Defensive Carry banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
36,786 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The ballot arrived yesterday. As I was researching the candidates, I saw that Roy Innis passed away earlier this month.

I'm not up on all the candidates. For those in the know, is there anyone we should not be voting for?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
24,668 Posts
Not that I know of, but I have seen a suggestion (I have not conducted any due diligence as of yet) that a write in vote for Steve Reichert of Beaverton Oregon should be considered.

Here's some background I received from an unknown source:

First off, vote 'No' on the bylaw changes.

Item 8 of the bylaw changes moves to amend the section regarding nomination of directors by petition. They want to change the requirement that you get 250 signatures, to a requirement that you get a number of signatures equal to 0.5% of the votes cast in the previous election of directors.

The practical effect? If more than 50,000 people voted in the previous election, you now need more signatures than the previously required 250 to get on the ballot. The NRA has over 5,000,000 members; 50,000 is 1% of that. So if more than 1% of the membership of the NRA votes, it just got harder to nominate people by petition.

Now the board can be safe that the nominating committee, made up of board members, will have complete control of who can run for the board from now on. The limp-wristed celebrities, hangers-on, and 2A do-nothings that fill so so soooo many seats on the board will be safe from the NRA membership attempting to replace them with new directors that will weaponize the NRA into what it should be.

Remember, this is the same BOD that defended Joaquin Jackson until his death. What could go wrong if we just let them become a closed club who hand-selects their own successors?

Item 12, the board is attempting to completely remove the ability of the membership to change the bylaws by vote at a meeting, and in item 13 to make the process for petitioning for a by-law change to require an impossibly high 5% of the number of voters from the most recent election of directors.

Let's say you can get that many voting members to sign a petition to amend the by-laws. Item 14 gives the board the power to unilaterally undo it.

The NRA board is attempting a coup to seize all power of the organization away from the membership, and leave no foothold from which the membership could ever get it back. We're trying to drain the NRA Board swamp, and they're trying to make it 10 feet deeper.
Here's my response to the above:

The video with Joaquin Jackson is worth watching too. I agree that governance can be a difficult issue, and 1% is too high, but is 250 too low in this day and age of social media reach and petition software? Would .1% be more reasonable for either side?

I'm not arguing, just ruminating.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top