NRA Board member against assault weapons
This is a discussion on NRA Board member against assault weapons within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; If nothing else Mr. Jackson needs to know how how presant NRA members and those who are about to become one feel about his statements. ...
August 15th, 2007 06:57 PM
If nothing else Mr. Jackson needs to know how how presant NRA members and those who are about to become one feel about his statements. Either he is for or against the NRA and now is the time to make his choice or find new job that supports his true feelings. I hold no bad feelings towards Mr Zumbo or Mr Jackson.
August 15th, 2007 06:59 PM
I received the same reply to my email as Mad_Max. However, his statement concerning "fully automatic" weapons still bothers me somewhat. It is my belief that to shoot a "fully automatic" weapon recreationally is protected by the 2A. I know a line must be drawn somewhere, but I don't believe automatic small arms is the line. Nukes, biologicals and chemicals yes but not small arms.
August 15th, 2007 07:12 PM
Originally Posted by ronwill
August 15th, 2007 07:44 PM
Here is a transcript of the last video of that interview, where the interviewer brings up assault rifles. I am sure there are some errors on my part so if anyone has better ears than I, please post corrections.
Interviewer: A lot of law enforcement are concerned about things like assault weapons, which they really don't feel contribute to the keeping of the peace.
Jackson Well I'm a person that believes a weapon should never- I personally believe that a weapon, as far as civilian, should never have over a five round capacity If you're a hunter -if your a hunter- If your going hunting with a weapon, you shouldn't ought to need but one round.
Interviewer: if you're any good
Jackson: If you're a good shot
Interviewer: chuckles right
Jackson: Five rounds will be plenty
Interviewer: Chuckles So have you brought this to the attention of your fellow board members that maybe assault weapons ought to be restricted.
Jackson: Well we've talked-we've discussed this you know, and but ah, this thing with assault weapons has been a touchy deal. But personally, I think that assault weapons, ah, basically need to be in the hands of the military and need to be in the hands of the police.. ah, But, ah as far as assault weapons to a civilian. if you- its - its alright if you've got that magazine down to five.
Interviewer: down to five
Jackson : five five...unclear
Jackson yep Five or something...unclear
August 15th, 2007 07:52 PM
Joaquin Jackson is a retired Texas Ranger. It is sad that he sold out to the hype. He was a great Ranger.
NRA Pistol Instructor
NRA Life Member
Amateur Radio License KE5LDO
August 15th, 2007 08:40 PM
From what I have heard I have to agree. This really is not about Jackson but instead about the position of the NRA and tolerance for these attitudes at the highest levels of that organization.
Originally Posted by Reloader
I have to say that his integrity and honesty really come into question when you read the transcript- then his statement.
The first thing he does is take the conversation from "keeping the peace" to "hunting". This attitude with the NRA is one of my biggest issues. The second amendment is not about hunting... we need to put a stop to that line of thinking....
Next his proclamation that he was referring to machine gun (full auto) is an insult to the intelligence to everyone, NRA member or not. Who is hunting with a machine gun???
That simply is not credible when you listen to that interview. In fact his statements do not at all seem limited to rifles but to all firearms....a machine gun with a 5 round magazine...who does he think he is kidding. He was talking about semi autos plain and simple. So he lied...or he is stupid and I don't think the guy is stupid at all.
Jackson is entitled to have his opinion and all due respect for his past service. That does not mean he gets to remain on the board of the NRA. Nor does it mean that he gets to lie to the membership regarding the intent and language of what he was saying.
As far as I can see the NRA is getting watered down and infiltrated everyday....we keep giving up ground. If they keep going they will make themselves obsolete...guns will be history, like Britain and Australia. You'll be lucky if you can carry mace or a pocket knife. The line in the sand need to be drawn.....
If he really regrets his statements he should have just said that- not lied about what he was saying....He gave the anti gun people too much ammunition.
Again with all due respect to Mr. Jackson past service as a Texas Ranger.....
August 15th, 2007 08:47 PM
I have known many cops that are very pro the 2nd amendment. In fact I have been surprise how many that I meet do believe in a civilians right to bear arms.
Originally Posted by Sig 210
August 16th, 2007 08:13 AM
"The first thing he does is take the conversation from "keeping the peace" to "hunting". This attitude with the NRA is one of my biggest issues. The second amendment is not about hunting... we need to put a stop to that line of thinking...."
The only way that we as NRA members can put a stop to that line of thinking by NRA board members is to elect true supporters of the 2nd Amendment. Candidates for the NRA board write up their own blurb about their pro-gun accomplishments for voters to peruse. Never mind that Sarah Brady could make herself look like a supporter of the 2nd Amendment.
Before you vote for new NRA board members do some checking into their background. A most cursory check would have shown that Jackson has never been pro-gun.
Bottom line: These guys do not just get onto the NRA board. They get elected to the board because of their pro-gun accomplishents and/or their status in life: i.e. Texas Ranger. Yes, some of them lie just like Jackson did. NRA members need to un-elect Jackson when he comes up for re-election. Lots of folks know that Jackson is anti but they will vote for him anyway because he wrote a book and is a retired cop.
August 16th, 2007 08:39 AM
Hell, Even by his response I still don't trust the bugger! WTH is wrong with "fully automatic"?
Originally Posted by falcon1
"My God David, We're a Civilized society."
"Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
-The Mist (2007)
August 16th, 2007 11:00 AM
His "clarification" is a LIE and he should be Zumboed immediately if not sooner.
He said no one should have more than a 5-round ammo capacity except the annointed special people who are better than the rest of us. He did NOT say anything about full auto.
Now I'm mad.
"...bad decisions that turn out well often make heroes."
Gary D. Mitchell, A Sniper's Journey: The Truth About the Man and the Rifle, P. 103, NAL Caliber books, 2006, 1st Ed.
August 16th, 2007 12:56 PM
I am glad you're mad....people need to write to the NRA. It does not matter if this is two years old. He is still sitting on the board and we need people in that position who support the 2nd amendment.
Originally Posted by randytulsa2
There is a cold wind blowing our way in terms of gun ownership and the NRA needs to draw a line in the sand rather than continually falling back....Otherwise what good are they.
I will say that I still am considering becoming a member of the NRA just so I have a more credible voice. If we loose the NRA we loose the 2nd amendment.....
August 16th, 2007 03:08 PM
"I will say that I still am considering becoming a member of the NRA just so I have a more credible voice. If we loose the NRA we loose the 2nd amendment....."
You are complaining about the entire NRA leadership because one ELECTED board member is an anti. The NRA leadership cannot fire a board member who was elected by the rank and file membership.
The problem is not the NRA, it is the former Texas Ranger, Jackson, and those who voted him into office. Then it turns out that you are not a member of the NRA-great. Join the NRA and then complain.
August 16th, 2007 03:13 PM
I thought the same thing when I read it...I'm not buying it and I think it's a CYA letter.
Originally Posted by randytulsa2
Perhaps sending letters to Ted Nugent would also be appropriate. He did a great job educating Mr. Zumbo and he would actually have access to Jackson.
August 16th, 2007 04:01 PM
What do you mean "then it turns out"......I think my letter (which is posted here in this thread) was very clear on this.
Originally Posted by Sig 210
I think it is reasonable for me to study an organization and thier core philosophies, before for I send them my hard earned money and give them my support.
As for Jackson if you disagree I accept, and fully respect that. I would suggest you too send an email with your opinion.
The NRA got a lot of credibility from me by responding the way they did, even though I was clear that I am "considering" membership. My reaction was: well if they take me seriously now and at least give me the courtesy of a polite reply, then they will take me even more seriously as a member.
My clarification on this, in no was diminished what I thought was responsible behaviour i.e. checking into this organization and looking for some clarification on their positions. I do not want to support any organization that thinks, or puts forth the concept that the second amendment is about hunting. I simply do not want MY position represented this way.
I have a pro Second Amendment position and I will only support political organizations of like mind......
Whether or not I join the NRA remains to be seen, AFTER doing more research on their current philosophies and positions. If Jacksons attitude is pervasive - I see little point.
As with any organization, I am quite sure there are guidelines for dismissal from the board. In fact I have seen boards vote problematic board members off boards in other corporations. It certainly can be done.
The fact that Jackson then put a statement on the NRA website, in which he lied about what occurred, is very disturbing and does make the entire NRA organization party to the proverbial crime.......
My previous post:
Here is the letter I sent. I am not currently a member but it has been on my list of things to get done this month....until this.
Dear Edward Land,
As a person who was just about to become a member of the NRA, I am disturbed by the comments of board member Joaquin Jackson, regarding assault rifles in this interview http://www.klru.org/texasmonthlytalk...on/jackson.asp .
If it is the attitude of the NRA that the second amendment only refers to hunting then something is wrong. Katrina brought home the reality, that we must be able to defend our homes in times of disaster and crisis. The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting and everything to do with self defense, the defense of our loved ones and country if need be.
I will respectfully wait until the dismissal of Mr. Joaquin Jackson before becoming a paying member and ardent supporter of your organization. Please feel free to advise me of this occurrence and count on my immediate reciprocation of a paid membership in kind.
There are too many against the 2nd amendment to allow a person like Joaquin Jackson to remain seated on the board of your/our organization, the NRA. I respectfully ask for his immediate dismissal.
I received a read receipt this morning
President Maxair Engineering llc Motorcycle Performance
August 16th, 2007 04:20 PM
Doesn't matter if he's "not a bad guy" or what his age is or whatever. If his age and experience are such that they make him not see our right to own weapons that he personally would not choose in spite of the fact that he would not choose them, he's wrong for the NRA as a board member.
Originally Posted by Sam Douthit
We need to understand, and live by, the idea that we have to recognize the rights of others to do (or own) some things that we would not choose for ourselves. This guy is out of touch in that regard, and as such is a detriment to the NRA and to gun ownership.
He could be the sweetest guy in the world, but if his views on guns are harmful to our cause, they're harmful to our cause. Simple as that.
By mr.stuart in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: July 24th, 2007, 12:35 AM
By DizTbone in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: February 23rd, 2007, 06:26 AM
By paramedic70002 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: February 12th, 2007, 09:57 PM
By thirtyonebravo in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: February 6th, 2007, 04:29 PM
Search tags for this page
edward land and nra
edward land nra
mark craighead obituary
mr land nra
nra contact edward land
nra randy clark
obituary mark craighead
randall clark nra
randy clark nra
secretary ed lands nra
ted nugent klru interview transcript
Click on a term to search for related topics.