Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson, of Monty Python fame.
***and multiple WEEKLY solicitations via mail and phone for donations...***
That is no reason to quit. it requires $$$MONEY$$$ to lobby congress. I get lots of solicitations from them, AND SAF and CCKRBA.
So, lets see what laws the anti-gunners have tried to force on us without the NRA stopping them.
1961. We don’t want to take your guns away, we only want to register handguns. Long guns will not be affected.
1964. We don’t want to take your guns away. We only want to register all of them!
1968. We don’t want to take your sporting guns away. We ONLY want to register them and ban ONLY the import of foreign Saturday night specials and five shot WWII military bolt action rifles!
1968 “Today we make America safe by taking the guns out of the hands of criminals!”...LBJ when he signed the 1968 gun control act into law.
1971. We don’t want to take your sporting guns away, we ONLY want to ban Saturday night specials.
1976. We don’t want to take your long guns away. We ONLY want to ban all handguns!
(From the original Handgun Control Inc group)....”We only want to control handguns. Long guns will not be affected.”
1981. The NRA is a rifle organization! They should give up their handguns! And they can keep their rifles!
1989. We don’t want to ban your hunting rifles and shotguns. We ONLY want to ban handguns AND Assault rifles and shotguns.
We ONLY want to ban assault rifles and shotguns AND all fifty cal. rifles and handguns!
I could go into more detail but that is plenty. Thankfully the NRA has been a lightning rod for such claims.
For those who are not NRA members do you really think you personally have the clout to sway congress and hold off an organized attempt by the Brady bunch and others? Can you come up with enough money to buy air time to counter the false claims of George Sorios and his billions?
If not YOU NEED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE NRA!
Good post. NRA is, on balance, the most effective lobbying organization for 2A rights.
Plus, the window decals drive the doofus looney lefties absolutely nuts. More so that having a “W” sticker, in my experience.
That’s a ridiculous argument. First your NRA membership helps fund 2nd Amendment advocacy and understanding, training and proper use. Secondly, membership gives you access to said training and specials not available to non members...Gun ownership is not a requirement...but hey what are you waiting for get a set of gonads, buy a gun get some training join up and have some fun!
I wonder how many of these worthless hides that are too cheap to become NRA members or give them a little extra for lobbying efforts are also too tight to give a donation to FR!
There was a man who had lots of firearms but refused to become a member of the NRA. Too many solicitations, a modifyed 1968 gun control law(which prevented real registration) and other silly reasons was his excuse for not joining.
When he died his will requested that NRA members be the pallbearers. They carried him this far, they might as well carry him the rest of the way.
Rubbish.
I joined the NRA wayyyyy before I owned guns. I was even raising money for the NRA Foundation before I owned guns.
It’s the principles that matter. Don’t sweat not packing...for the time being, that is. When the time is right, you will become a gun owner. Then you will be both a gun owner and an NRA member.
Sometime a dufus like Jackson gets in there”
Sometimes even a poofter like Larry Craig gets in, also....
I read an article once where guys would sit in grocery store parking lots and wait for minivans with the Million Mom March bumper stickers on them. They would follow them home and rob them knowing they wouldn't have a gun to protect themselves.
I now have NRA stickers on my dog as well.
I spent entirely too long on the phone yesterday morning talking to “Eric” at NRA-ILA. I started the conversation by asking him what it would take before the NRA would withdraw its support for H.R. 2640. He replied that the support would be withdrawn if some sort of gun-control amendment were attached.
I’m not a supporter of HR 2640 so you can only imagine how the conversation continued. I finally decided that I wasn’t going to change the minds of the officers of the NRA with a simple phone call so I politely ended the call.
Afterward though, I kept playing the record over and over and dwelling on the part where ‘Eric’ kept saying that the membership just needs to be educated as to the true benefits of the bill.
Perhaps.
But isn’t that a reversal of how the NRA is supposed to work? Isn’t the NRA supposed to represent the members? Since when does the NRA (or at least the NRA officers) consider education of the membership part of the job? Are we so ignorant of the political machinations of congress that we need to be “educated” by those elites who cater to movie and rock stars in order to bolster their own public images? Isn’t this the same problem we have with our “representatives” in congress?
I’m sure there are a lot of issues that divide the GOA and the NRA and HR 2640 is just the most recent, but ‘Eric’ couldn’t complete a paragraph without telling me how the GOA had lied about the Bill and how they spend most of their budget on mailings asking people to leave the NRA and join the GOA.
Well, I get a lot of GOA stuff in the mail and he’s right in that they point out the difference between the two organizations but any plea to leave the one and join the other is remarkably low-key. Instead they ask their members to write their congresscritters in an effort to pass or defeat some legislation. The NRA, OTOH, is content with letting the ILA do all the lobbying (obviously the members are to stupid to do anything like that.)
Now then, a bunch of guys are going to call me an “NRA-basher.” Fair enough, but I am a member. I’m just not a blind member. I don’t like someone peeing on my leg and telling me it’s raining and that’s what the NRA is trying to do here.
Lethargic? They were the ones who were providing the principal legal muscle to file the lawsuits there in the wake of the gun-grabbing. What gave you the idea that they were lethargic? Maybe the New Orleans courts were lethargic...
Maybe that's why he's got the insufferable elitist attitude that only military and cops should be allowed to own certain kinds of guns.
See here: NRA Statement on New Orleans Gun Confiscations
The statement was dated September 12, 2005, well over a week after most of the incidents had occurred. Now, I will give the NRA credit for ultimately stopping the seizures (NRA files suit to stop firearms seizures in New Orleans) and (Major Victory For Firearms Owners And Freedom In Louisiana), but I well remember that first week, when me and all the other 2nd Amendment supporters on this board gnawed our tongues and gnashed our teeth in anger during that first week, with nary a peep out of the NRA on the seizures, not until the 12th.
Just read the posts on that first thread and you will get a sense of the frustration we felt at NRA for not getting its act together faster.
Over the past few years I’ve been feeling more and more like the NRA administration sees itself as somehow above the members, that the members should be overjoyed that they have such a kind and benificent group of people willing to look after them.
So, just as our government is supposed to worry about the citizens picking up their rifles and bringing order to Washington, D.C., perhaps it’s time to remind La Pierre and Co. that they work for us. Mr. Jackson may very well be a famous man in Texas but because of these statements that he made, which show his true feelings, he needs to go. Let his recall serve as a warning to any other directors or officers who fail to live up to the principles of the NRA.
Like I said, take a look at his book before you make that call.
RLTW
They did: http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?ID=9937 25k 10/19/2007
I did not hear the interview yet. I disagree with everything he said, however your post led me to believe that he just conducted the interview. According to his reply the interview took place several years ago.
I am a NRA member and have been for years. Some here complain about all of the solicitations. I get them too, all of the time. None have yet come that force me to contribute. I give as often as I can. The NRA is first and foremost a political lobbying organization that works to defend our 2nd amendment rights. The mothers milk of politics is money. Do you think the DC court case was done without cost?
We live in perilous times, the gun banners are running wild in anticipation of returning to power. Make no mistake they will try at every level to restrict our rights and eventually take our guns.
I want to say again I disagree with everything that was reportedly said in the interview, but if as they say it was years ago why are you raising it at this time? We can ill afford to fight one another.
I give to the NRA, I give to the RNC, RNCC, RNSC. We must not be divided or the forces of liberal insanity will prevail.
The NRA is the most effective lobby in the USA, it has been a determining factor in the last several elections. AS long as MR Jackson has clarified his remarks and further is not currently as a leader of the organization advocating the views expressed in the past interview I do not believe it is a useful effort to attack him. We can ill afford the waste of energy fighting one another when our adversaries are so intent upon our destruction. Give of your time, money and energy in support of our common interest.
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.