Is the NRA giving us a con-job ???

[2BRKnot2B]

NRA was absent for a long time until NRA members started pushing them to get involved, during the Pataki administration when they did absolutely nothing to fight the Pataki 5 point law. Of course, they understood that Pataki was "W"s guy, so they had to tread lightly after their misstep in saying that they had a room in the "West Wing" specifically for them. Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! They have been more active in NYS of late. Maybe it's because some of us in SCOPE have proven we're not complete idiots, and have been doing the research necessary for them to actually make some headway in regards 2A restoration.

However, the bickering between SCOPE & NYSR&P has to stop. I know what NYSR&P's game is. It is to get shall issue in NY. However, as I've written in SCOPE "Firing Lines," "permits for rights are unconstitutional censorships or prior restraints." As such, the Shuttlesworth v Birmingham (from Staub v. Baxley) notes that, "anyone faced with such a licensing law need not" ask for permission, and may "engage with impunity in the right for which the law requires a license."

I have made it plain to NRA's Wayne LaPierre, and SAF's Alan Gottlieb, that such a ruling exists. They said I was naive in believing that it could be done without first having a SCOTUS decision that said the right was "individual." In fact, it is not one ruling, for as Shuttlesworth (from Staub) also states, there are a multitude of rulings saying such. I asked them years ago to help me with a suit to challenge, all the way to the SCOTUS, the permit system. However, for some reason, and I can only assume it is because they want to seem "reasonable" on the gun issue, they have determined that the best course was to accept the "infringement" on the right to keep & bear.

I also wrote for the SCOPE "Firing Lines" in 2007, "The Meaning of Infringed." Basically, where "Congress shall make no law, the infringe goes even further. Tho's congress can ban certain types of speech based on 'public safety' needs, "infringe" goes even further. One of its main meanings is "to encroach." To encroach means "to go beyond what is 'original', proper & customary; to make inroads. As you may see, just this one meaning shows that not only may no law be made infringing, but also, that the original amendment is the only law needed for any  U.S. citizen, regardless of state, to keep and bear arms, anywhere within the jurisdiction of the U.S., and any of its territories, etc.

That NRA is comfortable with some infringement, whether for a short period of time, or not, shows that they are not in keeping with their bylaws. Article 1, Sec. 2, I believe, without looking it up. There is a huge influence within NRA of Law Enforcement. Not all LE is of a belief in 2A as written.  However, many people are of the similar belief that NRA is milking the infringements for all they are worth knowing that if they did get total 2A as it was, and is supposed to be, their mission would be curtailed vastly, and their income would go down drastically. Whether that is true, or not, consider that, like all other gov't positions, the key is not to cut your job, but to grow the gov't so your job is more secure. People aren't ignorant, and our 2A people are more knowledgeable than most in this country. Better, their agenda isn't to destroy the foundation, or to "fundamentally transform" it (As Bary Hussein, and his leftists cronies wish to do), but to make it more secure & solid. That is the end SCOPE works toward, as should all pro-2A organizations.

In regards the discussion about Ken Mathison's trying to get shall issue by renewable permits, this was a discussion between himself, and Tom King, according to him, as related. The purpose was to get 'shall issue' as a compromise for 'renewability.' However, SCOPE feels, and has felt since I've been involved that any compromise with evil is still a capitulation. So, what Ken proposed to the board was roundly shot down on several occasions, even tho' Ken kept pressing it. It is understandable that someone in their position (Presidents King & Mathison) would like to do something, the thing is you must do "the right thing." The board understands that, and will not be for any such proposition that further erodes our constitutional right. That is the reason that Stephen Aldstadt said that we intend to regain the ground lost prior, at this years Sportsman's Day in Albany. We do truly mean that. It is our intention, and we would hope that NYSR&P aid us in that endeavor rather than act like they are the only pro-2A organization in NYS. Further, they cannot act like what they say goes. As a life member of both organizations as well as a life member of NRA, and GOA, it is imperative that we maintain a unified belief that 2A "shall not be infringed." If one organization doesn't believe that, then we do have a serious problem. Our job is to work toward repeal of infringements already allowed, not presenting further infringements which may be used against us in the future.

As a for instance to this, When one proposes "shall issue" for "renewability," always the enemy of freedom hears "renewable," but they are deaf when it comes to "shall issue." So, when NRA, NYSR&P, SCOPE, or whoever would propose such a thing, the enemies of freedom, the anti-gunners, etc., are willing to jump on the bandwagon to get  what they want, but seldom willing to go for the compromise. We have already capitulated a great deal of our rights here in NYS. It is time, as SCOPE President Stephen Aldstadt said, to reclaim our right, not allow further infringement. Anyone who would be for such doesn't deserve to be representing anyone in the pro-2A movement. If NYSR&P can't show a modicum of adult behavior in working together for the common cause, then we shall surely lose it all. After all, our enemy understands, and uses deftly, "divide & conquer."

[Mr VJP]

For those of you penny pinchers, the NRA as a 5 year membership for $100.  That's only $20 per year, for those who are mathematically challenged.

[fasteddie]

For those of you penny pinchers, the NRA as a 5 year membership for $100.  That's only $20 per year, for those who are mathematically challenged.

Wow ! A regular Math Wiz .......... : ..... ..

[nyantler]

Membership is $35 a year . That's one thing but then they come back and want more . I usually get solicited for more money about a month after paying the yearly membership dues .

Thats what non-profits do.. solicit money... you don't have to give any after you pay your yearly dues if you don't want... the fact that an organization that you belong to solicits money from their members regularly.. shouldn't be a reason to get all up in arms about (no pun intended).. I'm not saying it isn't annoying sometimes, but certainly doesn't sour me on the NRA.

[Mr VJP]

How come you guys don't complain about your property taxes and other taxes going up every year?  When the government sends you a letter asking for more money, you have to pay it.  They ain't just askin'!  And they are the same folks who are always passing laws to limit your gun rights even more.

[bpb]

How come you guys don't complain about your property taxes and other taxes going up every year?  When the government sends you a letter asking for more money, you have to pay it.  They ain't just askin'!  And they are the same folks who are always passing laws to limit your gun rights even more.

Come on SCOTT~ give me a break will ya?

I do and I protest the gun clubs taxes.

But we don't get hundreds of frantic emails telling us about the increases and to call now! LOL

Look at the latest rifle bill email that is circulating. It's the same old bill just  different number.

The U.S. Sportsmen's[/size] Alliance has never done anything in NY but send out alerts, usually late , er ah~ after we already know about them. Many of the people who get them can't even tell you how a bill is created let alone in NY it lives on forever. 

The Sportsmen alliance was started from an anti trapping bill in Ohio. In the 80's & 90's when trapping was a dirty work every group that use to support trapping left the trappers out in the cold. Then in the 2000's when they figured there was money to be had they returned to supporting trapping.

Now you'll have to be patient with me I have to spent time looking at Charlton Heston's basement email.  :-[

Okay I'm back~Yes I hit the deleted button again!

If you really want to tell these guys on Huntignny.com something, tell them why we have a AW ban in NY to begin with.   

And ya can't use Sheldon Silver as an excuse~ Tell them who caved in on firearms owners.

=================================

If you want to see what is in store for you read this fear mongering document from NYS.

I think this is the book Bill spoke about.[/size][/size]http://www.courts.state.ny.us/whatsnew/pdf/PublicHealthLegalManual.pdf[/size][/size][/size]Don't ya feel better now?[/size][/size][/size]the show on podcast[/size][/size]http://archives.warpradio.com/wysl/files/BillNojay/20110215.mp3[/size][/size][/size]Bill Nojay's show & the NY public health legal guide[/size][/size][/size]

[2BRKnot2B]

Shhhhhh!!! Bpb, your rattling the Republican tree. Yep, it was Pataki, and one of his minions seeking (pork) money for NYC schools, or, so I've heard. Pulled a fast one on the NY gun owners by putting the bill to the floor thru a committee which they didn't usually go thru, but thru a Senator who Pataki had in his back pocket.

[nyantler]

And yet again I say .. you don't have to continue to shell out money if you don't want to..that's you business.. but it is the business of the non-profit to solicit money...

[arrowflinger]

And yet again I say .. you don't have to continue to shell out money if you don't want to..that's you business.. but it is the business of the non-profit to solicit money...

And spend it.  La Pierre makes $900,000/yr.  Not a particularly good use of the funds donated to a "non-profit."

[Mr VJP]

His compensation is based on his performance.  Do you know what the average salary of a corporate CEO is these days?  LaPierre can be removed from his job any day the board doesn't feel his is doing a good job.  i guess they feel is doing a good job and so do I.

[arrowflinger]

His compensation is based on his performance.  Do you know what the average salary of a corporate CEO is these days?

Corporate CEOs do not run "non-profit" organizations.

Every dollar La Pierre gets is a dollar that was donated to protect 2nd amendment rights....not line his pockets.

[Mr VJP]

Do you have any idea what heads of non-profits get paid?

[arrowflinger]

Do you have any idea what heads of non-profits get paid?

Yup....lots.  I never said he was different than others.

Still, the fact that a large portion of every dollar donated gets sucked away by executives should trouble you.

Your money isn't going to support our cause....it is going to line their pockets.

[Mr VJP]

If you look at the arenas the NRA is spending money to fight in, I think you will find it is money well spent.  I believe without the NRA we would not have the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution anymore.  But I'm not of the opinion we should stop fighting to see which of us is right about that.

The NRA takes in about $250 Million a year.  That means out of your $35 dues, about .14 cents goes to LaPierre.  Wow!

[nyantler]

And still again... you make up your mind whether you want to give more money or not... a meager $35 a year to show support is well worth the cause. If you don't think so then you won't pay it.. yet I'm sure you will still continue to piss and moan about the people that do

[arrowflinger]

yet I'm sure you will still continue to piss and moan about the people that do

Yet another cheap shot.

[nyantler]

the truth hurts doesn't it...

[Mr VJP]

Once again I'd like to remind everyone the 5 year membership is a better value at $100.  Is $20 a year too much to send in to an organization with a long history of proven 2nd Amendment results?

[arrowflinger]

NRA should have stayed out of crossbow legalization in PA and MI.

I was paying them to protect 2nd amendment rights, not force inclusion of string guns onto those that did not want them.

They will not get another dime from me.

[Mr VJP]

It seems you side with those who want to stop certain freedoms more than those who want to increase them.

You're right, you do not belong in the NRA.

[bpb]

Posted 19 February 2011 - 09:47 PM

I was at Bass Pro in Auburn Hills, Mi. the other day, the archery clerk told me they were selling 20 crossbows for every compound they sold. A 20/1 ratio. /at that rate i'd say we will have a strong political voice.

=========    Oh the whining hasn't really been loud, yet.  Wait till the "purist" bow hunters in the DEC hunter Ed program have to start teaching the crosBOW section in there class.    :-*

[arrowflinger]

Posted 19 February 2011 - 09:47 PM

I was at Bass Pro in Auburn Hills, Mi. the other day, the archery clerk told me they were selling 20 crossbows for every compound they sold. A 20/1 ratio. /at that rate i'd say we will have a strong political voice.

=========    Oh the whining hasn't really been loud, yet.  Wait till the "purist" bow hunters in the DEC hunter Ed program have to start teaching the crosBOW section in there class.    :-*

Michigan?

LOL

[bpb]

Posted 19 February 2011 - 09:47 PM

I was at Bass Pro in Auburn Hills, Mi. the other day, the archery clerk told me they were selling 20 crossbows for every compound they sold. A 20/1 ratio. /at that rate i'd say we will have a strong political voice.

=========    Oh the whining hasn't really been loud, yet.  Wait till the "purist" bow hunters in the DEC hunter Ed program have to start teaching the crosBOW section in there class.    :-*

Michigan?

LOL

Yea MI. 

I know forums are better than TruTv.

[nyantler]

Posted 19 February 2011 - 09:47 PM

I was at Bass Pro in Auburn Hills, Mi. the other day, the archery clerk told me they were selling 20 crossbows for every compound they sold. A 20/1 ratio. /at that rate i'd say we will have a strong political voice.

=========    Oh the whining hasn't really been loud, yet.  Wait till the "purist" bow hunters in the DEC hunter Ed program have to start teaching the crosBOW section in there class.    :-*

Michigan?

LOL

Another intelligent response Arrow.. you really got your point across there... the LOL works the best doesn't it when you really have no response? Actually I like how you act like you don't know what he was talking about... good form. :

[2BRKnot2B]

Firstly, the 2A isn't about hunting. It is about "arms" and the 'bear'ing of them by the individual.

If NRA gets involved in a bow issue, they have every right. The bow is an 'arm'ament. So is a sword, knife, blackjack, nunchuck, etc.

The problem appears to be in the reasons behind the 2A which were settled under Heller (collective right v. individual right, self defense v. collective military defense). Further, that little segment where it says "...shall not be infringed," and what that entails. Look up infringe, encroach, hinder, violate, limit, etc. What laws are permissible under such a definition? Well, absolutely none! But we have people in the pro-2A groups, and those who won't join those groups because they disagree with that constitutional provision's ("shall not be infringed") concept.They feel (using heart v. brain) that there must some provisions to limit the 2A for people whom they feel are not worthy. These same individuals will often fight for the right, vociferously at times, vocally, to stop any limits on free speech. Surely, you have the right to speak out on whether there should be limits, but to accept the limits is to accept the delusion that your right to speak is any less able to be limited than my right to 'keep and bear' any armament which is the "birthright of the American citizen." That same quote includes that "every arm of the everyday soldier" is that "birthright." So, should I be able to own grenades,  LAWS, RPG's, Stinger anti-aircraft, full auto rifle(s), pistols, and carry (bear) them in any manner I so presume to do so, whether open, or concealed? How does my carry, as long as I am not in outright rebellion, or using them criminally, of offense to you? Does it make you wish to carry to prevent me from doing anything so criminal? Isn't that exactly what our 2A was meant to provide?

So, any who would say that the insane, mentally deranged, etc. should not be allowed to carry, presumes that they know who is, or may become, insane, or mentally disturbed at any time. That presumption is based on what? Anything logical? Anything personal? If personal, are you thinking with your heart, or your head? If you think with your heart, could you not be seen as insane by some, and if with your head, then insane by those who think with their heart?

The 2A was set up so that the individual "right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed." It doesn't disallow the insane, or the criminal. What it says is that "all" individuals have the right, that said right can only be, according to some founders, be removed, only if these be in direct opposition (shooting war with) the government. The question then becomes, what government since some of our founders thought that any devolving away from the constitution constituted a government which was not of the constitution, and thus usurping that document. Thus, the reason for the 2A, a means to return the gov't to its constitutional limits, and to institute a new one if any number of individuals could rightly put such in place.