Is The National Rifle Association In Trouble?
In the last couple of days since the lawsuit against Ackerman McQueen I’ve spoken to a former lobbyist for the NRA and two serving NRA Board Members. The conversations were off the record and not for attribution. Then I read this article in The New Yorker thanks to a link to it posted on Facebook by Prof. David Yamane.
The article is entitled “Secrecy, Self-Dealing, and Greed at the N.R.A.” Mike Spies article has a subhead saying “The organization’s leadership is focussed on external threats, but the real crisis may be internal.” I hate to say this given all the attacks on the NRA from every Democrat running for President, the State of New York, and the media but from what I’ve gathered Spies is correct. Just because we don’t like the source doesn’t mean they are wrong.
Last August, the N.R.A., in desperate need of funds, raised its dues for the second time in two years. To cut costs, it has eliminated free coffee and water coolers at its headquarters and has frozen its employees’ pension plan. Carry Guard, which was meant to save the organization, has proved disastrous. According to the memos, in 2017, the year that Carry Guard was introduced, Ackerman McQueen received some six million dollars for its work on the product, which included the creation of a Web site and media productions featuring celebrity firearms trainers. The lawsuit against New York State has created an additional burden. Sources familiar with the N.R.A.’s financial commitments say that it is paying Brewer’s firm an average of a million and a half dollars a month.
An official assessment performed by Cummins last summer dryly describes the N.R.A.’s decision-making during the previous year as “management’s shift in risk appetite.” The document analyzes the organization’s executive-liability exposures and discusses insurance policies that “protect NRA directors and officers from claims by third parties that they have breached their duties, such as by mismanagement of association assets.” From 2018 to 2019, it says, insurance costs increased by three hundred and forty-one per cent. “To say this is a major increase would be an understatement,” Peter Kochenburger, the deputy director of the Insurance Law Center at the University of Connecticut, told me. “This seems to be pretty direct evidence that the N.R.A.’s problems are not due to New York but rather to how the organization conducts itself.”
David Codrea links a different source, but concludes essentially the same thing: “You would be right to assume Bloomberg front The Trace will use everything it’s got to hurt NRA as much as it can. You would be wrong to dismiss everything they have presented here because of that.”
Commenter BRVTVS links the same source as John, comments “lays out pretty well why the NRA fails to protect gun owners.”
I don’t have money to throw away, and I have not renewed my NRA membership and never will, at least, not under these circumstances. It would be “nice” to be able to say that we’re losing the NRA (because to be able to say that would mean it has served us until now), but the truth of the matter is that we lost the NRA a very long time ago. Since initially joining, I’ve never been happy with their work on our behalf, and given this, why would I be a member?
They should have left insurance alone and focused on applying honest grading to politicians, but they haven’t been honest for a long time. As we’ve all discussed before, they are the most well-connected, well-financed, most powerful gun control lobby in the history of mankind and on earth. They supported the NFA, the Gun Control Act, the Hughes Amendment, the bump stock ban, and red flag laws.
If any other organization had tried to do more harm to the rights of gun owners in America, what action would they have taken that the NRA hasn’t?


