# so finally joined the NRA



## 8Eric6 (May 9, 2010)

so I finally joined the NRA and the free gift (a pen made out of .308 win) was made in CHINA!?!?!?!


----------



## bruce333 (Sep 1, 2006)

yup, made in China, Viet Nam, Venezuela. Used to be Japan. In a few years it will be some other country.



> From: Membership @ nrahq.org
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:26 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: Life Membership
> ...


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

The NRA just backed Nancy Pelosi's democratic pet - Chet Edwards, in his re-election here. And, they may back Harry Reid.

Whether they back Harry or not, I won't give them another red cent for backing Chet Edwards. I realize others may not know all about him since he's from this district, but he needs to go. There are tons of examples in his voting record. Nancy even pushed him as a possible running mate for Obama before he picked Biden.

I realize that the NRA is a 1 issue organization - and that the republican candidate has no voting history - but the NRA could still ask where he stands on the issue of guns, and then either back him or give no recommendation at all. But to back a guy who has voted with the dem's 96-97% of the time during his whole career...

Sorry....


----------



## cougartex (Jan 2, 2010)

Be prepared for a lot of mail from the NRA. :smt047


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

cougartex said:


> Be prepared for a lot of mail from the NRA. :smt047


Oh yes...

When I first joined, I got a request to RENEW my membership within 5 days - BEFORE I even got the membership packet. It was irritating.


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Shipwreck said:


> I realize that the NRA is a 1 issue organization - and that the republican candidate has no voting history - but the NRA could still ask where he stands on the issue of guns, and then either back him or give no recommendation at all. But to back a guy who has voted with the dem's 96-97% of the time during his whole career...
> 
> Sorry....


I sympathize with you, but there are reasons they have to back the incumbent, as a single issue organization.

1. They would cease being a single issue organization, if they distinguished based on differences other than the 2nd Amendment.

2. Candidates will say anything to get elected, so an incumbent with a proven track record is safer for gun owners, as far as the second amendment is concerned.

3. The NRA would lose its lobbying power, if incumbents felt threatend by the NRA on other issues. Why would candidates aim to please the NRA, if the NRA were undermining them on other issues?

I think the NRA realizes this and hopes you vote for other pro-gun candidates of your choice. Just be sure they are pro-gun.

They simply cannot abandon an incumbent who has supported them. It would be suicidal for them......and us. I remember when they supported Buddy Darden here in Georgia. At the time, I was proud to say that I would vote for a Democrat and voted for him. When he supported Clinton's gun control, he lost the NRA's support and his office. That's where the NRA has its clout.

Other organizations have to contest the candidates on other issues.


----------



## Seabee (May 11, 2010)

I agree and I'm Proud to say... "I'm the NRA"....


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Seabee said:


> I agree and I'm Proud to say... "I'm the NRA"....


Me too :smt038


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

ScottChapin said:


> I sympathize with you, but there are reasons they have to back the incumbent, as a single issue organization.
> 
> 1. They would cease being a single issue organization, if they distinguished based on differences other than the 2nd Amendment.
> 
> ...


Well, Chet needs to be voted out for dozens of reasons - ones that become apparent to all of us in his district. I will never be part of a group that will support such a liberal democrat, whatever their excuse is. Sorry.

And if they back Harry Reid, I think they will see some of their membership shrink. This issue has been discussed on a few sites, and some people have sent letters and resigned.

Out of sheer principal, I can't back a group that will back Chet.

Also, that move they made with the dems to support that disclosure law, also irritated many NRA members.


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Shipwreck said:


> And if they back Harry Reid, I think they will see some of their membership shrink. This issue has been discussed on a few sites, and some people have sent letters and resigned.


They aren't, officially, since he backed the anti-gun supreme court nominations. He betrayed the NRA, so he is out of their grace!



> Out of sheer principal, I can't back a group that will back Chet.


Well, again, they have no choice, other than to back him. Politics is a messy game. I'll bet they are hoping that you won't vote for him, but they cannot take that stance.



> Also, that move they made with the dems to support that disclosure law, also irritated many NRA members.


Yeah, it's an irritating game of survival. They banked on preserving their pro-gun voice and hope that the law would be reversed, since it is unconstitutional. The problem isn't the NRA, it's the Dems, and the NRA is struggling for Second Amendment survival. I was miffed at first, but now that I understand why they did it, it makes me more irate with the progressive bastards.

The NRA probably has a strong secret wish that you don't vote for the Democrats. They still have to support pro-gun incumbents.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

I wish I could fluently come up with all the counter reasons why this is sheer stupidity and selling out - as I have seen some great arguments that don't cut the NRA any slack. Sorry I can't be as eloquent. But, I'll never give them a penny. I am actually donating to the other candidate and doing what I can.


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Shipwreck said:


> I am actually donating to the other candidate and doing what I can.


I would too. They are probably hoping you do as well.

Unfortunately it's a "united we stand, divided we fall" situation. I have never been a member of an organization where all members agreed with each other 100% of the time....sigh. I suppose that is a good thing though.

The NRA has been a driving force behind preventing bad laws and enacting good laws nationwide. I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bath water.


----------



## 8Eric6 (May 9, 2010)

cougartex said:


> Be prepared for a lot of mail from the NRA. :smt047


haha yep already getting lots o junk mail


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

The NRA is not going to endorse Harry Reid, it was on Fox news, and the NRA site. :smt1099

http://www.nrapvf.org/news/Read.aspx?ID=14170&T=1


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

That's all fine and dandy - and that is GOOD news.

But they are supporting Democrat extraordinare, Nancy Pelosi's Pet, Chet Edwards.


Beeep. Wrong answer!


----------



## MitchellB (Aug 14, 2010)

I just recently re-uped my membership. I'm supposed to get a little duffel bag.


----------



## sig225 (Aug 30, 2010)

Yes sir ... that's was the first thing that came to my mind when you mentioned joing the NRA. I believe they are also part of the NMA (National Mail Association) :smt1099


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> That's all fine and dandy - and that is GOOD news.
> 
> But they are supporting Democrat extraordinare, Nancy Pelosi's Pet, Chet Edwards.
> 
> Beeep. Wrong answer!


Can you give me a source on that ship and see if I can find out why. I can't find it.


----------



## Couch Potato (Jun 3, 2010)

*Earned NRA support.*



Baldy said:


> Can you give me a source on that ship and see if I can find out why. I can't find it.


Here is a story showing the NRA endorsed Chet Edwards. A little research into his voting record will show why. He has strongly supported the NRA agenda for the past eight years. As a practical matter I don't see where the NRA had any other choice. If they build a record of not supporting candidates that support them, the NRA would lose all ability to promote their cause. A single issue group cannot afford to choose who to support based on the overall picture. They certainly cannot afford to affiliate with any one political party.

A choice to support the NRA is a choice to support gun rights through all possible means, even Democrats.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

He received a pour rating from the NRA once upon a time... He apparently has changed on this 1 issue.

The problem is that he votes with the Dems 96-97% of the time.

There was also a vote to kill the health care blll. he voted to let it go thru when he could have voted to kill it... All the while telling us in our district that he hadn't made up his mind. Then once that prodecural change had passed, making it easier for the bill to sail thru.. The dems figured out how many extra votes they had, and let a few dems with tough re-election campaigns to slide, and he could vote against it.

So, if he was really against it, he could have voted to kill the bill.

there is several other examples of his pour voting record. He REALLY is Nancy's lapdog.

I get that the NRA is a single issue organization. But he one of the fanatical dems that must be replaced. The NRA should either have supported the Republican challenger, or sat it out. 

I've had this discussion on other forums, by pro NRA guys that want to excuse this action - and the single issue argument is used. I get it. But I'd sooner support a monkey over Chet Edwards. He needs to be replaced in Congress. If the NRA backs him, they loose my support in the future. End of story.

-


----------



## Couch Potato (Jun 3, 2010)

I get why you think the guy needs to go. I know first hand what it is like to have an idiot representing you in congress. Nancy Pelosi was my representative years ago when I lived in CA. Not to mention I grew up in Georgia's 4th district, the place dumb enough to elect Cynthia Mckinney. Anyone named "Edwards" is not going to bring up fond associations to the memory of anybody here in NC. 

It probably would be best for the guy to be replaced, but I don't see it as a do or die issue. If he were my representative I might feel differently. I don't think it really matters much at this point. Our country is like a truck heading down a mountain with no brakes. Who is behind the wheel will only affect the severity of the crash that is inevitable. From a gun rights perspective Chet Edwards is as good as money can buy. The NRA is simply choosing not to throw away their purchase.


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Couch Potato said:


> Not to mention I grew up in Georgia's 4th district, the place dumb enough to elect Cynthia Mckinney.


Oh I do feel sorry for your past. Pelosi wants to pass bills in order to determine what's in them! What morons the voters are.

Sometimes I think that truck needs to smash into a brick wall, so we can pick up the pieces and start over :-(


----------



## dosborn (Apr 17, 2009)

cougartex said:


> Be prepared for a lot of mail from the NRA. :smt047


That was the first thing to come to mind when I saw the tread title. I get 3-4 items a week.

I wonder how much that costs them/us.


----------



## Couch Potato (Jun 3, 2010)

*Tell the NRA you don't want all the junk mail.*



dosborn said:


> That was the first thing to come to mind when I saw the tread title. I get 3-4 items a week.
> 
> I wonder how much that costs them/us.


No need to get mail you don't want. The following is found on the NRA web site.

Q: How can I reduce the amount of mail I receive from the NRA?
A: Simply email us at [email protected] or dial 800-NRA-3888 and request to be placed on the "Do Not Promote" list. This will significantly reduce the amount of mail you receive without affecting important mailings, magazine service, or your membership renewal.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

The guys who join for $25 or $35 a year probably have all their money spent on postage and junk mail


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

Shipwreck said:


> The guys who join for $25 or $35 a year probably have all their money spent on postage and junk mail


and it must pay off!


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Couch Potato said:


> Here is a story showing the NRA endorsed Chet Edwards. A little research into his voting record will show why. He has strongly supported the NRA agenda for the past eight years. As a practical matter I don't see where the NRA had any other choice. If they build a record of not supporting candidates that support them, the NRA would lose all ability to promote their cause. A single issue group cannot afford to choose who to support based on the overall picture. They certainly cannot afford to affiliate with any one political party
> 
> A choice to support the NRA is a choice to support gun rights through all possible means, even Democrats.


Thanks for the info on this guy.:smt1099



Shipwreck said:


> The guys who join for $25 or $35 a year probably have all their money spent on postage and junk mail


I see a lot of folks who use anything they can to justify not belonging to the NRA. If everybody that has a interest in guns for what ever reason would join, we could stop all this noncense that the left wing wackos come up with. I been in the NRA since back in the 60s and yes they have done a lot of things I didn't care for, but they also done a lot of good. More than any other outfit out there. Nobody has the clout like the NRA in Washington, nobody is even close. Nothing wrong with belonging to other outfits to. I donate some to a few others but more to the NRA than any of the others.


----------



## twomode (Jun 7, 2009)

My stats might be off but 100 million guns, owned by 40 million legally armed Americans. I'm cool with the NRA being a one issue organization. They're the biggest and best at protecting our rights. That fact CANNOT be denied. I have no problems with their solicitations, it costs alot of money to fight federally backed gun-grabbers. If you're not a member, you need to be 'cause out of 40 million, only 10% are members. That fact disturbs me even more.


----------



## ScottChapin (Jul 7, 2010)

twomode said:


> That fact disturbs me even more.


What disturbs me even more, is the fact that a local pro-gun group solicited me and I signed up for their emails. Then I got bombarded with anti-NRA emails. I won't give a red cent to them, because we need not be so divisive!

Needless to say, I unsbscribed. I never appreciated folks who build themselves up by tearing other folks down.


----------

