Posted on 12/09/2009 2:37:47 PM PST by Still Thinking
The February 2010 issue of GUNS Magazine is online, and a letter by NRA Life Member David Lundeen regarding my Firearms Freedom Act "Rights Watch" column caught my eye. He cited the September 2009 issue of their American Hunter magazine, and observed:
[I]t is clearly stated “Firearms Freedom Act “ supporters have never planned to test these laws in criminal cases, and no one who puts himself in that situation should expect support from the NRA.”
It's true. I'm a Life Member and get American Rifleman, and it's on page 18. Their rationale?
[T]his kind of litigation faces major obstacles–mainly because the Supreme Court has given Congress a very long leash when it comes to activities that could affect interstate commerce....Because of these issues, the NRA will continue to focus on the other kinds of pro-gun legislation described in these pages.[No] one should try to take advantage of the Montana or Tennessee 'Firearms Freedom Acts' without consulting a competent attorney and being prepared to pay large legal fees. Anyone who makes firearms commercially, without complying with federal law, is likely to be prosecuted.
The NRA seems to prefer the legislative route over the court route. The reason is that if you fail to get a bill through Congress you simply regroup and try again. If you go to court and lose that decision becomes precedence. That is a very risky gamble.
The NRA didn't initially support the Heller case for the same reason. There was a lot of anxiety that the Supreme Court wouldn't find in our favor. Now obviously that case was a huge win for our side, but at a great risk.
Just something to think about.
That's why they're not supporting this stuff.
After searching the DECEMBER issue and not finding it, I realized I was supposed to be looking in the September issue. The NRA is warning individuals not to become criminals because they will be prosecuted and the NRA simply can't help them. They know they would lose the case because the way Congress interprets the law.
Now back to that December issue that I was looking through. The NRA was involved with half a dozen lawsuits due to Heller mostly in Illinois but also in California. Luckily, most of those Illinois cities gave up their gun bans including the one in Morton Grove which started it all.
The NRA also didn't oppose Heller. It opposed Parker which turned into Heller. The filing of the case was before we had Roberts and Alito. We would have lost.
Next, ask yourself where is the goa and what have they ever done on their own?
“There is simply no way state laws can trump federal law unless the feds allow it. Remember the “supremacy” clause of the Constitution?”
Remember the 10th Amendment?
Sure there is a way, if the Constitution were actually followed. The Federal government has ZERO Constitutional authority to regulate commerce within a state. The Commerce Clause only legally applies to commerce BETWEEN states so that trade barriers can tariffs could not be erected between states.
This whole “substantive effects” BS was invented to expand Federal power.
LOL!
Even in respondng to NRA criticism you manage to attempt to deflect crimicism away by harping about GOA.
Pathetic.....but consistent!
yep, the good old nra!!!, (once the VERY greatest of any American organizations), STILL (years on now!!!)keeping on as a board member, again, after all of these years of their knowing DAMN well all about this bastard..... Grover Norquist... muslim convert, married to a muslim, founder of the anti-American group, the ‘islamic institute’ AND HUGE...lobbyist, agenda setter, fund raiser, sit. plans organizer and overall proponent for C.A.I.R.!!!! yep them, the muslim terrorist 1930’s nazi Germany ‘bund’ type front group operating right here under our noses actively seeking the destruction of our nation by muslims. hard to believe isn’t it?? that is the nra now. that is the ‘leadership’ of the nra now to allow this to happen. in the old days this bastard would not have gotten one toe anywhere near the nra....let alone serving on the board. my old butt contributes quite a bit of money to more than a few gun orgs.....none of that $$$ will ever go to the nra again.
[I]t is clearly stated “Firearms Freedom Act “ supporters have never planned to test these laws in criminal cases, and no one who puts himself in that situation should expect support from the NRA.
It was my understanding that Montana had planned from the gitgo to take the FFA to feral court after passage. I presume their intention would be to give current and prospective manufacturers legal cover to begin business. At least in one instance I can understand the NRA's reticence though: If the States are successful in implementing FFA, it would probably leave the NRA with a much smaller national following. The States will have accomplished what the NRA could never hope to do -- or they would have done it a long time ago...
Follow the money. The NRA is a lobbying group. If your cause is fixed...goodbye money.
March of Dimes is an excellent example.
Just so, but giving them the benefit of the doubt, it's entirely possible other factors may have influenced their decision as well. BUT, if they're not careful they may nuance themselves into irrelevence.
For a long time, even under the present leadership, they seemed happy to sit on their thumbs. Then membership got on them during Clinton. State organizations lead the charge and competition came up in the form of other pro-gun groups.
They need watching.
good advice. see my post 26. the once GREAT nra is long gone...
Good. Now please discuss the General Welfare clause. ;-]
AP History students get the redacted liberal pro-government view (what would you expect in government schools).
The American people need a reintroduction to the American Constitution.
They’re ignorant not stupid.
The NRA is taking a pass on a single lawsuit. How many dozens of lawsuits does the NRA have to be involved with before you notice?
There is no longer a gun ban in Morton Grove, Illinois. Thank you, NRA.
There are 75 NRA board members. Why don’t you ask Ted Nugent if he’s unhappy?
The NRA wasn’t a lobbying group until 1975. If the problem is fixed, the NRA can run matches in every city in the United States. Why don’t you ask the goa to file a lawsuit for the first time in their entire history?
goa = AWOL.
Bingo!!! Kinda like Je$$ie Jacka$$ and Al Sharpton keeping the racist movement alive so that they can keep their money rolling in.....
A bit touchy aren't we??? If you would have read my following post you would have NOTICED I was and am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. There's little doubt the NRA is a force to be reckoned with in DC and probably to a lesser extent in the courts, and for that I am grateful.
However, and IMHO, the FFA has the potential to become a powerful, if narrow tool for The States and The People to put the federales back in their pen. NONE of which would be necessary were it not for the feral government usurping our God given rights while overstepping its Constitutional authority. When the patients are running the asylum and the black robes are guarding the gates, getting out of our comfort zones to confront the beast is something to consider, no?
This has no chance in court.
It doesn’t stop a bunch of whiny non-members demanding how my money is spent.
Federal court? To quote Andrew Jackson: “The decision of the supreme court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia [Montana/Tennessee/Missouri] to yield to its mandate.”
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.