Posted on 06/17/2010 11:14:52 AM PDT by Dan Nunn
We appreciate some NRA members' concerns about our position on H.R. 5175, the "DISCLOSE Act." Unfortunately, critics of our position have misstated or misunderstood the facts.
We have never said we would support any version of this bill. To the contrary, we clearly stated NRA's strong opposition to the DISCLOSE Act (as introduced) in a letter sent to Members of Congress on May 26 (click here to read the letter).
Through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has consistently and strongly opposed any effort to restrict the rights of our four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. The initial version of H.R. 5175 would effectively have put a gag order on the NRA during elections and threatened our members' freedom of association, by forcing us to turn our donor lists over to the federal government. We would also have been forced to list our top donors on all election-related television, radio and Internet ads and mailings—even mailings to our own members. We refuse to let this Congress impose those unconstitutional restrictions on our Association.
The NRA provides critical firearms training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement throughout the country. This bill would force us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refuse to let this Congress force us to make that choice.
We didn't "sell out" to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill.
Our position is based on principle and experience. During consideration of the previous campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, congressional leadership repeatedly refused to exempt the NRA from its provisions, promising that our concerns would be fixed somewhere down the line. That didn't happen; instead, the NRA had to live under those restrictions for seven years and spend millions of dollars on compliance costs and on legal fees to challenge the law. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak.
There are those who say the NRA has a greater duty to principle than to gun rights. It's easy to say we should put the Second Amendment at risk over some so-called First Amendment principle – unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do.
The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology.
The NRA is NOT a 2nd Amendment organization... They are a professional lobbying organization under the guise of the 2nd Amendment. Their goal is not our 2nd Amendment rights, it’s 2nd Amendment controversy in order to get a larger membership and more money.
Following a rebellion by two important factions of rank-and-file House Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has pulled a campaign-finance bill opposed by a broad coalition of special interest groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
/agreed
*signed, a Life Member
I don’t follow the NRA for conservative activism, I follow them for gun rights. I’ve seen them endorse plenty of folks for their gun rights stances (e.g. Harry Reid), but the rest of their record is abysmal.
I follow the NRA for my gun rights first. I come here to FR for conservative activism and read The Patriot Post for other endorsements.
This is getting to be a pretty pathetic statement in regards to the NRA's actions!
The groups that got most of the gun laws repealed or modified around the country in the last few years has been done by LOCAL 2A groups and their members, not the NRA! So the NRA Groupies need to get off that talking point, as it just makes anyone that tosses it out look like a partisan hack!
Bush initially reversed the ban "National Parks Carry" and I don't consider him a friend of the 2A at all!
That fails the "first they came for the Communists" test [yeah, not the best choice of groups, but that is the quote]. If the NRA is ready to ching the rest of the Constitution, I'm ready to ching the NRA. There is waaaaaay too much "I got mine, the heck with you" going on these days.
So true, with the HealthCareReform BS it became obvious there's no such thing as a moderate democrat. They're rats, through and through.
In their world there is no need for a Constitution, they'll make up the rules as they go along. That's what makes them so dangerous, and they don't even know it (fools). I only trust a rat as far as I can kick 'em.
The NRA should be wary of any deals with these scum as should every American who cares about our fate. November can't come soon enough and when it does, that Great Flushing Sound heard will be the re-birth of a Nation To Which It Stands. No more quarter to these bastards. None.
Agreed.
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.