Archive for the 'National Rifle Association' Category

John Richardson:

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?

Commenter meep:

Look at all the paid anti NRA posters. You either are with us gun owners or against us. If you cant keep your mouth shut about the NRA you are no better than the gun grabbers

Hmm … keep my mouth shut.  But wouldn’t that run contrary to having a blog in the first place?

Hey, wait.  You mean I could have been making money all of this time?  If I’m no better than a gun-grabber, at least I could get paid for it.

Via David Codrea, this dreadful statement.

“Nobody wants dangerous people to have access to firearms, which is why the NRA supports risk protection orders with adequate due process protections and ensure those adjudicated to be dangerously mentally ill receive treatment,” Jennifer Baker, a spokesperson for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said. “The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms. We will only support an [Emergency Risk Protection Order] process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time.”

Echoing Mack’s comments, why would bearing arms be a deterrent if folks didn’t think I was dangerous?

The NRA: the most well-funded, well-connected, effective, best-resourced gun control organization on the planet.

From Military Arms:

It’s no secret that many in the media have been holding the NRA accountable for their actions as of late. There are very powerful people within the NRA who stand to lose a lot by the continued loss of members and revenue.

We have friends all over the world and in many communities which include those who reside and work within the realm of the Dark Web. It has been brought to our attention by a source we deem to be credible within this community that a bounty has been placed by a high level NRA operative against all detractors of the organization. The bounty calls for the deplatforming of the media person(s), the hacking of their bank accounts, mortgages, mail servers, etc. The stated goal is to cause  so many personal problems that the person will be focused on that vs. talking about the NRAs activities.

I represent several media people who have been approached with this information. I’m only posting this message so that there is written record that should we be deplatformed, should our accounts be hacked, or should anything else occur that might be destructive to our personal and financial well being, the likely source will be the NRA or an agent acting on their behalf.  We truly hope this information isn’t accurate but we must proceed as if it is given the serious nature of the warning. To this point we have not been victims of any such targeted attacks. If something were to happen after this post is made public, the culprit will be crystal clear.

I will not answer any questions about this statement.

Thank you for the continued support. The fight for our rights will continue and we will not be deterred.

Well, I hope he isn’t deterred.  I am in 100% agreement with his views.

On the other hand, this is a serious allegation and the dark web is a known hide-out for Larpers and liars.  Would the NRA do something like this?  I suppose it will be easy enough to watch and see what happens.  Frankly, I rarely believe much of anything I have ever read over at 4Chan (not that I spend much time there, but I’ve seen a few threads).  Most of the threads are without merit or evidence, with long posts by Larpers followed by replies from people who sound like they’re on dope and can’t construct a complete sentence.

I think I would have waited to see this manifest itself before saying anything.

WSJ:

Dustin Coleman has bought a booth at the National Rifle Association’s annual convention for his shooting accessories company for the past three years.

But last month, he canceled his reservation and donated the $1,400 rental fee to a rival group, the Firearms Policy Coalition. His reason: The NRA, the nation’s leading Second Amendment group with 5.5 million members, is no longer pro-gun enough.

It’s their own fault.    It doesn’t matter if there was “overwhelming legislative support for proposals that went far beyond these specific devices,” and there is still no evidence to this day that bump stocks were used in the Las Vegas shooting.  I defy the authors to produce it.  A picture proves nothing at all, and given that the ATF was never allowed to examine the firearms by the FBI, I doubt anything the FBI has to say about the incident.  This is one of the reasons I recommended that independent analysts be contracted to examine the firearms and crime scene.

The NRA could have thrown their weight around, threatened to score every vote, pour money into reelection campaigns coming up, and expose every politician for their work behind the scenes.  Or in other words, the NRA could have done their jobs.

Instead, Trump did it for them in an end run around the constitution.  That tells me that the politicians were scared.  Good.  They should have been, and we should have queued this up for them to deal with in order to expose them.  The NRA gave Trump cover to keep the politicians covert.

I don’t want to hear any excuses.  I consider all of them completely unacceptable.

Is the NRA in trouble with its base?  That depends.  The Fudds will always defend the NRA – right up until their bolt action hunting rifles and shotguns are confiscated and taken down to the local armory for “safe keeping.”  Or in other words, right up until their own Ox gets gored.

David Codrea:

So what are we supposed to do? Pretend deep disagreements don’t exist?

No.  We don’t.  My readers would be shocked at me if I pretended anything.  Make sure you read the comments.  They’re all over the map, some pointing to compromise with the NRA, under the rubric of “This is exactly what the progressives want to do – divide us.”  “We must be united.”

My view if fairly simple.  The NRA is the most well-funded, largest, most powerful gun lobby on earth.  They gave Trump the idea of red flag laws, the bump stock ban, supported the Hughes amendment, and on and on we could go.

Why would I give any more money to an organization like that?

This is a pregnant bit of video and requires some unpacking to do it justice.  Many things were said, and left unsaid.

I will not ally myself with Antifa, for they run contrary to everything I believe, want to change America for the worse, and want to use firearms to thwart my liberties.  I will not arm my enemy or teach him to fight.

I also will not, for example, support unlimited immigration since I know that in the main, Latinos and Hispanics vote progressive and favor draconian gun controls.  I will not change my mind because of “the sky is falling” panic attacks about possibly losing my rights if I don’t make friends with those who would oppose me.  Peace at any cost isn’t peace, it’s just temporary cessation of conflict, and the necessity of compromise means you lost.

As for the LGBT community, if I meet a member of that community who persuades me that she or he will never vote or work in any way, shape or form, to thwart my rights – and that includes the right not to bake them a cake – I won’t oppose their RKBA.  But I don’t join clubs.  I’m not entirely sure what Larry means when he implies that I should welcome someone into my community.  My community is where I live, and those with whom I run.

I am not fearful over my potential loss of rights.  My rights come from God, and God alone.  The Almighty has issued the decrees from which flow the right and duty of self defense, defense of home and hearth, and the amelioration of tyranny.  Loss of recognition of the second amendment, to which I’ve repeatedly referred as a covenant with blessings for obedience and curses for breakage, doesn’t mean I lose a right.  It means war has been declared and sides are forming.

I will always attempt to persuade those who do not see things my way to change their minds.  There is one of the reasons I write.  In that persuasion, I will include the RKBA, personal morality, philosophy, and theology.  I can walk and chew gum at the same time, and I will not compromise the very elements of my world and life view which I believe undergird and give foundation to the RKBA.  In other words, siding with an ostensibly opposing community because they might be able to be persuaded on one element, only to jettison that agreement when times get tough because it fundamentally differs from the balance of their world view, isn’t wise or effective.  I see all of life as connected, a function of our noetic structure that includes judgments on the truth value of propositions, theories of knowledge, beliefs in the foundations of social order, how we determine right and wrong, and ultimacy.

Only the Christian world and life view can birth, support and sustain liberty on a long term basis.  American is where it is now, collapsing under the weight of the trivial, obscene and ridiculous, because of this truth.  Trying to agree on the RKBA when the foundation is falling is like throwing a cup of water on a structure that has almost burned to the ground.

Finally, Larry’s analogy is utter nonsense.  It doesn’t surprise me at all that the old guard NRA believed that civilians shouldn’t be unholstering pistols under any condition.  That Ken Hackathorn tried to introduce the NRA to IPSC and the NRA refused only demonstrates my points.  The NRA refused to acknowledge God-given rights.  God will not bless them long term.  They will eventually go down in history as brief a footnote.  Mr. Vickers has his analogy exactly backwards.

I shouldn’t change my world and life view or compromise with people who would eventually undermine my liberties.  We’re not like the NRA in his analogy, we’re like Hackathorn.  The IPSC won, as will we.  God is on our side, and I’m not worried.  I will not be found among the hand-wringers, clinging to whatever little morsel of agreement I can get wherever I can find it.

Reuters:

When Missouri Senate Bill 656 was introduced in 2016, it was relatively modest legislation that proposed capping the amount county sheriffs could charge for a concealed handgun permit.

By the time it passed, with both houses of the state legislature overturning the governor’s veto, it had become one of the most expansive gun-rights laws in the country.

The gun lobby fought hard to pass the bill. The group some lawmakers credited with providing crucial momentum was not so much the National Rifle Association, the powerful national lobbying organization, but rather the Missouri Firearms Coalition, an aggressive grassroots operation founded in 2015.

With major gun-rights legislation stalled in Washington, much of the action has shifted to the states, where self-described “no compromise” groups such as the Missouri Firearms Coalition have mobilized activists in favor of pro-gun laws, according to Reuters interviews with gun-rights groups in more than a dozen states, lawmakers and NRA supporters.

These groups have become increasingly active in promoting a pro-gun agenda in many states, unafraid of alienating lawmakers who waver on gun rights. In many cases, they say they would rather lose a legislative fight on principle than compromise and support a watered-down bill.

At times, this can put local groups at odds with the NRA, which some see as too willing to give ground on the most aggressive pro-gun laws in state legislatures, said Greg Pruett, president of the Idaho Second Amendment Alliance, which formed in 2012.

“It’s always kind of interesting when you see a lot of people in the gun control community talk about how radical the NRA is,” said Pruett, whose group organized an email and telephone campaign to pass a 2016 Idaho law allowing people to carry concealed handguns without a permit, also known as “constitutional carry.”

“There’s an entire movement on the other side of the NRA … We’re done compromising,” he said.

Missouri Firearms Coalition political advisor Aaron Dorr says the NRA fought against constitutional carry for years, considering it too much of a longshot, and only came on board once passage was certain. The Missouri law not only authorized constitutional carry, it made Missouri a “stand your ground” state, extending the right to lethal self-defense outside the home, even when retreating is an option.

“It was the Missouri Firearms Coalition that was on the ground first with this,” said Jered Taylor, a Missouri state representative. “Eventually the NRA came on board, but the Missouri Firearms Coalition was the one that pushed it.”The NRA contended that it supported Senate Bill 656 from start to finish. The NRA assesses legislation across the states and sometimes opts for incremental victories, spokesman Lars Dalseide said.

“While the all or nothing approach may sound noble, the fact is you usually end up with nothing,” Dalseide said. “The other groups may have called for the passage of these bills in the past but they are largely fundraising organizations … None of these legislative initiatives moved an inch until the NRA got involved.”

[ … ]

The most uncompromising among them say the NRA has become too timid and too willing to back measures such as removing firearms from people deemed dangerous.

“I call it pre-emptive concession,” said Paul Valone, president of Grass Roots North Carolina, which has helped expand concealed carry rights and a “stand your ground” law.

That the NRA would trot out a spokesman who would say something like that, making them sound like crying little girls, says more than anything the spokesman could ever do or say to harm the NRA.

The NRA has harmed not only gun rights in America (with its support for the GCA, the NFA, the connection of mental health to crime, and the bump stock ban), but they have marginalized themselves in the process, becoming nothing more than a money grabbing organization.  It’s a shame, really, as it could have been different.

But it’s nice to see people waking to this reality and working at the state and local level.  As they do that, it can always be expected that the NRA will claim the credit for it.  As I’ve said before, I consider the NRA to be the largest, most well funded and well connected gun control organization on earth.

Does it matter, and can you tell them apart?

The people who have been complaining consistently are the NRA’s “leaders.” They’ve made “enforce existing gun laws” a mantra many gun owners repeat unthinkingly, as if ceding to the status quo of infringements will dissuade the totalitarian lobby from enacting any new citizen disarmament edicts.

As I’ve said before, the NRA is the largest, most powerful, best financed gun control organization on earth.

The Trace:

In the NRA’s depiction, Lockton failed the gun group, which trusted the broker not to run afoul of local laws when devising and marketing insurance. Lockton breached its contract, the NRA alleges, when it caved to New York’s bullying and ended a longstanding “mutually beneficial” relationship. In its own filings, the insurance firm puts its decision to sever ties in a different light. Lockton argues that the NRA brought the troubles on itself, by amping up its rhetoric to the point of radioactivity.

“The NRA’s own overtly political and inflammatory approach” to marketing, “as well as its provocative public stances, have resulted in a shift in the enforcement priorities of insurance regulators and heightened scrutiny,” Lockton said in a counterclaim filed in June …

I seldom defend the NRA, which I believe to be the largest, most well-funded gun control organization on earth.  But this is fascinating in that even an insurance company is now jumping on the anti-2A bandwagon, the very insurance company the NRA commissioned to supply its “Carry Guard.”

Specifically, the fascinating thing to me is that the folks in corporate America are just like the folks in Hollywood, Washington, D.C. and the other power centers.

They haven’t the slightest clue about the great unwashed masses in flyover country.  They believe the NRA’s rhetoric is inflammatory.  We believe that the NRA doesn’t represent our interests because they aren’t true supporters of the 2A.

The power brokers don’t even recognize the size of the gulf between us.  I’m willing to bet that they don’t even know anyone who owns a firearm or voted libertarian or conservative.

It’s remarkable to me how large the gulf is, how polarized the country is, and how this polarization is deepening and growing.  Frankly I don’t see how this ends except in civil war.