Not exactly.
The NRA is endorsing illegal legislation once again, just like their "enforce existing gun laws" campaign.
Unless you think the legislation to end frivilous lawsuits against the arms industries are illegal, you are mistaken in your conclusion. Findings, in the context of Congressional action are just that - reasons for the "law" part of the bill to clarify legislative intent. The "law" part is ending the frivilous lawsuits. Is that illegal?
On the issue "enforcing existing gun laws" I just have one comment: You can't stop a train on a dime. Step one is to stop any new laws from being put on the books. Step two is reduce the number of laws infringing on peoples rights. Step three is to finish the job so that peoples rights are upheld, and criminals are appropriately punished.
It is the reality of the situation, and as far as betting on success, I'll take reality over a pipe dream any day.
Do they just not get it?
I think a more appropriate question would be do you just not get it? I agree, unduing close to 100 years of illegal restriction of peoples rights in the blink of an eye would be ideal. Problem is, it just isn't realistic.
You seem willing to sacrifice the goal to push a deadline, is that true?
Or are they a "gun control" advocacy group?
I find it very hard to believe that someone with so obvious RKBA views would even make such a statement, even if in jest.
What part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?
The understand all of it, they just chose to act according to the realities of the situation at hand because they know that is what will get results. It may not be the immediate gratification you are looking for, but it is probably a lot more sucessful in accomplishing our mutual goals.