Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 70
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Center Twp., Pennsylvania
    (Beaver County)
    Posts
    8
    Rep Power
    0

    Default What's with the NRA?

    Ok, this had me disturbed:
    Disclose would silence almost every pro-gun organization in America... Except the NRA. In fact, the DISCLOSE Act was dead in the water until the NRA cut a deal to exempt itself (and a few big liberal groups like AARP and probably MoveOn.org) last week.
    I called the NRA, and they basically told me that since this new twist in Disclose didn't apply to NRA, it was no longer being lobbied against, or in other words, to hell with the rest of the constitution, and the other Pro Gun groups.

    Then, I found out about this: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/0...ng-harry-reid/Now I have to say I am DISTURBED, and don't know what to make of this. Does the NRA have blinders on?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    (Philadelphia County)
    Posts
    1,337
    Rep Power
    16766

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    Quote Originally Posted by JLPicard View Post
    Does the NRA have blinders on?
    IMO, yes. Seems to me their policies are primarily focused on A) their continued existence and relevance and B) supporting industry related to firearms.

    Most efforts in favor of 2nd amendment rights are only as a side affect of the above.

    Overall, not necessarily a bad thing. But I don't see them as the champion of the 2nd amendment as some others might.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Delco, Pennsylvania
    (Delaware County)
    Posts
    1,203
    Rep Power
    384228

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    OK, let me state for the record I think they know what they are doing.
    They are have access to many experts. When you want the best protection you go to the over 4 million strong NRA.

    I do not always agree with them, but I sure know they know how to this stuff better than me and you.






    Setting The Record Straight On The “DISCLOSE Act”

    Friday, June 18, 2010

    We appreciate the concerns some NRA members have raised about our position on H.R. 5175, the “DISCLOSE Act.” Unfortunately, the mainstream media and other critics of NRA’s role in this process have misstated or misunderstood the facts. We’d like to set the record straight.

    We have never said we would support any version of this bill. To the contrary, we clearly stated NRA’s strong opposition to the DISCLOSE Act (as introduced) in a letter sent to Members of Congress on May 26 (click here to read the letter).

    Through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has consistently and strongly opposed any effort to restrict the rights of our four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. The initial version of H.R. 5175 would effectively have put a gag order on the NRA during elections and threatened our members’ right to privacy and freedom of association, by forcing us to turn our donor lists over to the federal government. We would also have been forced to list our top donors on all election-related television, radio and Internet ads and mailings—even mailings to our own members. We refuse to let this Congress impose those unconstitutional restrictions on our Association.

    The introduced version of the bill would also have prohibited political speech by all federal government contractors. The NRA has contracts to provide critical firearm training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement agencies throughout the country. The bill would have forced us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refused to let this Congress force us to make that choice.

    We told Congress we opposed the bill. Consequently, congressional leaders announced they would exempt us from its draconian restrictions on political speech. If that happens, we will not be involved in final consideration of this bill in the House. If it doesn’t, we will strongly oppose the bill.

    Our position is based on principle and experience. During consideration of the previous campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, congressional leadership repeatedly refused to exempt the NRA from its provisions, promising that our concerns would be fixed somewhere down the line. That didn’t happen; instead, the NRA had to live under those restrictions for seven years and spend millions of dollars on compliance costs and on legal fees to challenge the law. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak.

    There are those who say the NRA should put the Second Amendment at risk over a First Amendment principle. That’s easy to say—unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do.

    The NRA is a non-partisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That’s their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology.

    Today, the fate of the bill remains in doubt. The House floor debate has repeatedly been postponed. Lawmakers and outside groups who once supported the bill, or took no position—including the Brady Campaign—have now come out against it because of the announcement regarding NRA. The outcome in the Senate is even murkier, as anti-gun Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has announced her strong opposition to the proposed change.

    No matter what may happen now, NRA members can be assured that protection of gun owners’ interests will remain NRA’s top priority. Please check in regularly at www.nraila.org for the latest news on this issue.
    NRA Training Counselor, Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Benefactor Member



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    DuBois, Pennsylvania
    (Clearfield County)
    Posts
    300
    Rep Power
    373

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    I don't know the specifics of the Harry Reid situation, but until I see official NRA endorsement I'm not sure it's worth getting upset about.

    The NRA is a single issue (2nd amendment) organization. They are not a civil rights, limited government, or constitution oriented organization. The NRA, for good or bad, is a single issue organization and that's how they'll remain. By being a single issue organization that is non-partisan (I realize people tend to think of them as repulbican, but they're not), they have allies in all political parties. The number of issues an organization supports, the fewer people will support the organization. Because of their size (and influence) I'd also like them to support other causes that may not appeal to other 2A people and other 2A people would probably want them to support causes I don't agree with, but if they did that they'd be alienating pro-2A people and thus reducing how many 2A people they appeal to (and in turn their 2A influence). By focusing on the single issue, they're maximizing their effectiveness of the 1 issue they do support.

    The NRA endorses candidates based solely on their 2A stance, not political affiliation or their stance with respect to the rest of the constitution. This has many benefits for the one issue they do care about, but it also pisses off people who think they should be involved in more than 2A. The result is that if legislation does not affect the 2A or them, it's none of their concern. When the referenced legislation included them, they were against it, now it doesn't, so they're not lobbying against it. If they were, then they'd be more than a 2A organization, which they're not.

    I'm not saying the NRA is the perfect 2A organization, just that they are a single issue organization and there's reason they are single issue. Them not trying to stop this legislation in no way makes them hypocrits or anything of that nature. They're just doing what they exist for and it's not to fight non-2A battles. So while I would like an organization with the membership numbers of the NRA to lobby against this bill, I don't fault the NRA for not doing it since it isn't a 2A bill. Doing so would make them more than a 2A organization, which is not what they want to be and I can understand why they don't.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    monroe cty, Pennsylvania
    (Monroe County)
    Posts
    209
    Rep Power
    58

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    Why is the NRA Backing Sen Harry Ried: They say on one breathe they are NOT backing anyone yet, but it seems if you read below it looks like they are all for Harry "Obama Agenda" Ried... YOUR NOT GONNA GET ME TO VOTE FOR HIM IF I LIVED IN NEVADA..


    NRA-PVF ENDORSEMENTS NOT YET ANNOUNCED IN ANY U.S. SENATE RACE FOR NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION

    Wednesday, July 07, 2010

    For the record, the NRA-PVF has not yet made an endorsement in the Nevada U.S. Senate race. In fact, there have been no announced endorsements for any U.S. Senate seat for the November general elections—period.

    For several reasons, we generally do not announce ratings or endorsements until closer to the elections. There are still votes to be graded and other information to be evaluated prior to issuing an accurate grade as Election Day nears.

    The NRA-PVF looks at the entirety of a candidate’s record. We start with the candidate’s voting record (if any), along with answers to questionnaires, statements and floor speeches the candidate makes on Second Amendment issues, as well as any action the candidate may have taken as a committee member or leader.

    Our endorsements are not given lightly, nor are they issued in every race. An NRA-PVF endorsement is something that has to be earned. As we do every election year, we wait until all the votes are taken and evaluate a candidate’s entire record. Making a decision prematurely, before votes are taken, risks giving politicians a “free pass”—something we can’t and won’t allow.

    It is important to note that the NRA is a single-issue organization. Our ratings and endorsements are based solely on a candidate’s support for, or opposition to, our Second Amendment rights. Other issues, as important as they may be to many people, do not and cannot play any role in those decisions. NRA represents a broad coalition of American gun owners, who are bound together by their support for the right to keep and bear arms.

    For us to factor non-gun-related issues into our ratings would foolishly divide our unified base of support on the Second Amendment. This policy has served NRA and gun owners well over the past three-plus decades, making us the nation’s pre-eminent pro-Second Amendment advocacy group.

    We fully understand that voters must take into account a variety of issues when deciding for whom to vote. We respect that. It is our responsibility, however, to provide voters with information solely on a candidate’s position on gun-related issues so that they may factor that consideration in addition to other issues.

    Admittedly, Senator Reid’s record is not perfect; few politicians’ records are. For a number of years (primarily in the 1990s) Sen. Reid had some problematic votes on our issue. But in the last five years, he has dramatically improved his record on our issue, so the NRA-PVF would be irresponsible if it did not give due consideration to those recent votes and actions. There is no doubt that, as Senate Majority Leader, Reid has supported efforts to protect Americans’ gun rights, both by voting FOR pro-gun measures AND preventing anti-gun legislation from reaching the Senate floor.

    In 2004, Sen. Reid voted against efforts to reauthorize the Clinton “assault weapons” ban and early last year, flatly stated he would oppose any effort to reinstate an “assault weapons” ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future. In 2005, Sen. Reid was instrumental in Senate passage (and eventual enactment into law) of the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (PLCAA). That law shut down reckless lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers, which attempted to hold them liable for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Sen. Reid also cosponsored the PLCAA in the previous Congress and voted against the Feinstein Amendment to ban so-called “assault weapons” and the Kennedy Amendment that would have banned most hunting ammunition.

    Sen. Reid voted for legislation, which became law in 2006, to prohibit gun confiscation during states of emergency. He also voted for legislation to allow commercial airline pilots to be armed in the cockpit to protect their passengers and crew.

    In the last two years, Sen. Reid voted for the Ensign Amendment to repeal the Washington D.C. gun ban and restore self-defense rights in our nation’s capital. He cosponsored similar legislation -- S.1414 -- in the 108th Congress. He also voted for an amendment to allow law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense in national parks and wildlife refuges. This federal policy change took effect on February 22. In addition, Sen. Reid voted last year for the Thune-Vitter Amendment to provide national reciprocity for state Right-to-Carry permits. Sen. Reid also voted twice for the Wicker Amendment allowing Amtrak passengers to include firearms in their checked luggage. In his capacity as Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid made votes on all of these amendments procedurally possible. And these are but a few examples of Senator Reid’s support and leadership on Second Amendment issues.

    All of which leads to a very serious question for all NRA members and gun owners who oppose Sen. Reid to contemplate: who would take Reid’s place if he loses his race—and his critically important position as Senate Majority Leader? Remember, the Senate Majority Leader is the gatekeeper who decides which legislation will be considered on the Senate floor. If Sen. Reid loses, the next candidate for Majority Leader is very likely to be Chuck Schumer or Dick Durbin—two of the most anti-gun U.S. Senators in history!

    It is critical to the defense of the Second Amendment that we have pro-gun majorities in the U.S. Congress. While no endorsement has yet been issued in this race, nor any other U.S. Senate race for the November general election, rest assured that we will make all of these announcements at the appropriate time and in light of our election policy.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Douglassville, Pennsylvania
    (Berks County)
    Age
    65
    Posts
    1,274
    Rep Power
    6015

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    Quote Originally Posted by iceman9999 View Post
    NRA-PVF ENDORSEMENTS NOT YET ANNOUNCED IN ANY U.S. SENATE RACE FOR NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION
    You have a hard time understanding this blatant statement? Do you also have a hard time with "shall not be infringed?" Same concept.
    Bill USAF 1976 - 1986, NRA Endowment, USCCA

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, Pennsylvania
    (Lancaster County)
    Posts
    4,879
    Rep Power
    21474857

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    It's a poison pill. Very simple concept.
    "You can't stop insane people from doing insane things by passing insane laws--that's insane!" -- Penn Jillette

    "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic." -- Ted Nugent

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    lawrence co., Pennsylvania
    (Lawrence County)
    Posts
    282
    Rep Power
    91035

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    They say the nra hasn't endorsed anyone, meanwhile, wayne La PU campaigns with and for HARRY REID over a verifiable conservitive.

    The nra has been selling you kool aid drinkers down the sewer for years just the same as the seiu has been selling out their members.

    wayne wants to keep his cushy gig as long as he can keep you nra members BS'ed.

    Just look at their past endorsements.
    The say they went for the lessor of 2 evils over an over to justify their double dealing.
    But guys, The lessor of 2 evils is still evil.

    The nra has done just enough to say they are doing something, when in reality they are only perpetuating themselves just like the big unions.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    127.1.1.1, Pennsylvania
    (Bucks County)
    Posts
    2,922
    Rep Power
    3528460

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    If you are a member you got the complete article about Harry Reid and the range he put together and why they support on 2A issues.

    That is all they care about. Their mission statement in 2A the org is 2A so that is why the article is there and LaPierre took photos with him.

    I don't like Reid either.. but politics is an evil game of wheeling and dealing. That much I have seen and heard. Taped conversations, PI's, deals for votes, hell look at our own "2A supporters" in Harrisberg and how all of a sudden they are helpless with HB40 becuase of Evans!! Give me a break. If they wanted it passed with that many sponsors and co sponsors it would be. Instead they let Evans take the heat, get his votes in and they get to blame some one while keeping their jobs and everyone goes home happy except us.

    So take the kool aid comment along with your rep and put it in your pipe and smoke it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kittanning, Pennsylvania
    (Armstrong County)
    Posts
    651
    Rep Power
    1745

    Default Re: What's with the NRA?

    Yep, politics are politics! It would not hurt to support the conservative either. No more to the NRA from me with the Reid endorsement ...... I'm done.
    The original point and click interface was a Colt Peacemaker!

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •