I believe that compromise on something that's an inalienable right is bad.
This is a discussion on Does The NRA Compromise Too Much? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Without a doubt, the NRA is the most effective pro-gun lobbying group. However, some people complain that they compromise too much. People seem to have ...
Without a doubt, the NRA is the most effective pro-gun lobbying group. However, some people complain that they compromise too much.
People seem to have two opinions when it comes to the NRA compromising.
One side feels that comprimise is a necessary evil in politics, and that gun owners sometimes have to give a little in order win over all.
The other side feels that the NRA is giving our rights away a little at a time. They feel that NO COMPROMISE groups such as the GOA (Gun Owners of America http://www.gunowners.org) has it right.
What do you think?
I believe that compromise on something that's an inalienable right is bad.
Looking back the NRA compromised when the anti's had free rain. I remember when they were dragged in front of the anti's in the 90's they couldn't get a word in edge wise. In the last 6 years the tide has moved very greatly in our favor. The NRA quickly push when the moment is right. I think its their way of picking their battles.
-Diplomacy: The art of saying nice dogie until you can find a rock.
-The truth is a three edged sword.
-Your brain is your primary weapon everything else is just a tool.
-When the only tool you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail.
Exactly.I believe that compromise on something that's an inalienable right is bad.
There is no way in heck that we should ever compromise anything in the second amendment and that pesky little statement in it that says"shall not be infringed".
If any compromising is to be done then let the socialist fiends that seek to destroy this country one amendment at a time be the ones to do it...
and how it actually works are two different animals...
The NRA is a strong voice in fighting for our rights, and they have made a BIG difference here in Florida...
I support them as often as I can...
Proverbs 27:12 says: “The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it.”
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
Compromise on an inalienable right is bad.
But sometimes necessary.
If you think we shouldn't compromise, I imagine you don't observe any posted weapons restrictions, right? No, the fact that you are able to carry signals that you don't regularly open carry in "infringed" locales.
It's a judgement call-- deciding each day what our response will be to the forces aligned against us. The NRA does the same. I haven't always agreed with each decisioin the NRA has made, and I doubt that I ever will. I do think they are the single most effective voice against the gun-grabbers we have.
I know I wouldn't want to be in the NRA's crosshairs.
Obeying the posted law is not quite the same thing as a compromise.If you think we shouldn't compromise, I imagine you don't observe any posted weapons restrictions, right? No, the fact that you are able to carry signals that you don't regularly open carry in "infringed" locales.
Comprimising on the written law of the land, in this case the Constitution of the United States, is exactly what got us to this dilemma in the first place.
Somethings can be comprimised. The Law of the Land, should not be. To compromise any part of it is to systematically destroy it piece by piece.
Trying to lay blame is _not_ something I normally take part in, but whoever was watching over our rights in 1934 was sleeping on duty.
The NFA should have been immediatly challenged in the courts. It's _much_ more difficult to get rid of unconstitutional laws when they've been in place for 70 years.
The NRA is the only gun rights organazation I'm aware of that existed in 1934. The NRA's legislative Affairs department was created in 1934, specifically to combat attacks on our rights. The NRA _SPONSORED_ the draconian gun laws adopted in D.C., and supported the passage of the NFA.
The NRA is the largest single voice in support of gun owners rights. I appreciate their work, but there's no doubt that their position at that critical time is a dark blot on their history.
Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. It's worth it.
There is the world of what should be and what can be.
The GOA lives in the world that should be. They will never get there but I support them for trying.
The NRA lives in the world of what can be. They will never attain all of what the GOA wants but they achieve more than it ever will.
GOA is made up of pure idealists. They push on everything with all they have therefore their effect is diluted, not focused and alienates many in the middle who sit on the fence. Their motive is pure and obvious though, therefore easier to ally oneself with if you agree with them.
NRA is made of realistic idealists. They know when to push and when to lay off in order to further the largest part of their agenda. Sometimes they admit to having to bite the bullet and work with bad legislation to minimize its impact if it is going to pass anyway. It is hard to make that decision and many feel superior by refusing to acknoledge the reality of the situation. The compromise is a danger and they must always be aware of just how and where they do.
Back when Tom Washington and Neal Knox were running the NRA they were a hardnosed, in your face organization that idealistically held the hard line. As the Dems were in control of both houses of Congress and the Whitehouse they made ZERO progress and lost a lot. The "hardline" was not palitable to the majority of the population and NRA membership dropped dramatically.
Enter Marion Hammer, grandma and then Heston who took a much more concilliatory approach. Not so much chest thumping, giving a bit here and there. Now there was much less opposition for the sake of opposition. The arguements being made were more acceptable to the sheeple and membership grew, political gains commenced.
We didn't lose our 2 Amendment rights overnight and we'll not get them back overnight. Today we are head and shoulders better off than we were when Reagan came to power. Bush 41 was no friend to gun owners. We all know about Clinton, Reno, Feinstein, Schumer, Brady and the rest of the bunch. Right now they're frustrated.
It's good to have CCRTKA and the GOA in that they show the polititians what we really want and the NRA (the powerhouse) lets them know what we'll accept this time around. The next time around we'll demand a bit more until we finally get what we wanted to begin with.
I understand your frustration with the NRA, but the political reality is that just as the anti's got their wins a bit at a time, we'll get them overturned a bit at a time... You gotta be patient.
Let the NRA offer the carrot, and GOA the stick!
And let VCDL type organizations (www.vcdl.org) really dish out the heartburn! They accomplish more at the state level than either NRA or GOA could federally.
"Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18
Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
Paramedics With Guns Scare People!
Being a member of smaller organizations is great showing support for them is outstanding they do get alot done at the state level; however, the Politcal weight Rests with the NRA. NOT being a Member of the NRA is very Counter Productive.
Firearms Freedoms do NOT rest with you "SOULY" the Concealed Handgun Permit Holder.
Hunters, Wildlife preservation, BSA, 4-H, Jaycees, Royal Rangers, Law Enforcement, Military, Firearms Awareness Programs Eddie Eagle, Womens Programs, Refuse to a Victim Programs, NMLRA, Shooting Sports...Etc... I could go on, but I'm hoping you understand there is a bigger picture to enjoying firearms and your freedoms than having the ability to walk around with a concealed handgun on your hip ( that is a big issue but not the whole issue)
Last edited by Rob99VMI04; October 26th, 2006 at 04:02 PM.
I agree. Some see the NRA as compromising too much, but maybe it's a little naive to think that we can just stand like a monolith, unmoving and unyielding, but that's the kind of brittleness that gets broken. (Think of the oak v. the willow in a wind metaphor.)
It is very likely that the NRA is choosing where they can make the most of opportunities. And it's true that when people are fighting to take away something that's yours, you may have to yield something in order to protect something else -- and no one is saying we won't come out swinging to take back ground that may have been deliberately temporarily compromised away.
Who else has the connections and the inroads and the sheer resources, at this point, to do what the NRA does, and to keep tabs on what congressional scumbags like Schumer, Kennedy and Feinstein are up to?