This is unfortunate - Oliver North is a good guy, but Wayne Lapierre is also a good guy ….
“Wayne Lapierre is also a good guy ….”
No, he isn’t. He’s kept me from even considering joining the NRA since the 1990s or early 2000s. I don’t recall what the particular bill was that ticked me off because it was one of those overly broad bills that tries to do so many things that the public can’t keep track of what congress is sneaking by us, but I do recall it involved in LaPierre (and the NRA along with it) being perfectly OK with trading away first amendment rights, for a slightly more favorable government interpretation of second amendment rights. His willing to trade away other freedoms for insignificant “brownie points” has always stuck with me. This was around the time I turned 18, and it was my first exposure to LaPierre and I vowed then I would never join the NRA as long as he was in charge of it. I know the NRA is a single issue organization, but if you willingly accept chipping away at the protections of one of the our first ten amendments, you legitimize chipping away at all of them.
I think Lapierre has been in a position of power too long. It is time for him to retire.
Met LaPierre about 30 years ago when he spoke at a gun rights group I belonged to. My impression back the, an is still, that he is a compromising limp dick.
I like Oliver North, but I also think that he was a poor choice for President of the NRA. Picking him sends a clear signal that the NRA is preaching to the choir - having him there pleases movement conservatives but does little to attract people who might support the 2nd Amendment but disagree with or dislike North for other reasons. Also, like it or not, telegenic celebrities make the best public figures - a lot more people on the political fence would give a Charlton Heston a fair hearing than an Oliver North. I don't much care for our celebrity-obsessed mass culture, but unfortunately that's what works.
For similar reasons, I'm not convinced that NRA TV has made the right choice by pushing "culture war" issues unrelated to the right to keep and bear arms. Not because I disagree with them, but because the NRA should stick to its single issue focus in order to be effective. What good do they do by alienating someone who supports the right to keep and bear arms but who disagrees with them on various social issues?