NRA lying to 80 million gun owners about Silveira Gun Rights Case

Keep and Bear Arms ^ | 8.28.2003 | Angel Shamaya

[CHICAGOFARMER]

NRA lying about Silveira case AGAIN

Press Release - Is the NRA Serious from Gary Gorski, attorney for Silveira Plaintiffs August 26, 2003 [filed here late due to site being down] [Additional analysis by Angel Shamaya below press release]

The NRA issued the following press release:

NRA Files Brief with the Supreme Court in Silveira v. Lockyer The National Rifle Association (NRA) has filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court, in the case of Silveira v. Lockyer, arguing that the Second Amendment is indeed an individual right, and a right that is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist said, "Every freedom guaranteed by the Bill of Rights is extended to the individual citizen. The Second Amendment is a fundamental civil right and it should not be subject to any discrimination. To address the dilemma of violent crime, lawmakers ought to place the full burden of justice on the criminal element. Sadly, society is more content to trade our valued freedoms as an alternative. We hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will stop this erosion of our independence."

Cox praised the hard work by Chuck Michel, an attorney who has worked on this case in California. "Chuck has worked tirelessly to safeguard Second Amendment rights in California for many years. He is an exceptional individual and a sharp attorney. We are fortunate to have him working on our behalf in California," concluded Cox.

Posted: 8/13/2003 3:45:26 PM [Click here to see it on NRAILA.org or here for a saved a screenshot.] This is clearly deceptive --- Chuck Michel has worked tirelessly in attempting to impede the case of Silveira v. Lockyer from its inception, up until the NRA filed it's amicus brief. He has tried to dissuade Silveira's attorney, Gary W. Gorski, from filing the action, and prosecuting the appeal. On appeal in the Ninth Circuit, he filed an amicus brief in opposition to Silveira, arguing that the Plaintiffs/Appellants lacked standing. So, it begs the question: What has Chuck Michel done for the case in California?

Gary W. Gorski Attorney at Law http://www.gwgorski.com SEPS EXERTUS, SEMPER FIDELIS, FRATER INFINITAS ("Often Tested, Always Faithful, Brothers Forever") 916.965.6800 916.965.6801 fax

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Responses from KeepAndBearArms.com Founder/Executive Director, Angel Shamaya

NRA Chief Lobbyist Chris Cox's press release praising CRPA/NRA attorney Chuck Michel as "an attorney who has worked on this case in California" is overtly dishonest. The insinuation is that Chuck Michel has been helping the Silveira case. Nothing could be further from the truth.

While NRA's amicus brief supporting Silveira is welcome and excellently prepared, the organization has not given one dime toward the Silveira legal battle, of which KeepAndBearArms.com is the sole fundraiser. (They may have paid their law firm to write their brief -- a brief written and filed after the case had already been appealed to the Supreme Court.) Despite this, we have two documented reports that NRA's phone solicitors have raised money under the guise that they've been helping the case -- from months before they prepared their brief. Regardless, for Cox to imply that Chuck Michel has helped this case in any way is a gross insult to the many people who have worked on the case.

Here are some facts Mr. Cox omitted from his press release:

1) NRA/CRPA attorney Chuck Michel tried to KILL the Silveira case. Brian Puckett documented that fact for all to see. Go see for yourself: NRA Lawyer Undermining ALL Our Rights

2) NRA/CRPA Chuck Michel publicly threatened that if Mr. Gorski appealed the case to the Supreme Court, CRPA would "most likely file a brief asking the Supreme Court not to hear the dangerous case." In that press release of May 13, 2003, Michel said, among other things:

A) "CRPA opposes Supreme Court review of the Silveira decision."

B) "It is absolutely the wrong case for Supreme Court review."

3) Chuck Michel actually called Gary Gorski a "Judas" for fighting the Silveira lawsuit. Here's a direct quote from the guy NRA's Chris Cox is praising for being "an attorney who has worked on this case in California":

From: CDMichel@aol.com Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 9:33 AM To: gwgorski@pacbell.net; CDMichel@aol.com Cc: PROTELL@aol.com; cconte@nrahq.org Subject: Re: CRPA Brief

"...you are setting yourself up to be remembered in history as the Judas that betrayed the 2A civil rights movement."

C. D. Michel TRUTANICH - MICHEL, LLP A t t o r n e y s a t L a w Port of Los Angeles Office 407 North Harbor Blvd. San Pedro, CA 90731 Phone:(310) 548-3703 Fax: (310) 548-4813 Internet: www.t-mlawyers.com

QUESTIONS FOR CHRIS COX

1) What were Mr. Michel's objectives while he was doing this "work"?

2) Was Mr. Michel trying to HELP the case succeed by announcing that it was "wrong" and "dangerous"?

3) Was Mr. Michel trying to empower the lead counsel by calling him a "Judas that betrayed the 2A civil rights movement"?

4) Does NRA intend to raise money under the false premise that your organization has done, is doing or will be doing anything other than paying a law firm to write and file an amicus brief in this case? There is much work to be done -- why won't NRA help finance this effort?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE: WE STILL REQUIRE FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SILVEIRA LEGAL BATTLE AHEAD!

If you have not yet donated to the Silveira v. Lockyer lawsuit fund, will you please do so now?

Give online:

https://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/donations/

Give by mail:

http://KeepAndBearArms.com/silveira/mail.htm

For more information on the case, its development, its success thus far, and details on what your financial support will help fund, go here:

http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“The fundraising by KeepAndBearArms.com is essential to Silveira v. Lockyer and has my backing 100%.”

— Gary Gorski, Attorney for Plaintiffs, Silveira v. Lockyer

[CHICAGOFARMER]

While NRA's amicus brief supporting the Silveira case, NRA has not given one dime toward the Silveira legal battle, of which KeepAndBearArms.com is the sole fundraiser. NRA's phone solicitors have raised money under the guise that they've been helping the case. Presently Keep and Bear Arms funding raising efforts has provided 100% of the cash needed to move this case to the United States Supreme Court.

It is time for some or all of the 80 million firearms owners to stand shoulder to shoulder with the leaders on this case. It is time for NRA members who are reading this freepr to step forward in get involved.

[SteveH]

CA [+ NRA hypocrisy] *bang

[archy]

Joe, it looks like this is a good one for your 2Amd list attention.

-archy-/-

[Ben Dover]

I'm a NRA life member. I donate when I can, if I can. One of my problems with the NRA is that I get solicitations from them almost every week. With over 4M members, that works out to over a $1,000,000 a week in printing and postage. What the percentage of members that respond to each of these mailings, I do not know. I think that if the NRA would not saturate the postal system with these mailings, less people would feel that these mailings are just junk mail and would feel compelled to take action to the request for funding.

[CHICAGOFARMER]

NRA is that I get solicitations from them almost every week. With over 4M members, that works out to over a $1,000,000 a week in printing

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I wish I knew how much money NRA gets in donations, and how much they spend. I have heard they manage 120 million, but I just do not know. They are run by an advertizing company that uses the NRA cause for their own pocketbook, is what I hear.

This case need people who can spread the word. Can you spread the word??

[agitator]

For all of the money they raise, can anyone show me a single non-constitutional federal gun law that has ever left the books or that hasn't been traded off for an even worse law (i.e., McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Trojan Act) ?

And for all of the claims about how concealed carry laws have been passed, haven't they been the result of grass-roots efforts rather than the NRA and aren't they just as non-constitutional?

If I was still an NRA member, I would be asking where the bang for my buck was.

[AnnaZ]

The NRA pretty much stinks. I have little use for a gun rights group that isn't working hard enough to put themselves out of business.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I'm a Life Member and donate when I can, too. NRA send me a magazine and thats it.

[Robert Drobot]

Thanks to your thread I'm now aware of http://KeepAndBearArms.com

I've bookmarked it, and will support my right to protect my family through them.

[BenR2]

Ping.

How about you come over to work with KABA?

[Mind-numbed Robot]

This is a nice little bash-the-NRA thread, much like the many bash-George Bush threads I see with a little clique joining hands and all singing the same hymn.

What is the NRA's objection to this case? Despite the one sided presentation here it seems that the NRA simply thinks this is a weak case on which to base such an important outcome. It might be better to find a stronger case so that a loss does not become a precedent.

[rw4site]

Boy! Did you ever pick a fitting screen name!

[OldPossum]

I told them twice that if they kept on sending me all that material week after week my wife and I would quit. They kept on doing it and we quit.

P.S. In addition to Keep and Bear Arms, the Gun Owners of America is a good organization. That's where we moved our allegiance.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Thanks. Now do you care to answer my question or is dodging the issue and just making a personal attack your style?

[Dan from Michigan]

Second Amendment Foundation

I'm a member of the NRA. I'm also a member of SAF, which is a great org.

[rw4site]

Re: "It might be better to find a stronger case so that a loss does not become a precedent."

First of all, It is not a clique. It may just be people who have been waiting for years and years for the NRA to support the Constitution and fight for 2nd amendment issues in the judicial and legislative systems.

Every law that usurped the 2nd amendment should have been strongly fought. Their track record is dismal. How many gun laws have the NRA had removed and when was the last time they took the initiative to support any gun owner and fight for their case to the end? They haven't.

You and other ardent supporters of the NRA continue your quest. I don't mind. I will continue to voice my contrary opinion.

NRA member. Also a member of the GOA, JPFO, and RKBA.

[Johnny Crab]

"a gun rights group that isn't working hard enough to put themselves out of business"

BINGO! or BANG! Should "the people" finally stand up for "the people" and 2A gets read as its writers meant it to be....the NRA would become "not economically viable".

[risk]

ping

[Imal]

I'm an NRA life member, and I certainly don't agree with everything the NRA does. I'm also an American, and don't agree with everything America does either, but I'm not leaving over it.

The allegations may merit concern and investigation, but it think it's silly for defenders of our right to self-defense in this country to get all bent out of shape over whether they're a member of the Peoples' Judean Front or the Peoples' Front of Judea.

We all want the same thing, and we may choose to go about it differently as is also our God-given right. But wasting our time dragging each other down is our enemies' job, not ours. Let's not make it any easier on them, because they aren't going to go easy on us.

Let's try keeping some perspective, for crying out loud.

[risk]

I agree with you.