# NRA may be in trouble



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

May be violating FEC and IRS laws pertaining to donations.
Story here: https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-nras-deceptive-shell-game-with-donations-a-116744915796.html


----------



## jtguns (Sep 25, 2011)

Its a hit piece on the NRA.


----------



## shootbrownelk (May 18, 2014)

The current administration including O'Bummer and the DOJ figure head, the worthless Eric Holder have been on a crusade to destroy the NRA since the beginning. This is the current attack. I wonder what they'd find if they investigated Hildabeast's campaign finance contributors and where their money ends up? Important finance matters, like what it cost the Clintons to have Vince Foster whacked.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

Perhaps its a perception thing for me, but the ILA seems to have taken the wheel of the NRA.

Phone calls, money begging, fear mongering..... it has gone beyond annoying.

What happened to the old NRA? Encouraging shooting sports, safety training, history and collecting?
It seems the Rifleman has all these ads for gold, the government at your door, send more money..... with brief interruptions about firearms.

I've yet to see anything on those SUPER Sweepstakes Winners from the ones I entered LAST YEAR.

I would like to see more articles on repairs, tactical practices and drills, safety, even refreshers on your responsibility as a CCW (whether a permit is needed or not)


It seems if more people saw shooting sports as an enjoyable Safe hobby and participated in it, 
there would be a lot more objection to those trying to take away any parts of gun ownership.

I suspect this would be a much more productive effort instead of this stupid battle of who's the bigger idiot, hoplophiliacs or hoplophobics.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

CW said:


> Perhaps its a perception thing for me, but the ILA seems to have taken the wheel of the NRA.
> 
> Phone calls, money begging, fear mongering..... it has gone beyond annoying.
> 
> ...


All of that ^^^ is why I have not been a member since '87. Teach people how fun it is to shoot, don't scare them by making guns only for self-defence against the bogey-man. Sorry, bogey-MEN, coz they are sh!t scared of all sorts of things, apparently.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

SailDesign said:


> All of that ^^^ is why I have not been a member since '87. Teach people how fun it is to shoot, don't scare them by making guns only for self-defence against the bogey-man. Sorry, bogey-MEN, coz they are sh!t scared of all sorts of things, apparently.


Maybe we can hope the NRA Old School (no politics) Conservatives take back power.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

CW said:


> Maybe we can hope the NRA Old School (no politics) Conservatives take back power.


I would join again happily.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

CW said:


> Perhaps its a perception thing for me, but the ILA seems to have taken the wheel of the NRA.
> 
> Phone calls, money begging, fear mongering..... it has gone beyond annoying.
> 
> ...


If your questions are more than rhetorical, I suggest you find and read "American Shooter". by Gerry Souter. The NRA is not its main focus, but its gradual devolution is there, along with the evolution of the shooting sports.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

CW said:


> Maybe we can hope the NRA Old School (no politics) Conservatives take back power.


I am an Endowment member, a Life member since 1983. I still kick in $10 or so every year, as an entry in one of their raffles. I apply a BS filter to the emails, and sometimes contact my 'people in Washington' because of them. There are occasional nuggets in the gravel.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

An Obama Administration attack plot. Besides, I'd rather give my "illegal" political contributions to them than to allow Bill and Hillary to get all that "Foundation" money from foreign governments and basically fund their agenda with it. 

so...........whose the bigger crook? the NRA or Hillary??? I'm betting it's Hillary by a long shot.


----------



## shootbrownelk (May 18, 2014)

CW said:


> Maybe we can hope the NRA Old School (no politics) Conservatives take back power.


 Gun ownership vs. Gun-grabbing zealots is nothing but politics. Wake up.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

shootbrownelk said:


> Gun ownership vs. Gun-grabbing zealots is nothing but politics. Wake up.


Wake up?


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Do not forget how they brought Al Capone down..... Our government has made so many laws that no one can keep up with them...... Basically our government can take down any entity at any time with all its laws(probably even us)...... Since there are so many laws the justice system is based on the catch all phrase of "Ignorance to the law is no excuse"........... This puts the so called violator of the law(s) between the rock and the hard place............. God bless America..............


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Don't they wish. No NRA = No second amendment. I don' t believe that's too terribly hard to understand. No politics, yea right. Pro gun laws, Anti gun laws and defending attempts at new gun laws such as Feinstiens Assault weapons ban are enacted by politicians(mainly democrats). You are either with us or them. Join the NRA today, or make a donation would be my advice, or just ride on the back of others and/or hide beneath your sheep's clothing. You make the choice.


"Some of it quickly found its way into the account of the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund, the NRA’s political action committee." How would he know that?

Gone are the good "ole" innocent days of the NRA not having to be political to defend and support the 2nd Amendment. If you want to blame any particular party for the change of the NRA being political, blame the progressive democrats.


----------



## shootbrownelk (May 18, 2014)

CW said:


> Wake up?


That's what I said, are you hard of reading? People had better wake up and fight BS like this Attack on the NRA by O'Bummer and his cohorts.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

shootbrownelk said:


> That's what I said, are you hard of reading? People had better wake up and fight BS like this Attack on the NRA by O'Bummer and his cohorts.


Oh, give me a break.....

I can't freaking WAIT for the next Prez (probably a Republican) to start making gun control laws, just to watch conservative heads explode.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

denner:


> Don't they wish. No NRA = No second amendment. I don' t believe that's too terribly hard to understand.


Unfortunately, for some it is. Even those that claim to be on our side. Great post!


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SailDesign:


> I can't freaking WAIT for the next Prez (*probably a Republican*) to start making gun control laws, just to watch conservative heads explode.


I'm glad you acknowledge that. I can't wait either, I think "Da Bitch" is gonna go down like a ton of bricks. Not even the mainstream media will be able to cover up for all that baggage. Who knows she may be indicted before then? All those foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State. Quid pro quo? Oh yeah, now that she's running for president they've since stepped down from the foundation. Guess who's running it now? Chelsea! You just can't make this stuff up. These people have absolutely no shame. The deleted e-mails, Benghazi, Cattle Futures, Vince Foster suicide, dodging sniper fire, Travelgate, Filegate, Whitewater. Did I leave anything out?

$200,000 for a single speaking engagement, and she goes around criticizing executive pay. She condemns wealth and the 1% while the Clinton's net worth is around 200 million. I wonder how they got all that money? According to her they were "flat broke". They're almost as rich as Romney. Yeah, she's one of us all right, our champion. The only thing the Clintons are champions of are the Clintons. Oh, I almost forgot she did vote in favor of the Iraqi War, yet is quick to criticize the Bush administration over it. Such hypocrisy!

During the Monica Lewinsky scandal Bill Clinton sent his closest friends and surrogates out there to defend him, making fools out of themselves. While all along he knew he was lying. I think it was Ross Perot who said; "If he doesn't care about his close friends and surrogates, how much do you think he cares about people he doesn't even know?" The only reason "Da Bitch" stuck with him is to further her own political ambitions. The Clintons as far as I'm concerned are amongst the most despicable, loathsome swines that ever held public office. Can the people who elected them really be that stupid?

If a Republican does get elected and it looks, more than likely one will. I sincerely doubt that we are going to see any more gun control laws getting enacted. You can't be serious?


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

desertman said:


> <snippage>
> 
> If a Republican does get elected and it looks, more than likely one will. I sincerely doubt that we are going to see any more gun control laws getting enacted. You can't be serious?


Wel, I'm no fan of Hillary's, and I hope she is not the Democratic front-runner.

On the gun control thing, rumor has it that W signed more than BOB will. No, have no source, but will try to find one. A suitably non-liberal one if possible.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

As long as the Republicans hold majorities in both houses, no anti-gun bill will make it to any Prez's desk.:smt033 Just sayin.

How a bill becomes law:

http://mercury.educ.kent.edu/database/eureka/documents/HowABillBecomesALaw_TeacherAndStudent.pdf


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

denner said:


> As long as the Republicans hold majorities in both houses, no anti-gun bill will make it to any Prez's desk.:smt033 Just sayin.


Just you wait, 'Enry 'Iggins.....


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> Just you wait, 'Enry 'Iggins.....


Well, Yes, but No.

I think I was thinking of this one, which is kind of a double negative, really. 

Obama Signed More Repeals of Federal Gun Policies Than Bush | Politic365

If i find the one my memory THINKS it remembers, i'll let you know.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SailDesign:


> On the gun control thing, rumor has it that W signed more than BOB will. No, have no source, but will try to find one. A suitably non-liberal one if possible.


The reason that BOB (Obama) didn't sign any gun control bills is because none ever made it out of congress. You should know that. BOB is no friend of the 2nd Amendment. You can be sure that if any anti gun bills had passed in congress he would be sure to sign them. You seem to be an honest guy, please don't try and pass off the black militant to be something he isn't. His contempt for the 2nd Amendment and those who believe in it are well documented. Remember "bitter clingers"? He had given numerous speeches while he was both a state and federal senator where he stated that he didn't believe in the "civilian possession of firearms". Neither does the Democratic Party for that matter. They (DNC) and Obama also do not believe in "Constitutional Law". They've claimed more times than I can remember that the constitution is a "Living breathing document". Who's kidding who here?


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

desertman said:


> SailDesign:
> 
> The reason that BOB (Obama) didn't sign any gun control bills is because none ever made it out of congress. You should know that. BOB is no friend of the 2nd Amendment. You can be sure that if any anti gun bills had passed in congress he would be sure to sign them. You seem to be an honest guy, please don't try and pass off the black militant to be something he isn't. His contempt for the 2nd Amendment and those who believe in it are well documented. Remember "bitter clingers"? He had given numerous speeches while he was both a state and federal senator where he stated that he didn't believe in the "civilian possession of firearms". Neither does the Democratic Party for that matter. They (DNC) and Obama also do not believe in "Constitutional Law". They've claimed more times than I can remember that the constitution is a "Living breathing document". Who's kidding who here?


Aaaaand we disagree again. 

In other news, it's sunny here, but the temps could be higher.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

What I fear of the Dems are laws that disarm the public and solidify socialist-elitist control.

What I fear of the GOP is international cow-towing treaties that disarms the public secretly and solidifies global OWG control.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

SailDesign said:


> ..............sunny here, but the temps could be higher.


Where's Al Gore when you need him?


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

CW said:


> What I fear of the Dems are laws that disarm the public and solidify socialist-elitist control.
> 
> What I fear of the GOP is international cow-towing treaties that disarms the public secretly and solidifies global OWG control.


"Socialist-elitist" is an oxymoron. 

The TRUE elitists are the billionaires - Romneys, Kochs (God save us from them and ANYONE they "sponsor"), etc. Yes, there are some Democrat billionaires, but the deck is heavily stacked to the Right. Socialists (I mean true socialists)? Not so much...


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Saildesign:


> Obama Signed More Repeals of Federal Gun Policies Than Bush | Politic365


That report was done by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. They will do anything they can to deceive gun owners into believing that Obama and the DNC are our friends. The objective is to lull gun owners into complacency. Once the Democrats have full control of government we can kiss our 2nd Amendment and "Constitutional law" goodbye. Sure maybe they did throw us a few bones, trying to convince us that they are truly on our side. I'm certainly not falling for it. Because of the Supreme Court decision they have not been able to achieve their goals as of yet. All it will take is a few more Liberal judges on the bench to reverse or render meaningless that decision. Some governmental agency either state or local will ban either this or that. The court will rule that it does not violate the 2nd Amendment as it doesn't ban all firearms. This will further set the stage for the abolition of the 2nd Amendment for all it's intents and purposes. This in spite of the fact that the Heller/McDonald decision confirmed that the 2nd Amendment is indeed an individual right, it applies to all firearms that are in "common use" and is "unrelated to service in a militia". However they did leave the door open for further restrictions. What those could be is anybody's guess. It will all depend on the make up of the Supreme Court at the time.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SailDesign:


> Aaaaand we disagree again


It's not whether we disagree or not. I've presented you with hard cold facts, just as the sun is shining here right now in Arizona, you just refuse to accept it.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

SailDesign said:


> "Socialist-elitist" is an oxymoron.  ......


I like dumb cows - especially ribeye.

I suppose there are various forms of socialism, but with greed and power motivating, they all lead to tyranny.

Even communism is a great idea - everyone has enough, everyone works for the betterment of his neighbor. It will never happen in this world.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

desertman said:


> SailDesign:
> 
> It's not whether we disagree or not. I've presented you with hard cold facts, just as the sun is shining here right now in Arizona, you just refuse to accept it.


Your "cold hard facts" are as suspect to me as my report (albeit from the Brady Foundation) obviously is to you.

Ergo - we disagree. Ain't no big thing. Happens all the time with civilised people - that's why the word "discussion" exists. The trick is to live with the fact that others see the world differently, and move on. i honestly don't care which Prez did the most, or least, or whatever. I DO care that the NRA, who I dislike, are the only high-profile organisation apparently fighting for 2A. Because I dislike their tactics.

We can discuss this, of course.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

CW said:


> I like dumb cows - especially ribeye.
> 
> I suppose there are various forms of socialism, but with greed and power motivating, they all lead to tyranny.
> 
> Even communism is a great idea - everyone has enough, everyone works for the betterment of his neighbor. It will never happen in this world.


Oh, shoot Yes, on that last one. Like hippie communes, it never quite works because there is always someone who feels they have worked harder/deserve more/something else. Lovely idea, just never going to work.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> Oh, shoot Yes, on that last one. Like hippie communes, it never quite works because there is always someone who feels they have worked harder/deserve more/something else. Lovely idea, just never going to work.


I haven't read Marx and don't intend to, so the 'state withering away' thing may not be his notion. That wasn't the USSR design, nor the one ticking away in China. Both of those were/are forms of formula oligarchy, with no provision for 'withering'. The plutocrats now in the ascendancy certainly have no plans for withering; they are going the Puppet State route, wherein the _whole thing_ is essentially a bureaucracy functioning for their benefit.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

hillman said:


> The plutocrats now in the ascendancy certainly have no plans for withering; they are going the Puppet State route, wherein the _whole thing_ is essentially a bureaucracy functioning for their benefit.


and it produces nothing for anyone else. It has to grow to survive, lest it fail. We need to do something to limit it's growth. Those in power do no good for all, they do good only for themselves and their riches. Our elected officials don't really care what happens in the system as long as there is no political upheaval. The contentment of the masses is all they worry about, and it is only for their own survival that they worry about it. It really makes no difference which party is in power, they only seek to keep power for their own gains, not to improve the lot of the common man. "We" have allowed this to happen by becoming complacent and expecting the status quo to continue. The government only seeks more "control" to protect itself from being displaced. Disarm those seeking to displace the government, and you have secured more power unto the government.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I thought oxymoron was a laundry detergent? :watching:


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> I thought oxymoron was a laundry detergent? :watching:


I'll bet you thought cunnilingus was an Irish airline, too...


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

SailDesign said:


> Wel, I'm no fan of Hillary's, and I hope she is not the Democratic front-runner.


Too bad the DNC doesn't allow 20 democrats to have a year-long free-for-all to see which candidate appeals to their lowly rank-and-file members. Wouldn't be prudent to scatter campaign funds all over the place, and have disagreements about the platform...wait... there is no platform, I forgot.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Bisley said:


> Too bad the DNC doesn't allow 20 democrats to have a year-long free-for-all to see which candidate appeals to their lowly rank-and-file members. Wouldn't be prudent to scatter campaign funds all over the place, and have disagreements about the platform...wait... there is no platform, I forgot.


Sadly, the only platform either side really has is "We don't like That Other Guy"


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

SailDesign said:


> I'll bet you thought cunnilingus was an Irish airline, too...


I can't even pronounce it......let alone know what it means. :smt083


----------



## TurboHonda (Aug 4, 2012)

Colonel Angus


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

I thought he was referring to a clever interpreter or a cunning linguist.

GW


----------

