NRA Ballot opinions please.

[cephas]

The argument:
"Item 8 of the bylaw changes moves to amend the section regarding nomination of directors by petition. They want to change the requirement that you get 250 signatures, to a requirement that you get a number of signatures equal to 0.5% of the votes cast in the previous election of directors.
The practical effect? If more than 50,000 people voted in the previous election, you now need more signatures than the previously required 250 to get on the ballot. The NRA has over 5,000,000 members; 50,000 is 1% of that. So if more than 1% of the membership of the NRA votes, it just got harder to nominate people by petition.
Now the board can be safe that the nominating committee, made up of board members, will have complete control of who can run for the board from now on."

One rebuttal:
"There are groups organizing in an attempt to take over the NRA, funded by a certain New York billionaire, these changes are mostly targeted at limiting their ability to do so."

What do you think?

[Gunsnwater]

More thought needed. I can see why it's needed. What repercussions it will bring in the future are unknown but if the NRA is compromised we are doomed. The current people have served us well.

[ray h]

Isn't there some sort of vetting process before the actual vote? Certainly someone has to know who these people are that are running.
I'm with gunsnwater, I need to think about it and consider what all this could effect and do we actually need a change.