NRA On The Hot Seat - Exposed or Attacked?

[Nameless Range]

Interesting to read those articles Fin. When record membership coincides with budget shortfalls it makes you wonder what their priorities are. Whatever those priorities are, it's obvious they have been corrupted, and are using the Second Amendment to sucker their masses.

Trump tweeted this this morning. This is the same Trump who only a year ago, in reaction to a shooting said, “Take guns first, worry about due process later .”

Imagine if the previous president would’ve said that

 

[BuzzH]

Interesting to read those articles Fin. When record membership coincides with budget shortfalls it makes you wonder what their priorities are. Whatever those priorities are, it's obvious they have been corrupted, and are using the Second Amendment to sucker their masses.

Trump tweeted this this morning. This is the same Trump who only a year ago, in reaction to a shooting said, “Take guns first, worry about due process later .”

Imagine if the previous president would’ve said that

View attachment 105146

The proper letter designator behind your name changes everything and excuses anything.

Looks to me like the NRA is looking for a Presidential miracle to save them...good luck with that.

 

[Sytes]

Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/04/to-nra-or-not-to-nra/#ixzz5mDIgLleC
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

I’ve seen far too many posts on social media, which to me is a joke anyway, from chatroom warriors that are calling for the destruction of the NRA.

More truth in this statement than not.

 

[Losing_Sanity]

Admittedly, sometimes it takes me a while to figure these things out and understand all of information. I don't really understand all of it, and that's probably what some organizations rely on. The common folks don't often catch these things. But, reading this tread brings some questions to mind.

At the risk of getting beat up, and showing my ignorance:

1) Many of the commenters have stated they quit supporting the NRA for various reasons. Although these reasons are legitimate and important, everyone has the right to do as they want. But, they also credit the NRA as doing a lot of good. So, if there is good that the NRA has done and is doing, why stop supporting them?
2) In cooperation with #1, Why not push for change in the things that are in question, don't understand, or don't like? There must be some avenue to question/correct these things. Other than pulling out.
3) As Big Fin eluded to, that while on the different boards with the RMEF (Thanks for your contribution), he knows of all the good that the RMEF and he can defend any opinion to the contrary. So, why didn't someone in the NRA organization ring a bell and call this stuff out? Could it have been that overlooked? I'm sure as well spoken, educated, and accomplished that Dana Loesch is, surely she would have see this stuff and called someone out.
4) If the NRA has stood up for all of us in the past and defended our rights, before this scandal, shouldn't we stand behind them and push for reform.

Sorry if I seem off base here, but I don't think this is what William Conant and George Wood Wingate envisioned for their organization.

 

[mplane72]

I have been meaning to re up my membership so I can join the gun club near our new house. It's just to convenient. Seeing things like this plus their crazy ass scare adds on you tube make me wonder if I can pinch my nose hard enough.

 

[BuzzH]

Admittedly, sometimes it takes me a while to figure these things out and understand all of information. I don't really understand all of it, and that's probably what some organizations rely on. The common folks don't often catch these things. But, reading this tread brings some questions to mind.

At the risk of getting beat up, and showing my ignorance:

1) Many of the commenters have stated they quit supporting the NRA for various reasons. Although these reasons are legitimate and important, everyone has the right to do as they want. But, they also credit the NRA as doing a lot of good. So, if there is good that the NRA has done and is doing, why stop supporting them?
2) In cooperation with #1, Why not push for change in the things that are in question, don't understand, or don't like? There must be some avenue to question/correct these things. Other than pulling out.
3) As Big Fin eluded to, that while on the different boards with the RMEF (Thanks for your contribution), he knows of all the good that the RMEF and he can defend any opinion to the contrary. So, why didn't someone in the NRA organization ring a bell and call this stuff out? Could it have been that overlooked? I'm sure as well spoken, educated, and accomplished that Dana Loesch is, surely she would have see this stuff and called someone out.
4) If the NRA has stood up for all of us in the past and defended our rights, before this scandal, shouldn't we stand behind them and push for reform.

Sorry if I seem off base here, but I don't think this is what William Conant and George Wood Wingate envisioned for their organization.

1. Sometimes the good cant be over-shadowed by the bad and everyone has their breaking point on what they can accept on the bad side.
2. Tough to do when there are inside alliances and you're drawing into a made hand.
3. I can give you at least a $million$ reasons why Dana Loesch would be highly incentivized to keep her yap shut even if she knew things weren't right.
4. I would agree, push for reform all you can, but you're trying to make changes via the people that are: still the power players in the NRA, and have a lot of reasons to fight for their continued existence. Its their livelihood and lavish lifestyles that are at risk, they aren't going down without a fight. Frankly, I don't believe they care enough about the cause to step aside to keep the NRA alive. I think before they did that, the power brokers would bleed the NRA dry to get their last drop of blood.

I could be completely wrong too...

 

[Losing_Sanity]

I could be completely wrong too...

You are not wrong in your opinions. You make some really good points.

I believe there has to be a way without giving up such a force for our freedom and firearms. They have made significant impacts to keep what we have. And with the current Democratic agendas, the NRA will be needed to support the fight.

Seems that there are a lot of personalities that seek the NRA for sponsorship or endorsements. Celebrities in all aspects of our society. Can't they make a difference? Can't they lobby for fair practices? And what about the folks that the NRA request for endorsements? Cant they say, "Not until there is reform"?

Almost everything that matters in life has some kind of trial or tribulation.

I won't fault the people who feel differently, and I respect their convictions and opinions. But let's be sure that what we give up is worth it in the end.

 

[Big Fin]

Seems that there are a lot of personalities that seek the NRA for sponsorship or endorsements. Celebrities in all aspects of our society. Can't they make a difference? Can't they lobby for fair practices? And what about the folks that the NRA request for endorsements? Cant they say, "Not until there is reform"?

I would not rely on that. For a few reasons. First being that these folks are signing the back of the checks and if they make a peep, the folks signing the front of the check will not only stop sending payment, but will go out of their way to make sure these folks are tarnished in the shooting industry. Nuge and his followers are tied closely to the current NRA administration, so change from that group is unlikely.

Where change can come is from the industry folks who give millions to the NRA. I think that is where the true pressure will come. These are businesses that are built on a robust shooting and hunting community. They are usually operated by conservative folks who built these businesses with good business judgement and frugality. They look poorly on waste, misuse, or other malfeasance.

One needs to understand the governance mechanisms of the NRA. A lot of the Board positions are just window dressing and done for marketing purposes. With the way the Governance documents delegate power, the real operation is run by a small handful of the Board Officers, and until recently (and maybe currently), the majority of power was held by Ackerman-McQueen. The question comes down to, "Will those folks who have their positions and fortunes as a result of being handpicked by Ackerman do what is necessary to bring forth change that would require a departure from Ackerman?"

A poorly run NRA is not good for 2A and gun ownership. For the sake of 2A and gun ownership, hopefully this turns out to be a case of bad reporting and overzealous claims. Given the increasing concerns from people who are closer to the inside of the NRA, I suspect there is much truth to these claims.

 

[Tradewind]

[. Its their livelihood and lavish lifestyles that are at risk, they aren't going down without a fight. Frankly, I don't believe they care enough about the cause to step aside to keep the NRA alive. I think before they did that, the power brokers would bleed the NRA dry to get their last drop of blood.

Exactly. Hard to cut out the cancer w/o killing the patient

 

[MTGomer]

How many higher ups in the NRA actually care about gun rights and aren’t there just for the connections and $ ?
Same for republicans. How many republican politicians actually believe in gun rights beyond what it gets them for votes?

I bet we don’t want to know the answer to either of those.

 

[Losing_Sanity]

I would not rely on that. For a few reasons. First being that these folks are signing the back of the checks and if they make a peep, the folks signing the front of the check will not only stop sending payment, but will go out of their way to make sure these folks are tarnished in the shooting industry. Nuge and his followers are tied closely to the current administration, so change from that group is unlikely.

I do see your point. I appreciate the explanation.

I guess as long as it puts biscuits on the table, they aren't willing to do much. Which, in a way, makes them no better because it boils down to the money. The fact still remains that, if the NRA goes under, there won't be anymore endorsements or sponsorship to get paid from. I get that you can't cut the head off of snake without affecting the ass end, so to speak.

 

[Trial153]

They aren't changing. They will double down on what has been successful for them, and the two party corporate/government partnership establishment they are a part of. US vs Them. Everyone goes to the correct little comfortable corner in the echo chamber.

 

[2ski]

I would not rely on that. For a few reasons. First being that these folks are signing the back of the checks and if they make a peep, the folks signing the front of the check will not only stop sending payment, but will go out of their way to make sure these folks are tarnished in the shooting industry. Nuge and his followers are tied closely to the current administration, so change from that group is unlikely.

Where change can come is from the industry folks who give millions to the NRA. I think that is where the true pressure will come. These are businesses that are built on a robust shooting and hunting community. They are usually operated by conservative folks who built these businesses with good business judgement and frugality. They look poorly on waste, misuse, or other malfeasance.

One needs to understand the governance mechanisms of the NRA. A lot of the Board positions are just window dressing and done for marketing purposes. With the way the Governance documents delegate power, the real operation is run by a small handful of the Board Officers, and until recently (and maybe currently), the majority of power was held by Ackerman-McQueen. The question comes down to, "Will those folks who have their positions and fortunes as a result of being handpicked by Ackerman do what is necessary to bring forth change that would require a departure from Ackerman?"

A poorly run NRA is not good for 2A and gun ownership. For the sake of 2A and gun ownership, hopefully this turns out to be a case of bad reporting and overzealous claims. Given the increasing concerns from people who are closer to the inside of the NRA, I suspect there is much truth to these claims.

Will it? Look what the NRA decided to do to Yeti. It basically amounted to blackmail. You change so we are going to tarnish you. Looking at that, if I was an industry person, I'd be kind of scared to put any pressure forth, though this is the time to do it if it's going to work.

 

[2ski]

A couple thoughts I had as I read this thread:

So Heston and his "cold dead hands" and the Nuge with his "backstrap fever" have been NRA spokespeople, and thats okay, but Lebron has to just "shut up and dribble". Agree or not with Lebron, he's much more well-spoken than either of those two. Why is it okay for the other two to be political, but not Lebron? Looking at board members, Karl Malone would make a much better person to put in front of people. But the yahoos salivate for the other two idiots. I read an article years ago that when the NRA had someone that took a more well-thought out approach as the president or something, membership dropped. Put the idiots at the forefront and membership goes up. Kind of the difference between something like the NRA and BHA. And don't get me wrong, I've heard things from BHA people that I want to know where they get their tinfoil hats from. But they aren't putting out crazy people as spokesman. Kind of compare to Pigman vs. Fresh Tracks. Which one shows hunting in a better light? But who gets more viewers. One doesn't have idiots for part of its viewership. The host just has an unhealthy obsession to DQ.... When the public sees Ted and Charles it puts 2A in a different light than if a guy like Randy was the spokesperson for 2A.

Lastly, I was none too happy about Zumbo getting the boot over his opinion piece. I get why there was the backlash, but so let it be backlash. Not full out getting rid of him. I mean, he wasn't anti 2A. He just had an opionion that alot of hunters had/have. So what? I'm not a long range fan. But it is what it is.

We can disagree can't we? Or must we let radicals run our lives?

 

[Big Fin]

Will it? Look what the NRA decided to do to Yeti. It basically amounted to blackmail. You change so we are going to tarnish you. Looking at that, if I was an industry person, I'd be kind of scared to put any pressure forth, though this is the time to do it if it's going to work.

That was a stupid debacle, for sure. Most would say, that a year later, YETI came out on the better end of that dust up. That event was indicative of the manner in which the NRA lets a small handful of their "Ackerman Appointees" run the joint. The story of how that unfolded revolves around a few of the folks mentioned in the articles posted in this thread.

YETI is not a "shooting industry" company. They are not the type of "industry folks" I am referring to. I am talking about the individuals who have made fortunes in the shooting world and have historically made the NRA the focus of their philanthropy. These folks will help sort out if the points made in these articles are true. And if so, I suspect they will require changes for that philanthropy to continue.

YETI was signing the back of a lot of NRA checks as part of sales to the Friends of the NRA banquet program, so that puts YETI in a different situation. If you look at the list of NRA seven-figure donors, they are mostly individuals, not publicly traded corporations. These are the folks who can bring pressure. The NRA is signing the back of their checks, not the other way around.

 

[shoots-straight]

Waiting to hear the Nudge speak.

 

[shoots-straight]

Lord I apologize for the funny perpetrated at the expense of Nudge fans.

This has been a very good discussion. Sorry I didn't contribute anything of quality here.

I quit the NRA when "WE THE PEOPLE" of Montana were working hard to ban the hunting on Game Farms and the NRA came out telling their membership to vote against the initiative. I called the highest ranking person, in the NRA, that would talk with me. He was in Washington DC and represented the NRA, was told that there was a donor and life member, that lived in Montana, he had a game farm, and wanted the NRA to help him. That was enough for me.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Another big reason the nra is in the toilet.

 

[grizzly_]

NRA President Oliver North asked Wayne LaPierre to resign.

 

[npaden]

The smoke has appeared to erupt into all out flames as of this evening!