Dissolution of the NRA?

[yoink 321]

Not the news we were expecting from the AG in New York...

Link

 

I don't see it happening.

[ryoder 1,590]

WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nra-lapierre-ny-attorney-general/2020/08/06/8e389794-d794-11ea-930e-d88518c57dcc_story.html

The group’s bitter internal battle burst into public view in April 2019 at the NRA’s annual convention in Indianapolis, when then-NRA President Oliver North was forced out by LaPierre after pressing for an internal financial review.

So apparently, Oliver North was the good guy in that fight. Let that sink in.

[jakee 1,489]

48 minutes ago, ryoder said:

So apparently, Oliver North was the good guy in that fight. Let that sink in.

Whuuuuuut

[Phil1111 1,149]

The stories of insider dealing go back almost a decade.

"The suit accuses the N.R.A. and the executives of “violating numerous state and federal laws” by enriching themselves, as well as their friends, families and allies, and taking improper actions that cost the organization $64 million over three years. "

[ryoder 1,590]

[ryoder 1,590]

Todays column by Heather Cox Richardson is entirely about the NRA. This one sentence really stands out:

 In 2015, the NRA had a surplus of almost $28 million. By 2018, it was running a $36 million deficit.

Holy shit!

Source: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/posts/2376404872503565

 

[Phil1111 1,149]

3 minutes ago, ryoder said:

Todays column by Heather Cox Richardson is entirely about the NRA. This one sentence really stands out:

 In 2015, the NRA had a surplus of almost $28 million. By 2018, it was running a $36 million deficit.

Holy shit!

Source: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/posts/2376404872503565

 

Gee Wayne and his buddies must have had some good times.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Yup. They gave something like $30 million to Trump. 

No, that's not a typo.

They were one of the first big lobbying groups to hop on the "Trump Train (wreck)".

I had been a member for over 20 years, but their shrill hatred & lies about any D candidate were getting old.
When they backed Trump fairly early in the campaign, I finally had enough. 
The revelations about Russian 'dark money' were no surprise.

This new info about serious money mismanagement is not surprising either. 

[ryoder 1,590]

5 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

I had been a member for over 20 years, but their shrill hatred & lies about any D candidate were getting old.
When they backed Trump fairly early in the campaign, I finally had enough. 
 

My old man was an NRA member. I was an NRA member up until they started bringing in nutjobs like Ted Nugent and Glenn Beck as featured speakers at the annual convention. That was when I had enough and quit. I don't recall what year that was.

[ryoder 1,590]

Turn off Javascript to avoid paywall:

WaPo: NRA reports alleged misspending by current and former executives to IRS

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nra-irs-disclosure-990/2020/11/25/50521108-2d34-11eb-9c71-ccf2c0b8d571_story.html

So the strategy is to pin the blame on people who have left, (including Oliver North who blew the whistle), and back the people still there, (i.e. Wayne LaPierre and cronies).

[kallend 2,027]

2 hours ago, ryoder said:

Turn off Javascript to avoid paywall:

WaPo: NRA reports alleged misspending by current and former executives to IRS

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nra-irs-disclosure-990/2020/11/25/50521108-2d34-11eb-9c71-ccf2c0b8d571_story.html

So the strategy is to pin the blame on people who have left, (including Oliver North who blew the whistle), and back the people still there, (i.e. Wayne LaPierre and cronies).

So the NRA execs are basically saying that their dues-paying members are losers and suckers.

[Westerly 61]

The NRA takes on a lot of flak, but they do in fact have an important mission. The right to protect yourself with a firearm absolutely is a right that should not be abolished. I can give you a perfect example as to why. My wife and I life on a certain east coast state not know for friendly gun laws. Basically, you cant even carry a knife if it's too scary looking. Well she used to ride her bike to work daily for exercise, but she had to go through a certain area that had a lot of homeless people. Fine, whatever. However, on one certain day she was attacked and sexually assaulted. What a fucking dictionary-perfect example of why people should be able to carry a weapon. But she cant, because it's a felony. She cant even carry a taser or mace. Nothing. She cannot legally carry any type of weapon other than a small knife which is largely useless. So now she just doesent ride her bike anymore thanks to the ass muchers who made it illegal for a women to protect herself against sexual assault, rape, ect. So yes, I support the NRA because weapons carried by competent individuals who are correctly trained and proficient in their use can and do save lives, and everyone should have the right to defend themselves up to and including the use of deadly force.

[wmw999 2,447]

Sounds like Massachusetts. I’m sorry that happened to your wife. 
Wendy P. 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

25 minutes ago, Westerly said:

ass muchers who made it illegal for a women to protect herself against sexual assault,

markharju much? 

Edited November 26, 2020 by JoeWeber

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Westerly said:

The NRA takes on a lot of flak, but they do in fact have an important mission. The right to protect yourself with a firearm absolutely is a right that should not be abolished. I can give you a perfect example as to why. My wife and I life on a certain east coast state not know for friendly gun laws. Basically, you cant even carry a knife if it's too scary looking. Well she used to ride her bike to work daily for exercise, but she had to go through a certain area that had a lot of homeless people. Fine, whatever. However, on one certain day she was attacked and sexually assaulted. What a fucking dictionary-perfect example of why people should be able to carry a weapon. But she cant, because it's a felony. She cant even carry a taser or mace. Nothing. She cannot legally carry any type of weapon other than a small knife which is largely useless. So now she just doesn't ride her bike anymore thanks to the ass munchers who made it illegal for a women to protect herself against sexual assault, rape, etc. So yes, I support the NRA because weapons carried by competent individuals who are correctly trained and proficient in their use can and do save lives, and everyone should have the right to defend themselves up to and including the use of deadly force.

You're wasting your time with this crowd. See directly above.

Edited November 26, 2020 by Guest

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

I agree that gun rights are important, and it's really disheartening to see the NRA go down the tubes the way they are, but they got arrogant and stupid. Now there are consequences.

The shit they are accused of are crimes.

The money they funnelled from Russia was also criminal.

Even without the criminal crap, they had become shrill and repetitive, to the point that they lost a lot of people.

They claimed that every election was a referendum on gun rights, and if they people they didn't like won, that gun rights would be 'destroyed'. 
Over and over again.

Yet, even with Obama in the White House for 8 years, no substantive gun control measures were passed.

I hope that another organization will step up, but nobody out there has the history and exposure.

As an alternative, I hope a group of 'NRA opposition' can take control and clean it up. Not sure if that's even possible.

[billvon 2,991]

20 hours ago, Westerly said:

The NRA takes on a lot of flak, but they do in fact have an important mission.

I agree.  Unfortunately, the NRA no longer supports gun rights; it is now a republican PAC.  Time for a new organization dedicated to gun rights and not republicans to take the reigns.

[Phil1111 1,149]

20 hours ago, Westerly said:

The NRA takes on a lot of flak,... So yes, I support the NRA because weapons carried by competent individuals who are correctly trained and proficient in their use can and do save lives, and everyone should have the right to defend themselves up to and including the use of deadly force.

I agree and without arguing the specifics of your wife's circumstances. The whole fear argument, that America is so dangerous that everyone who can have a carry permit, should have one, is fallacious. More Americans that qualify for carry permits, don't carry. In fact more that actually received carry permits, still don't. Because after a time they decide the inconvenience and hassle isn't worth it.

ADs, suicide, accidents, etc. kill many fold more than are saved by the use of defensive gun use, every year. The NRA sells "well all be helpless" without a handgun in a handbag, or belt. Its a wonder that anyone even walks the streets. A wonder that tourists who can't carry in any state aren't natural targets for armed criminals.

Firearms save lives, sure, but net US gun laws cost tens of thousands of lives per year.

As the above map shows. The states with tougher laws have fewer gun deaths.In fact the just completed election could lay blue and red states over that map and find a correlation.

[Westerly 61]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

I agree and without arguing the specifics of your wife's circumstances. The whole fear argument, that America is so dangerous that everyone who can have a carry permit, should have one, is fallacious. More Americans that qualify for carry permits, don't carry. In fact more that actually received carry permits, still don't. Because after a time they decide the inconvenience and hassle isn't worth it.

ADs, suicide, accidents, etc. kill many fold more than are saved by the use of defensive gun use, every year. The NRA sells "well all be helpless" without a handgun in a handbag, or belt. Its a wonder that anyone even walks the streets. A wonder that tourists who can't carry in any state aren't natural targets for armed criminals.

Firearms save lives, sure, but net US gun laws cost tens of thousands of lives per year.

As the above map shows. The states with tougher laws have fewer gun deaths.In fact the just completed election could lay blue and red states over that map and find a correlation.

You are right on most of those points, but there is a difference between loosing your life due to your own choices and loosing it because it was taken from you. Skydiving kills people. More than a thousand people have died skydiving since the inception of the sport, but the government doesent ban it. Accidental deaths in the case of someone being unsafe is not really any different than a skydiver dying because he was being unsafe. Sad, but entirely the fault of the person who died. Suicide is an issue, but again not having access to firearms does not eliminate suicide. If you look at the top 10 countries for suicide rates (USA is down in the 30s), most of them dont allow any firearms. As far as the argument for preventing crime, the only people who follow laws are law abiding citizens. I hope I dont have to explain how making it illegal to carry a weapon does not in any capacity deter criminals from carrying them.

I dont think  just anyone should be able to walk into a gun show and buy a gun no questions asked, but for competent people who are properly trained, responsible and of sound mind and judgement, they absolutely should be able to own a gun, including all the 'scary' looking rifles.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Westerly

[JoeWeber 2,720]

5 minutes ago, Westerly said:

You are right on most of those points, but there is a difference between loosing your life due to your own choices and loosing it because it was taken from you. Skydiving kills people. More than a thousand people have died skydiving since the inception of the sport, but the government doesent ban it. Accidental deaths in the case of someone being unsafe is not really any different than a skydiver dying because he was being unsafe. Sad, but entirely the fault of the person who died. Suicide is an issue, but again not having access to firearms does not eliminate suicide. If you look at the top 10 countries for suicide rates (USA is down in the 30s), most of them dont allow any firearms. As far as the argument for preventing crime, the only people who follow laws are law abiding citizens. I hope I dont have to explain how making it illegal to carry a weapon does not in any capacity deter criminals from carrying them.

I dont think  just anyone should be able to walk into a gun show and buy a gun no questions asked, but for competent people who are properly trained, responsible and of sound mind and judgement, they absolutely should be able to own a gun, including all the 'scary' looking rifles.

Dude, he is right on all of his points and your response is mumbo jumbo. Enough with the "competently trained people" argument. Outside of the military no one is competently trained or current. The idea that having a fancy firearm as a defense weapon you are likely to use is a fantasy. And to clarify things for you, parachutes are not used in defense.

[brenthutch 444]

2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Dude, he is right on all of his points and your response is mumbo jumbo. Enough with the "competently trained people" argument. Outside of the military no one is competently trained or current. The idea that having a fancy firearm as a defense weapon you are likely to use is a fantasy. And to clarify things for you, parachutes are not used in defense.

Not true, a former team leader in my unit went on to a very successful career in Delta, then retired and went on to establish his own “private security firm” and is now a civilian teaching operators how to operate.  Just watch a video of Jerry Miculek, and tell me that a civilian doesn’t know how to handle a firearm.  

[JoeWeber 2,720]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Not true, a former team leader in my unit went on to a very successful career in Delta, then retired and went on to establish his own “private security firm” and is now a civilian teaching operators how to operate.  Just watch a video of Jerry Miculek, and tell me that a civilian doesn’t know how to handle a firearm.  

No. What I said is true. I have no problem with you or anyone like you having access to advanced firearms. But you are not like the rest of us. Fact.

[brenthutch 444]

4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

No. What I said is true. I have no problem with you or anyone like you having access to advanced firearms. But you are not like the rest of us. Fact.

Just who’s responsibility is it to make those distinctionsa

 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

Just now, brenthutch said:

Just who’s responsibility is it to make those distinctionsa

 

That's what reasonable regulation laws are for. I'm not afraid of those laws. I can definitely see where someone like you might be. But it's a greater good thing in my view. I also believe that it's possible to write laws that provide safe harbor if we can all just be a bit less hysterical. 

[billvon 2,991]

2 hours ago, Westerly said:

 As far as the argument for preventing crime, the only people who follow laws are law abiding citizens.

Of course.

Quote

 I hope I dont have to explain how making it illegal to carry a weapon does not in any capacity deter criminals from carrying them.

And I hope that we don't have to explain that in countries that ban assault weapons (like Australia) the death rate from them goes way down.

You explained earlier how it's completely different when someone takes your life vs. when you kill yourself due to bad decisions.  I agree.  Finding ways to reduce the likelihood of someone else taking your life (or your wife's life) is worthwhile, IMO.