Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Chasbo00 wrote:Tweaker got it right. The NRA has plenty of warts; but, it is the only outfit with a membership big enough to influence things on a national level. Despite my frustrations with the NRA I'll continue to support them. I would like to see a leadership change though - both LaPierre and Cox need to go. Also, a board of directors that has more than 70 members is too large to work properly. The organization needs restructuring as well as new leadership.

I'm with you and the Tweak...they have warts just like the GOP and other organizations but we all do...and the current leadership does have to go...

If they send you something soliciting money and you dont want to participate then toss it...btw, the only way to effect change in the NRA is by being a member and voting...boycotting it wont help at all.

As a matter of fact if everyone dissatisfied with the NRA bails on them then it will never change.....

My problem is we have NRA members who passively go along with the organization, without ever thinking about changes.

I would love for the NRA to be more aggressive, and take some stances, but in their mind, every loss they get provides the other side with ammo to further the gun control agenda.

The NRA in affect doesn't want to seem as an "Extremist".

I vote everytime I get the sheet, but I need BETTER choices. I think the only way we could turn it back is to put in ads in the Rifleman, and try to get BETTER people to run.

I like having Uncle Ted on the board, but would he, or could he, handle being Executive VP? I think he could motivate the board to go another route.

Rev Del. I don't want to think I was pointing the finger at you specifically, sir! By virtue of being active here, we are all preaching to the choir. I am bothered by the same things you are, but we must fight with the tools available, not the ones we wish to have.

I know Mike, I know... It's just so frustrating when you carry the water for other gun owners, and they just shrug it off.

If you believe in something, BELIEVE IN IT! It's like faith, I'm not a "Sunday/Holiday" believer. I believe from the time I wake up, to the time I go to sleep.

It doesn't make me perfect, or the best, but it makes my world better.

I just don't like fence sitters, or "try'ers". Do, or do not... there is no try.

This open letter to Ted Nugent from JPFO, summarizes my feelings toward the NRA.

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd02/nugent-open-letter.htm

Is there a "perfect" Pro-2A organization? No, but I have seen far too many compromises made by the NRA for me to continue to support them.

It seems to me that the NRA has just gotten to be too big for there own good. Anymore, it seems, that the NRA solely exists to protect the gun manufacturer's and has forgotten about the average member (except, of coarse, when it comes time to ask for more money!).

^^^ +1

I'll second Yard's letter link!

GO JOOZ!

zephyp wrote:

gatlingun6 wrote:

wylde007 wrote:SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
veryone

Oh wait. Never mind.

***********************************************************************************
That part in the recent SCOTUS opinions that stated: "Reasonable gun regulations are permitted". Remember gun regulations of any kind are now within the purview of the Feds. 2nd A rights are not UNFETTERED!

Gat6

SCROTUS can kiss me where the sun dont shine...now we have to hear twits discuss "reasonable gun control" and us knowing that the intent is to stretch "reasonable" until all the "control" is situated in one place and that ultimately means we the people will not be allowed to buy, own, build, carry, or touch a gun...

******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Mr Z that SCOTUS sentiment combined with violating a reasonable gun law won't get you a better jail cell if convicted. When people were salivating about the likely outcome of MacDonald V Chicago, I was saying be careful what you ask. And sure enough along with the good of overturning Chicago's anti-handgun regulation, just like that, for the 1st time the 2nd Amendment was fully incorporated against the states, and into the lexicon came the as yet to be defined term: "reasonable gun control". And now we are stuck with it for all time. So the new phrase is: What don't you understand about reasonable gun regulations. To which I reply not a thing since SCOTUS has not defined the term. But don't be so paranoid, there's no chance that guns will ever be totally banned

Gat6

Yarddawg wrote:This open letter to Ted Nugent from JPFO, summarizes my feelings toward the NRA.

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd02/nugent-open-letter.htm

Is there a "perfect" Pro-2A organization? No, but I have seen far too many compromises made by the NRA for me to continue to support them.

It seems to me that the NRA has just gotten to be too big for there own good. Anymore, it seems, that the NRA solely exists to protect the gun manufacturer's and has forgotten about the average member (except, of coarse, when it comes time to ask for more money!).

Thats probably been the most succinct critique of both the NRA and the anti-2A agenda. Bravo children of Zion indeed.

Great letter from JPFO! I've read a number of their materials before, and they do a good job of communicating basic principles.

Reverenddel wrote:My problem is we have NRA members who passively go along with the organization, without ever thinking about changes.

I would love for the NRA to be more aggressive, and take some stances, but in their mind, every loss they get provides the other side with ammo to further the gun control agenda.

The NRA in affect doesn't want to seem as an "Extremist".

I vote everytime I get the sheet, but I need BETTER choices. I think the only way we could turn it back is to put in ads in the Rifleman, and try to get BETTER people to run.

I like having Uncle Ted on the board, but would he, or could he, handle being Executive VP? I think he could motivate the board to go another route.

I hear ya but its kinda like politics...we hopefully dont vote for democrats or stop supporting republicans because they dont live up to the job...we vote em out and hopefully vote in better ones...NRA members need to do the same thing...if current leadership dont leave up to expectations vote em out and run em off...

Okay so where does anyone go from here?

One the one hand it looks like the new Patriot Act again gives broad leeway to stomp on our rights in the guise of "protecting" citizens. And this one goes further by stripping the act of any modicum of privacy protection for legal gun owners.

And all this was apparently "blessed" by the supposedly pro-gun politicians in D.C.

It doesn't help much to learn all this after the fact. We can scream and cry foul individually or as a group but that's about it.

The question then arises, where was the NRA? Apparently in bed with then anti-2a's.

And where are we? Apparently on the sidelines waiting for someone to do something. Well they did and I, for one, don't like it.

So now what? We can lament our bad luck or we can mobilize. Why can't we at least try to fix it?

Rather than call for the repeal of the Patriot Act (though not a bad idea IMO), we could push for a bill to reinstate our rights to privacy. Probably a much easier, and therefore, politically expedient.

The way I see it, we've lost a pile of rights on all fronts. How did this happen? Did someone propose, push through and pass a Bill of Anti-Rights? No. They chipped away little bit by little bit until they were able to accumulate a large chunk of our personal freedoms. If we want them back, our best bet would be to reverse the process.

In a way, we are already doing this (gun owners) by fighting for things like better cc laws.

So what about organizations like the NRA? Well, one can say some good things about them. They are well recognized and they do carry a bit of clout.

Maybe the real question that should be asked is can the NRA be recast into an organization resembling the one proposed in the open letter to Ted Nugent?

Is it possible to get rid of the current leadership? What do we really WANT from the NRA anyway?

What would an effective organization that could make some real progress look like?

Maybe one that could mobilize it's members to inundate our representatives so they know we are paying attention and are vocal about our wishes?

Maybe an organization that could appeal to a greater percentage of gun owners?

I don't know. I've only been here a short while, but what I've seen so far is a dedicated group of intelligent citizens with a passion for protecting our rights and our heritage. If other state groups are on a par with this one, I think we can make a difference.

Andy

I remember way back when I turned 18, old Doc Ingram cornered me at the post office and gave me a membership application to the NRA. That was over 40 years ago now. I'll never forget what he told me: "Even if you're of those young folks that think they ARE wild-eyed gun crazies, we need them to cancel out the wild-eyed anti-gun crazies. Sign up, boy; and send in your dues." Ole Doc had it right. We need the NRA precisely because it is so overgrown and bloated. It has numbers; and that scares the politicians. They are no longer deserving of the "wild-eyed gun-crazy" label. Seems to me that after LaPierre's "jack-booted thugs" remark after (was it Waco or Ruby Ridge?) they've been afraid to really call a spade a spade for fear of being "marginalized" as being too extreme and losing influence. It's a crappy game, but I can see why they feel obliged to play it. We also need the smaller organizations such as GOA, SAF and VCDL to deliver the message in terms as vivid as our strongest feelings demand.

Do I think LaPierre is overpaid? Compared to what? Compared to anyone who earns an honest living in the real world who doesn’t head a fortune 500 company, dang tootin’ he’s overpaid! But he’s a Washington Lobbyist, dammit! Compared to the other major-league Washington Lobbyists, probably not. Is it a damned shame we need to pay somebody like him that kind of money to have a voice? You betcha. But if we stop doing it, it ain’t Sarah Brady’s outfit that’ll suffer, is it? Like it or not, we NEED the NRA. And we also need the GOA, SAF, and VCDL. Each serves its purpose and the smaller organizations cannot step in and carry the burden that NRA does.

Those “GUN GUYS” are obviously an anti-gun group seeking to undermine the lobbying power of the pro-gun constituency. Even though I share much of the dissatisfaction with the NRA’s current organization and tactics, I will not cut off my nose to spite my face. I’ll keep sending them a few bucks now and then. It’s sort of like that worm medicine my momma used to make us take every spring; it tastes bad, but it protects me from insidious parasites.

+1 Dormin!

Dormin,

Your points are well taken, but is just joining and sending money enough? An organization is a group of people not an entity. You've paid your dues so your voice should be heard.

My concern is the NRA, like just about every other large organization - such as the major political parties, has become a "top-down" organization where the leadership tries to tell the rank and file what to think.

Granted any good leadership will make unpopular and sometimes seemingly nonsensical decisions, but they should garner the confidence of the membership that they are working in the best interests of the whole.

So my question is: is the NRA responsive to the membership? If not then how can they improve? Are they headed in the right direction overall? How can the membership best influence the leadership?

Surely members can vote on board members, initiate resolutions, and otherwise make their wishes known.

It is up the leadership to guide the ship. It is up to the membership to tell the leaders where they want to go.

Andy

P.S. About salaries, I don't get too concerned with these. If the leadership is effective, they'll earn every penny. If they are not, any salary is wasted.

By all means, knock yourself out. Have as much impact on the NRA as you are able. I do, too. More often than not I refuse to send them money and tell them exactly why I'm mad at them. Only occasionally do I respond positively to their begging for "more money". I do sponsor service members' dues a few times a year. But one person, or even an entire community (such as VGOF, for instance) just isn't going to have a whole lot of impact. The NRA is so dang big you might as well pee in the ocean and expect the water to turn yellow and smell like asparagus.

But Dormin...

If enough of those "NRA MEMBERS" who felt the way some of us do could just TALK to one another, and find out exactly HOW many of us were irritated with the leadership right now, we may find the NRA changing direction.

Some call it "Mutiny", I call it "Democracy in action."

Reverenddel wrote:But Dormin...

If enough of those "NRA MEMBERS" who felt the way some of us do could just TALK to one another, and find out exactly HOW many of us were irritated with the leadership right now, we may find the NRA changing direction.

Some call it "Mutiny", I call it "Democracy in action."

My point exactly.

Reverenddel wrote:But Dormin...

If enough of those "NRA MEMBERS" who felt the way some of us do could just TALK to one another, and find out exactly HOW many of us were irritated with the leadership right now, we may find the NRA changing direction.

Some call it "Mutiny", I call it "Democracy in action."

Go for it. I'll come along for the ride. But I ain't going to take any oaths to give up drinkin', chewin', or horizontal refreshment (ner anything else I think I'll miss a-tall) until we succeed.