Read em' & weep: National Association for Gun Rights vs. NRA: How Do They Differ?

[vinnyg101]

National Association for Gun Rights vs. NRA: How Do They Differ?


The mission statements of two of the United States’ top pro-gun lobbies, the National Association for Gun Rights and the National Rifle Association, sound very similar.





The NRA’s mission statement, summarized from its bylaws, is:

"To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms." The statement also includes a focus on promoting public safety, training in the safe and efficient handling of small arms, hunter safety, and shooting sport promotion.


The National Association for Gun Rights' mission statement:

says the organization was "established to promote firearms education, legal advocacy and the promotion of the Second Amendment. In the compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that profits. In the compromise between food and poison, it is only death that wins." The NAGR also "follows the courts closely" for purposes of legal advocacy and is working to start training programs nationwide.

But even with approximately the same mission, the two organizations have been highlighted in the media as taking different approaches. Here are a few facts about how they differ:

• Budgets: Despite the much larger budget of the NRA....NAGR in 2013 started off the year by spending $1.9 million lobbying for gun rights, as compared to the $700,000 spent by the NRA, according to USA Today.

By the end of 2013, NAGR spent $6.76 million to the NRA’s $3.41 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The NAGR continued to outspend the NRA in 2014, and as of September, the center reported it had spent $2.25 million next to $1.88 million for the NRA.

• Background checks for buying guns: NAGR is against background checks of any kind. On its Facebook page, NAGR stated that opinion and took a jab at the NRA for allegedly failing to fight expanded background checks.

“NAGR will never ‘negotiate’ your gun rights away! But stories continue to surface that the NRA is in active talks with West Virginia Democrat Senator Joe Manchin on federally-expanding background checks on gun owners,” NAGR posted in 2013. “NAGR OPPOSES expanded background checks, so-called 'gun trafficking' legislation and new mental health 'mandates' and 'screenings.'"


Vice President Joe Biden, President Barack Obama and other (usually Democratic) leaders often point out the NRA used to be in favor of limited background checks. The Washington Post delved into that claim in 2013, determining that the organization did indeed change its opinion between 1999, when some statements were made indicating background checks at gun shows might be OK, and today.


The Post quoted Sandy Froman, NRA board member and former president, from a CNN interview: "The NRA has changed its position and the reason it’s changed its position is because the system doesn’t work."

• These two organizations may appear to be gunning for the same thing, but there is no love lost between them — at least from the perspective of NAGR. The NAGR website lays out the differences:

“The National Association for Gun Rights and the NRA are both gun rights organizations, but the similarities end there. NAGR has grown in recent years because hundreds of thousands of gun rights activists across the country are tired of the ‘inside the beltway’ institutional gun lobby. ---- There has been a perception that the institutional gun lobby is more interested in having access to politicians and ‘getting something done.’ ---- NAGR does not want ‘access’ to politicians, though we have friends that are elected officials, and certainly does not want to pass a gun bill ‘just to get something done.’”

“When I get approached by a 2nd Amendment organization looking for support, my first question has become ‘how much of their time and energy do they spend bashing the NRA?’ Well, NAGR is pretty much top dog at that. Dudley Brown's main focus appears to be nipping at the NRA's heels,” one commenter on a forum discussing the two organizations wrote in 2008. “It's somewhat ironic that I can't recall them scoring a single successful lawsuit or piece of legislation. They just yell.”



newsmax.com/FastFeatures/national-association-for-gun-rights-nra-differ/2014/10/12/id/600067/
By Morgan Chilson10/12/2014

[RocketSled]

Does NAGR send you junk mail in an amount that it seems the mail costs more to produce and ship than you paid for membership?

That's what I couldn't stand about the NRA and why I did not renew my membership. So much junk mail. I'd rather they use my dues to fight for the cause, not waste it on trying to get me to buy a higher membership package.

[JenniferG]

I think we've been through this before with this phony organization.

BELLEVUE, WA –-(Ammoland.com)- Dudley Brown and his “National Association for Gun Rights” (NAGR) have built a reputation by attacking every other major gun rights organization and even pro-gun politicians, to the detriment of the gun rights movement.

His rhetoric has done more to marginalize Second Amendment activism than all of the slanders from gun prohibition lobbying groups combined.

Now Dudley has spewed his venom toward Alan Gottlieb, a true champion of Second Amendment advocacy with a proven track record of accomplishment. Gottlieb is founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA).
In his latest effort to raise money for his own self-aggrandizement, Dudley Brown has launched a vicious canard against Alan Gottlieb, accusing the veteran gun rights advocate of “Leading the fight for national gun registration.”
Alan Gottlieb has never advocated for gun registration in his life. His legislative efforts have been to prevent that, and Dudley knows it.

Sean Tonner, deputy chief of staff for former Republican Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, was quoted by The Denver Magazine , asserting, “All Dudley wanted to do was create controversy. He makes his money when there’s turmoil, real or perceived, because that’s what gets his members to write him checks.”

It is time to call Dudley what he is, a political bomb-throwing bully whose stock in trade is to incite distrust and discontent within the ranks of the gun rights movement to enhance his own fund-raising efforts and power base.
Instead of directing his energies toward fighting the real enemy, Dudley Brown has attacked other gun rights organizations in an effort to elevate his own group, but at what cost to gun rights?
Perhaps he believes the only way to raise his own status outside the borders of Colorado is to trample on people and organizations with whom he should be allied for the common cause of advancing Second Amendment rights, rather than inflating his own ego.

When anti-gunners see people in the gun rights movement attacking one another they cheer. Such vicious attacks provide aid and comfort to the enemies of the Second Amendment.

WHERE WAS DUDLEY?
The Second Amendment Foundation has championed gun rights legal actions and won in federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Remember, it was SAF that took McDonald v. City of Chicago to the Supreme Court and won. Where was Dudley?
SAF and CCRKBA have conducted the annual Gun Rights Policy Conference for more than 25 years, bringing together major gun rights leaders with grassroots activists to unify and expand the gun rights movement. Where was Dudley?
When SAF and the National Rifle Association joined forces to stop the unconstitutional gun grab in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, where was Dudley?
When SAF and NRA joined forces to defeat the San Francisco gun ban, where was Dudley?

https://www.ammoland.com/2014/05/dud...#axzz4vQtgqHIP

[Emptymag]

Is there a condensed version of the two posts above?

[vinnyg101]

Is there a condensed version of the two posts above?

Don't know. Buy the direct link is a the bottom of the article in the OP post.

[tacticalreload]

I think we've been through this before with this phony organization.



https://www.ammoland.com/2014/05/dud...#axzz4vQtgqHIP

I don't know this Dudley guy or his organization so for all I know he could be a class A douchebag or fine upstanding man.

However, as for Bill Owens' comment about him saying "He makes his money when there's turmoil, real or perceived, because that's what gets his members to write him checks." Uhmmm... the same could quite easily (and reasonably, IMO) be said about the NRA. I'm pretty sure that I have never received a single piece of correspondence (and Lord knows I've gotten countless) or a single issue of one of their magazines that wasn't filled with fear mongering propaganda... "real or perceived". I wonder how much Dudley took home in compensation in 2015, when Wayne LaPierre banked more than $5.1 million?

In fairness, it could pretty much be arguably be said about any number of organizations... from the ASPCA to ANTIFA to the ACLU.