gun lobby organizations

[wrnyhuise]

Ok first off i know this thread is going to boil some blood so those that need it have your nitro ready.
I have seen a ton of posts here saying things such as " if you are not a member of NRA or something like it you have no business here". Here is my hang up on this. I know these groups fight for our rights i get that. I however am totally against lobby groups of any kind. They should be outlawed all together. We elect people to speak for our desires if they do not we vote them out. The lobby groups create the corruption we at least help it out greatly. So I can see donating to these groups to help them educate the public yes, but these groups on either side of the arguments should not be in D.C.

Just my opinions. I support our rights as gun owners and shooters. But will not be a member of a group. I donate when i can and that is still giving my support. If we don't stand by our principals what good is our word?

 

[Stickfight]

NRA membership is voluntary and joining indicates a desire for the organization to speak on behalf of that one person on that particular range of issues. Any limitation on the political speech of the NRA is a de facto limitation on each of its individual members.

Lobbying groups no doubt foster corruption, but that can't outweigh the value of free expression.

 

[spectre327]

I agree that Lobby groups are a definite evil and power of corruption but to outlaw entire groups that speak for us removes what little support we can muster.

Rather, there should be a weeding process to remove "bad salesmen" from the groups. There are rules to follow on what you can and cannot say. Speak in a way that shows bad on the group, remove them from membership.

Lobby groups are exactly that. They persuade. We could outlaw them but they would resurface no matter what because of the many who would vote for a persuasive group that would inevitably become a lobby of sorts.

 

[jbombelli]

Ok first off i know this thread is going to boil some blood so those that need it have your nitro ready.
I have seen a ton of posts here saying things such as " if you are not a member of NRA or something like it you have no business here". Here is my hang up on this. I know these groups fight for our rights i get that. I however am totally against lobby groups of any kind. They should be outlawed all together. We elect people to speak for our desires if they do not we vote them out. The lobby groups create the corruption we at least help it out greatly. So I can see donating to these groups to help them educate the public yes, but these groups on either side of the arguments should not be in D.C.

Just my opinions. I support our rights as gun owners and shooters. But will not be a member of a group. I donate when i can and that is still giving my support. If we don't stand by our principals what good is our word?

I've been here for a long time now. I can't recall ever seeing a single post that said "if you're not a NRA member <or some other organization> you have no business here." Not one. Maybe you can link to a few? I mean, if there's tons of them as you say, it should be easy for you to link to a few.

That said, you really don't like the 1st Amendment do you? You don't like that we can get together and pool our resources toward a common political end?

 

[nlnyhuise]

What does the 1st Amendment have to with not liking lobbyists? I want very much so our voices to be heard by our Senators and Reps, but do I feel the need to pay someone to do it for me?! No. That's also why I don't believe in Unions. I think the American people need to start making Congress listen to them! How do you do that?! You get together with a group of like minded people and send e-mails and letters to your Senators/Reps. If you get enough people together, you can accomplish anything. Money needs to be taken out of politicing all together. Be strong and loud, tell them what "We the people" want, and if they don't, send them home in the next election.

 

[Stickfight]

The First Amendment doesn't have anything to do with not liking lobbyists, apart from your being free to express your dislike of them without the fear of being silenced by the government.

 

[jbombelli]

What does the 1st Amendment have to with not liking lobbyists? I want very much so our voices to be heard by our Senators and Reps, but do I feel the need to pay someone to do it for me?! No. That's also why I don't believe in Unions. I think the American people need to start making Congress listen to them! How do you do that?! You get together with a group of like minded people and send e-mails and letters to your Senators/Reps. If you get enough people together, you can accomplish anything. Money needs to be taken out of politicing all together. Be strong and loud, tell them what "We the people" want, and if they don't, send them home in the next election.

Your $50 bucks won't get you very far. It doesn't even buy you a meeting. Election campaigns cost a lot of money. You want to influence your politicians? You gotta contribute. Now, with that in mind, your $50 combined with the $50 contributions of thousands of other people suddenly goes a lot further.

Letters don't pay the bills. In the end, they're going to do what those who actually CONTRIBUTE TO THE CAUSE want. Not the letter writers. ONE GUY spending a hundred bucks of his own money on a campaign outweighs a thousand letter writers who contributed nothing more than a signature.

Money will never be taken out of politics. Everyone running for office needs their voice and face out there. What do you think, that's free? No. That costs millions of dollars. Combine that with the complexity of the election laws, and the fact that the first thing anybody running for office needs to do is hire an entire lawfirm to make sure he properly navigates the myriad laws, and now you're into even MORE money.

So good luck. It's nice to be idealistic, but it doesn't actually fly in the real world.


Now, about those posts I asked for... got any links to any of them?

 

[jwh20]

Ok first off i know this thread is going to boil some blood so those that need it have your nitro ready.
I have seen a ton of posts here saying things such as " if you are not a member of NRA or something like it you have no business here". Here is my hang up on this. I know these groups fight for our rights i get that. I however am totally against lobby groups of any kind. They should be outlawed all together. We elect people to speak for our desires if they do not we vote them out. The lobby groups create the corruption we at least help it out greatly. So I can see donating to these groups to help them educate the public yes, but these groups on either side of the arguments should not be in D.C.

Just my opinions. I support our rights as gun owners and shooters. But will not be a member of a group. I donate when i can and that is still giving my support. If we don't stand by our principals what good is our word?

I suppose you can agree to unilaterally follow your convictions about lobbying, but it's kinda like agreeing to go to into a battle unarmed because you oppose the war. You're most likely to end up dead than to make your point.

Currently lobbying is both legal and commonly practiced and while I agree with your point, mostly because it's become the tool of the best-funded side to impose their. But since it seems very unlikely that Congress is going to do away with lobbying and lobbyists any time soon, you put yourself at a severe disadvantage by saying you won't play in that game.

Also consider what would happen if suddenly all lobbying was stopped. What about the mass-media that passes for "the press" today? Would they just start being totally neutral and unbiased in their reporting? I don't see that happening at all, they'd just be even more powerful since they choose to report only one side of the story and refuse even paid ads from opposing viewpoints.

I'm not one who says you have no business here if you aren't an NRA/GOA/SAF member, but I'd encourage you to reconsider your opposition. These groups exist to represent the interests of their members. If they don't have members, they cease to exist.

 

[beararms1776]

If your going to donate, why not just become a member? Your donated money still serves the same as what you disagree with.
I can't see not supporting these groups. The idea is, is to strengthen a foundation, not destroy it as the left would love to do.

 

[wrnyhuise]

Your $50 bucks won't get you very far. It doesn't even buy you a meeting. Election campaigns cost a lot of money. You want to influence your politicians? You gotta contribute. Now, with that in mind, your $50 combined with the $50 contributions of thousands of other people suddenly goes a lot further.

Letters don't pay the bills. In the end, they're going to do what those who actually CONTRIBUTE TO THE CAUSE want. Not the letter writers. ONE GUY spending a hundred bucks of his own money on a campaign outweighs a thousand letter writers who contributed nothing more than a signature.

Money will never be taken out of politics. Everyone running for office needs their voice and face out there. What do you think, that's free? No. That costs millions of dollars. Combine that with the complexity of the election laws, and the fact that the first thing anybody running for office needs to do is hire an entire lawfirm to make sure he properly navigates the myriad laws, and now you're into even MORE money.

So good luck. It's nice to be idealistic, but it doesn't actually fly in the real world.


Now, about those posts I asked for... got any links to any of them?

For starters i will find a specific post for you but give me a minute because it was a few days ago when i saw one. Second you sir in all due respect are a good example IMO of the uber Militant gung-ho folks people complain about. Once again IMO. My statement has nothing to do with the 1st amendment and i will forget for a second the fact that I actually bled for my for this country to protect that right. My statement is in regard to a flawed view of 1 the political process and corruption within it and 2 the fact that WE are a representative government who's elected leaders are elected to follow the wishes of the people not a lobby group. Yes i will agree that there are power in numbers but do you suggest that people have no voice of their own and are totally unable to band together as a people? I am against unions in this same aspect. I do not wish someone else to voice what i can say myself. In regard to money sent. I do that for education not the lobbying. I admit that some of my money goes to something i am against but the education the NRA far outweighs that and what difference does it make if i hold a membership card or donate. the support is still there. It is not a number of members that make the difference with these groups it is the money that goes into somebody's pocket. and if you think otherwise you are very unaware of what happens in Washington.

In regard to pretty much everyone else that has responded thus far i see your points as well but also thank you for at least having an open mind to my view and opinion while voicing yours. I appreciate good debate so long as people can see both sides even if they disagree.

 

[wrnyhuise]

"If you are a member of this site and are NOT a member of the NRA or another organization like the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) or the Gun Owners of America (GOA) you should join at least one of them today."

I will not give the name due to it being from a different post and i honestly don;t want to drag someone into this thread that has not done so themselves already. This is one example of what i was talking about. Now I am not mad at this post was just simply pointing something out. I also researched a couple of gun clubs today and noticed that several require a NRA membership as well as a membership to them. Honestly that i think is a bit messed up. I am a very safe shooter and would love to belong to a club of like minded people but honestly I am not rich by far. My weapons are purchased through lay-a-way and are very seldom to be honest. I do not have the money to purchase several memberships just to go shoot at a club with people. what would total a couple hundred dollars a year for me is just out of the question if I expect to afford ammo as well. I wish these clubs success and am sure people enjoy them greatly. I just never thought a group of gun owners and shooters would be so uppity about things. I guess in the grand scheme of things I am just a city boy who obviously is just too damn country and poor to understand.

and in good humor i told you all this thread would raise blood pressure. lol

 

[CarmelHP]

Of course, that post DIDN'T say what you represented it as saying, now did it? What's a little deception to make your point? Right? And the First Amendment has several rights guarantees such as assembly as well as speech. Banning groups that speak for their members infringes both those rights. Too bad you "bled for" rights you really didn't understand.

 

[jbombelli]

For starters i will find a specific post for you but give me a minute because it was a few days ago when i saw one.

One? I thought it was lots.

Second you sir in all due respect are a good example IMO of the uber Militant gung-ho folks people complain about.

I don't care if people complain about me. I fully embrace the extremist title I've been given by so many others. These days it is considered "extremist" to simply believe the Bill of Rights means what it says, to believe the Constitution is not a "deeply-flawed", "outdated document" "in serious need of revision." I'm tired of seeing other people negotiate away MY freedoms, my liberties, my way of life.

Once again IMO. My statement has nothing to do with the 1st amendment

The Supreme Court disagrees.

and i will forget for a second the fact that I actually bled for my for this country to protect that right.

Ahhh... the "I served so therefore I'm right" approach to debate. We call that a logical fallacy. The fact that you served does not in any way lend legitimacy to your opinion on politics. It may very well lend legitimacy to your opinion on battlefield tactics, but certainly not politics.

My statement is in regard to a flawed view of 1 the political process and corruption within it and 2 the fact that WE are a representative government who's elected leaders are elected to follow the wishes of the people not a lobby group.

Be that as it may. Money talks and bull**** walks. That 's the reality.

Yes i will agree that there are power in numbers but do you suggest that people have no voice of their own and are totally unable to band together as a people?

Not at all. But again, money talks. Bull**** walks. More money talks louder. And we ARE banding together. We're pooling our funds. We're getting the best among us to use those funds and their skills to our advantage. The very thing you don't like because it's "lobbying."

I am against unions in this same aspect. I do not wish someone else to voice what i can say myself.

Even if he's better at speaking, is more convincing, and can get audiences with people you can't?

In regard to money sent. I do that for education not the lobbying. I admit that some of my money goes to something i am against but the education the NRA far outweighs that and what difference does it make if i hold a membership card or donate. the support is still there. It is not a number of members that make the difference with these groups it is the money that goes into somebody's pocket. and if you think otherwise you are very unaware of what happens in Washington.

I'm very well aware of what happens in Washington. Again, money talks and bull**** walks. You want results? That takes money. One guy spending some money outweighs a thousand people writing letters. You may not like it, but that's just how it is and it will never change. And in fact the number of members an organization has makes a very big difference, particularly when they're funding said organization out of their own pockets. I keep harping on this, but MONEY TALKS. If you think otherwise, it is YOU who are very unaware of what happens in Washington.

In regard to pretty much everyone else that has responded thus far i see your points as well but also thank you for at least having an open mind to my view and opinion while voicing yours. I appreciate good debate so long as people can see both sides even if they disagree.

.

"If you are a member of this site and are NOT a member of the NRA or another organization like the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) or the Gun Owners of America (GOA) you should join at least one of them today."

Where does that say you don't belong here if you're not a member of the NRA or another organization? It looks like somebody's just encouraging you to join. They're not saying you don't belong here.

 

[nlnyhuise]

Alright. So everyone is saying we need the NRA, GOA and whatnots to have our voice be heard right?! So why do we have more than 1 group trying for the same thing? Should all money be in one area so it can "talk"? One voice is heard better than many, so why do we have so many trying to say the same thing? If this is truly why we are giving money to a group, to defend a God given RIGHT, then why not just one great big one that has a **** ton of money instead of 3 or 4 medium to large ones, that can't even agree with what should be done?!

 

[jbombelli]

Alright. So everyone is saying we need the NRA, GOA and whatnots to have our voice be heard right?! So why do we have more than 1 group trying for the same thing? Should all money be in one area so it can "talk"? One voice is heard better than many, so why do we have so many trying to say the same thing? If this is truly why we are giving money to a group, to defend a God given RIGHT, then why not just one great big one that has a **** ton of money instead of 3 or 4 medium to large ones, that can't even agree with what should be done?!

It's called "competition." Maybe you should look that word up. Some people don't like the NRA and don't think it speaks specifically for them, so they might join GOA, or someone else, whose goals and ideas match more closely to what they want.

And you answered your own question: "...can't even agree ON what should be done." Different people have different goals and different ideas of how to reach those goals, so it's only natural that we have multiple groups.

 

[wrnyhuise]

Jbombelli we shall forever disagree on several points and that is fine and fully expected within large groups such as this site. I will say be that as it may and while i respect you position of having your own opinions and standing firm on them. Understand that i sir am doing the same from my positions. I am not telling you that you cannot think the way you do and would never outright attack somebody for their views unless they did so to me. That being said i do hope that one day you find a way to voice you point of view without attacking others. I respect your right to your thoughts but talking to you feels alot like talking to people hooked on CNN. there is just not getting through that people don't see everything the same.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I however am totally against lobby groups of any kind. They should be outlawed all together.

Think of it this way, wrny, lobby groups exist to exercise the constitutional rights of those who wish to petition their government.

What you object to in the favoritism and corruption that Big Government breeds. Your anger should be addressed towards a system which focuses on government as the solution rather than the problem.

 

[jbombelli]

Jbombelli we shall forever disagree on several points and that is fine and fully expected within large groups such as this site. I will say be that as it may and while i respect you position of having your own opinions and standing firm on them. Understand that i sir am doing the same from my positions. I am not telling you that you cannot think the way you do and would never outright attack somebody for their views unless they did so to me. That being said i do hope that one day you find a way to voice you point of view without attacking others. I respect your right to your thoughts but talking to you feels alot like talking to people hooked on CNN. there is just not getting through that people don't see everything the same.

Ah but jumping on here and implying that it's a majority held belief on INGO that if you're not an NRA member you don't belong here isn't attacking all of INGO?

You're going to call for not only the dissolution of the very organizations who do the most for us, to which many of us belong, to which many of us donate time and money, but you'll call for them to be outlawed, and then cry because you're butthurt over being attacked for your position?

Why are you even here on this site? I can't help but wonder if you even ACTUALLY OWN any firearms, or if you're just here to troll. That happens often after the gun rights crowd wins a victory in Congress, or in the courts. The leftists show up, start new memberships, and blame the NRA for the world's problems. Just like you're doing.

 

[wrnyhuise]

Think of it this way, wrny, lobby groups exist to exercise the constitutional rights of those who wish to petition their government.

What you object to in the favoritism and corruption that Big Government breeds. Your anger should be addressed towards a system which focuses on government as the solution rather than the problem.

I thought i did say the pocketing of money for results is the problem. perhaps i didn't voice that properly if so i am sorry, yes i agree with you completely.

 

[wrnyhuise]

Ah but jumping on here and implying that it's a majority held belief on INGO that if you're not an NRA member you don't belong here isn't attacking all of INGO?

You're going to call for not only the dissolution of the very organizations who do the most for us, to which many of us belong, to which many of us donate time and money, but you'll call for them to be outlawed, and then cry because you're butthurt over being attacked for your position?

Why are you even here on this site? I can't help but wonder if you even ACTUALLY OWN any firearms, or if you're just here to troll. That happens often after the gun rights crowd wins a victory in Congress, or in the courts. The leftists show up, start new memberships, and blame the NRA for the world's problems. Just like you're doing.

i did not say anything about a majority of INGO for starters. I have had some really good conversations with many people here and hope to continue to do so. In regard to if i own firearms or not you may think or assume as you wish sir. I don't blame the NRA nor any gun rights groups for the problem, i know they are trying to help. It is the fact that "money talks" that you so cherish is the problem at the root of it all. The act of money pocketing to buy votes is what should be outlawed not the voice itself. The manner in which business is currently being conducted is the criminal aspect of all this. It is not a representative government that we are supposed to be. It is nothing but a politician rental service.