Printable View
I keep getting all these spam e-mails from Dudley Brown of the National Association for Gun Rights, basically claiming that the NRA is "too liberal" for a gun rights organization.
So, what gives? Does anybody follow these guys? It's kind of strange to see a minority of the population (e.g. gun advocates) splitting into even smaller sub-factions that claim the other isn't representing the interests of the people.
I'll post an example of the TL:DR e-mails as a comment if anyone is interested.
"President Obama and his anti-gun pals know the first step to CONFISCATING every firearm in America is registering them.
Not just "some" guns. But every single one.
That's why every speech and comment from Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden and the other anti-gun loudmouths, starts with a demand for "universal background checks" or "expanded background checks" or "grand-fathered gun checks."
Don't be fooled. Those background checks are gun registration.
Time and again anti-gun state and federal bureaucrats have been caught keeping records of the checks, including the name of the gun owner and the specific gun purchased.
Besides, would you ever want to trust Barack Obama or Eric Holder?
Of course not!
That's why the National Association for Gun Rights is standing opposed to ALL efforts to give the federal government more information on gun owners.
But after an appearance by NRA President David Keene on CBS, the Associated Press stated:
"The head of the National Rifle Association says the organization has no problem with tighter background checks of gun purchasers.
[Keene said] the NRA is 'generally supportive' of them."
And sadly, that's not even close to the worst of it.
____, believe me, I wish I didn't have to write you this email.
In a moment, I will give you a link to NAGR's No Gun Ban petition that I urge you to sign immediately.
If you've already signed the petition, please read this entire letter and then forward it to every pro-Second Amendment friend and family member you have -- preferably with a personal note urging them to join the fight.
You see, this may be the most important letter I have ever sent you.
And if you and I are going to win this fight -- the biggest danger our Second Amendment rights have faced in a generation -- we have to be willing to look all of the facts square in the face, even those we may not like.
You see, President Obama and his anti-gun pals are pushing hard for "universal background checks" on ALL gun sales and transfers -- even just handing a hunting rifle down to your son.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the only way to enforce the scheme is for the federal government to keep a national gun registry of every gun and every gun owner in America.
That's why the Feinstein Gun Ban forces owners of all grandfathered weapons to register their guns in a national database.
And if the NRA is signaling a surrender on handing President Obama and his anti-gun pals more information about American gun owners, I shudder to think what deals may get cut as the anti-gun hysteria gets whipped to a frenzy just before a House or Senate vote.
Since their President came out publicly in support of a new "background check" national gun registration scheme, the NRA did issue one public statement pointing out some of the dangers I told you about weeks ago.
I was hoping that would signal a change in direction.
But now The Hill is reporting:
"Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday [January 24] that he was working on a bill with Senate colleagues and the National Rifle Association (NRA) that would implement universal background checks, a major component of President Obama's proposed gun-control reforms . . .
'I'm working with the NRA, to be honest with you, and talking to them.'"
Of course, the NRA is now denying all of it -- denying they're "talking to" one of their anti-gun, "A-rated" Democrats about expanding gun control.
I hope that's true, but this story has gone back and forth so many times, it's making me seasick.
This is the absolute WORST thing that could result out of the Newtown tragedy!
Full-scale national gun registration under the guise of background checks?!?!
But unfortunately, this is not the only place where the NRA is signaling pre-emptive surrender.
Just a few days ago, news broke that President Obama was enlisting "Obamacare" doctors to begin snooping on gun owners in the name of taking away guns from those with "mental illness."
After going dark on Facebook for days after the Newtown tragedy, the NRA signaled its support for a national mental health database at its December 21 press conference.
In fact, the NRA's Executive Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, stated:
"We have a completely cracked mentally ill system that's got these monsters walking the streets . . .
"How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation's refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?"
As I'm sure you agree, no one ever wants to be forced to deal with an armed madman.
But don't be fooled.
The "mental health" issue is a ruse to hand government bureaucrats the power to STRIP Second Amendment supporters of their God-given right to keep and bear arms, without trial or conviction by a jury of peers.
38 states have some sort of mental health database, and they're already being used to strip law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights.
In fact, studies show that over 100,000 military veterans have been stripped of their gun rights already just from acknowledging stress on returning from war.
And one former Surgeon General estimated that 46.4% of Americans will have mental health issues at some point in their lives!
That should give you some idea of just how many law-abiding Americans can be stripped of their gun rights with "mental health" charges alone.
But how long until the gun-grabbers start adding folks they denote as "threats" to public safety to any Federal "Mental Health" No Gun Database?
Just a few years ago, the Department of Homeland Security issued documents calling those with the "wrong" Presidential candidates' bumper stickers on their cars possible terrorist threats.
Now, one West Point think tank is warning about "far right" threats from those who support "civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government."
Do you really trust President Obama to play fair with the massive new power he'd have with a National Mental Health Database?
I don't.
But sadly, this is the way the NRA has operated for some time.
After the Columbine tragedy in 1999 -- and the media frenzy that followed -- the NRA sent similar signals to the Clinton Administration.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre even stated his organization supported the very so-called "Gun Free Zone" policies that ensure bloodthirsty lunatics never run into armed opposition when they go on a rampage.
At their 1999 convention in Colorado, Wayne LaPierre stated:
"First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period."
On May 27, 1999, in testimony before the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee, LaPierre said:
"We think it's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act."
As for background checks? Also, at their 1999 convention, LaPierre stated:
"We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops demanding new gun taxes and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers."
And in an Outdoor Life magazine interview in 2000, the president of the NRA again confirmed their belief that all firearms sales go through the Brady system.
_______, this is what bothers me so much.
It's not that NRA doesn't understand what's going on.
They've known good and well anti-gun Presidents and bureaucrats break the law to illegally record, track and trace guns and gun owners.
And yet they're signaling a willingness to hand THIS President even more power?
The same administration that proved it was willing to look the other way while bloodthirsty Mexican drug gangs stockpiled firearms and walked them across the border -- ultimately resulting in one U.S. Border agent's death?
If you agree with me that we must fight for our Second Amendment rights tooth-and-nail, I'm going to be counting on your help in the coming days.
For now, I'm asking you to please sign your No Gun Ban petition, if haven't already done so.
I believe -- like our Founders -- that you and I have a God-given, inalienable right to keep and bear arms.
I don't know about you, but I don't believe God-given rights are negotiable -- so I'm not about to see them whittled away.
I've already instructed my staff that -- with your help -- the National Association for Gun Rights will fight any scheme the gun-grabbers throw at us . . .
. . . even those gun control initiatives the anti-gun national media deems "popular."
I don't believe our gun rights should be determined by popularity contests.
If you agree, please sign your No Gun Ban petition TODAY.
The one way to win this fight is to turn up the heat on Members of Congress.
You and I must ensure they know that ANY vote on ANY scheme to gut our right to keep and bear arms will mean political pain . . .
Pain at the ballot box.
Pain Second Amendment supporters all over the country will be prepared to deliver; if necessary, even if the NRA "blesses" some deal that gives more power to the Obama Administration.
Because -- and know this, beyond a shadow of a doubt -- NAGR will never bless deals the NRA struck that violate our Second Amendment rights.
And we won’t give politicians a pass who vote for this kind of garbage, even with the NRA’s blessing.
That’s why I’m asking you to stand firm . . . Now, while the heat is on.
All this depends on numbers. You and I must generate as much heat on Congress as possible. Standing together, I am convinced we can win.
If you haven't signed your No Gun Ban petition, please do so.
If you have, please forward this letter -- along with a personal note if possible -- to all your pro-2nd Amendment friends and family members asking them to join us.
And finally, please chip in $10 or even $20 today to help the National Association for Gun Rights fight back against the gun-grabbers. To donate please just CLICK HERE.
This fight is just too important for compromises and half measures.
Your generosity today will help me mobilize even more gun owners from all over the country.
For Freedom,
Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President
P.S. This is the biggest threat our gun rights have seen in a generation.
You and I must be prepared to FIGHT BACK with everything we have.
Half-measures and compromises won't cut it.
If you agree, please sign your No Gun Ban petition IMMEDIATELY. And if you've already signed, please forward this to all your pro-2nd Amendment friends and family.
And to help the National Association for Gun Rights stand strong against the gun grabbers, chip in $10 or $20 by CLICKING HERE today! Whatever you can give will be greatly appreciated."
I am getting these also. I suspect I got on their list from signing one of the anti-ban petitions, or maybe by registering when I went to the Harrisburg rally two weeks ago? Either way, I agree that splitting up and bashing NRA is not the right approach, and I certainly don't need several e-mails a day telling me about how great "the other group" is.Quote:
Originally Posted by KamikazeKnifer
I got on there list by signing a petition they seem like fear mungrals and the fact that they are bashing the largest pro-gun association instead of working with them I wouldn't join them.
Sorry, I just can't join a group where the Presidents name is Dudley.
:D ^^^^ LOL ^^^^ Agreed!Quote:
Originally Posted by jerkin
LMAO!!! I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerkin
I'm sorry but when is the last time anybody in the media, or any anti came out publicly throwing punches at NAGR or GOA or any of the other groups? I have no doubt that they are all there to support our cause, but to the enemy they don't exist.
It is sad that our enemy knows the strength of our greatest weapon (the NRA) better than we do. The enemy fears the NRA, no matter how hard they try to convince us that they do not. The proof is in the amount of effort they are putting into their NRA smear campaign, and how hard they are trying to divide and conquer the gun owners. The most pathetic part is we are playing right into it, squabbling over which group is better than the other, which group is really fighting for us.
If we could stop fighting amongst ourselves and rally together under a single banner to show our numbers. But no, instead we remain divided. We give the enemy a leg to stand on when they say things like "a majority of gun owners don't support the NRA" because a majority of gun owners aren't NRA members. Meanwhile, the NRA is out there fighting for us, and they do have the attention of the entire nation right now, but they can't say "50 million gun owners draw the line here" because only 2.5 million gun owners are members. Sad.
We all need to work together to be succesful. No infighting.
I see it not so much as US smearing names or bickering, but more as the NAGR trying to make a name for itself by bashing NRA. I have numerous other e-mails to support the statement, and it is sad. NRA, as you said, is our most powerful asset. Support them if you can, unless you have some real issue with something they are doing or have done. They are very important to preservation of gun rights this country.Quote:
Originally Posted by csmith
EDIT: sorry, that kinda sounded like I was debating against you. I agree with you.
No worries. I was against joining the NRA right up until the Sandy Hook shooting for numerous reasons. The NRA was the only group in the spotlight that showed any sort of respect for the loss of life by not jumping out and pointing fingers. Ultimately, it was Pocketprotector who convinced me to join by simply stating we need to unite.Quote:
Originally Posted by ponti1000
I agree I do all I can daily but the NAGR just seems off with there NRA bashing and their emails are just a little forceful and repetative I get emailS with an s daily like 6 a day.
I like NAGR. They have a good strategy IMO. Besides, why only hit anti's on one front? That gives them the ability to focus their resources on one defense.
GOA is more aggressive than the NRA but the mention of the NRA makes Chris Mathews pee down his non-tingling leg. SAF has done well in court cases for us as well.
I support them all. I understand the "no infighting" comments but look at it this way. Feinstein's ridiculous bill had us thinking, "She is asking for the world so we feel OK about yielding only mag limits." Likewise, if NAGR is radical, maybe they will make the NRA appear to be level headed in the minds of moderates. We need to cover our bases IMO.
Opinions abound. If some groups keep the NRA "honest" than that is a benefit for all of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by KamikazeKnifer
Do you realize that firearms owners and enthusiasts are one of the largest minority groups in the United States? We are probably close to half of the population of the US if you include households where some of the adults are owners and others are just enthusiasts.Quote:
Originally Posted by KamikazeKnifer
African Americans are sixteen percent of the population, Latino Americans are maybe twenty percent of the population and Gays/Lesbians and others are less than ten percent of the population.
These three special interest groups command a much larger share of political influence, government handouts and special rules than gun owners.
If gun owners were as activist as these recognized minorities we would probably have pretty liberal gun laws for law abiding citizens rather than gun apartheid in New York City, Chicago and other cities run by elitists.
While non gun owners are a majority of Americans they are not as a group opposed to gun ownership. Gun Control Enthusiasts are a tiny minority of Americans, much smaller than gun owners. I think at last count the Brady Campaign has a couple of million members.
The average non gun owner is apathetic or agnostic about gun ownership. It's an "out of sight, out of mind" thing. Not surprising since the vast over whelming majority of firearms in the US are NOT used in crimes.
Women are NOT a minority group since they comprise just slightly over half of the population (more baby girls are born than boys and women as a group live longer than men). They are represented as "minorities" only because of illogical thinking by Feminists and Progressives.
Not a fan of NAGR. IMO, their business model is simply: send out fearmongering emails and advertisement, always claiming "we must do something" then "p.s. give us money"
Then they take that money and do nothing. They have no lobbyists, politicians have never heard of them, and they are outright liars and cheats.
Currently, RMGO, which is also owned/run by Dudley Brown, who is the owner/CEO of NAGR, is shut down for not filing with the IRS for 3 straight years. I.e.. taking the money and pocketing it.
Here is a link to a thread on ar15.com about them, where the owner(dudley brown) responds to a call out for their blatant lying and scamming.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/126...ts.html&page=1
Notice, that he refuses to address the issue of the lying, but continues on his fear mongering tactics, and talks about how much he has done, when in reality he hasn't done much of anything.
Agreed 1000%!!! I get the same emails, almost every other dayQuote:
Originally Posted by joneill3
I don't really know much about "NAGR" other than the fact that it has a really....unfortunate name. :)
i scan thru the emails i get and take away what i think is relevant. 3-4 emails a day is pretty damn annoying though.
they are pretty good with up to the day current events which lets me call or email officials if something is going on. i have never donated to them though.
Obama is attacking the NRA for a reason. They are the most effective in Washington DC.
This is not to say you should not support other groups too. I am a member of the SAF, GOA and JPFO too.... but the NRA is the one Obama called out and they are the ones who must lead this fight.
Give the NRA your support first... then see what other groups you want to support too.
That all said... I scan the NAGR emails too. I think they are big on hype. Small on action. I don't think a single anti-gun politician knows of them or hates them enough. The anti-gun politicians who you should support through their hat for them.
Who does Obama Hate... The NRA
Who does Feinstein Hate... The NRA
Who does Bloomberg Hate.... The NRA
Who does Schumer Hate.... The NRA
Any Question on who to support ???
It sounds like an attempt to split and divide gun owners, for all I know they could be antis pausing I don't know but the devil you know is better than the one you don't know
I'm not sure it is an attempt to split gun owners. But, I think our efforts are dilluted with too many organizations all claiming to be the best. That being said Sen. Rand Paul seems to have attached himself to NAGR. I'll reserve my decisiion on how effective until they actually accomplish something.
+1. I've read nothing but shady things about NAGR and Dudley for the last couple of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin
Found this thread searching this exact same question. I live in CO where Rocky Mountain Gun Owners is run by the same guy who runs NAGR. I am a member of RMGO, and NRA, but obviously am questioning which is representing the gun owners without caving.
Here's a link to an RMGO article saying that the NRA caved on the Brady background check when it was created.
I am a member of the NRA, GOA, SAF. Proudly I mite add. In addition I contribute extra money during the year to all three. :D
I think GOA is pushing the 3 million member mark, I'm personally both an NRA and GOA member. GOA has had a lot of legislative power lately because they focus almost all their efforts at old-school lobbying because it works.Quote:
Originally Posted by csmith
Maybe if GOA could surpass the NRA membership numbers, they could work in the shadows while the left spends all their energy on fighting the NRA?
As for NAGR, I donated, but I'm kind of sick of the fear mongering and all the really weird letters I've received from various other organizations since then.
I joined GOA when they first came on the scene and they did the used the same tatics as NAGR. I got so tired of sending in questionairs that never went anywhere. I dropped them and only gave to the NRA-ILA. I am a life member of the NRA since 1973. This year I added the GOA and SAF to my list of memberships. I get all the emails from NAGR, but do not send them money as I am not sure whether they are going to be effective. I want the most bang for my dollars and as far as I can see that is the NRA and local groups.