By Nathan Barton
What is it with gun-rights organizations? Or organizations that claim to represent owners and users of firearms?
We’ve known that the NRA has been no true friend of liberty for a long time, and in fact, started out more as a gun control organization than a group dedicated to preserving our rights to keep and bear arms. It is why many of us don’t want anything to do with them, and cringe every time they speak up on something. We’ve seen something similar with other organizations, including some originally founded to work around the attitudes and actions of the NRA. The Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership, all come far too readily to mind.
As does the National Shooting Sports Foundation. JPFO recently reposted an article from NSSF which is actually pretty good, addressing the husband of former Representative Gabrielle Gifford, retired Navy Captain (and astronaut) Mark Kelly. Gifford is the latest edition of James Brady as a “poster child” for gun control. But buried within that NSSF article we find this:
“…where NSSF has lead the effort to get more appropriate mental health records into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System through our successful FixNICS effort. … Kelly opined that “There hasn’t been any substantial organization on the other side that’s calling for responsible and common sense changes to our laws to keep us safer.” Let’s begin with the fact that the “substantial organizations” in the form of NRA and NSSF are the ones that run the nation’s true gun safety programs, notably the NRA’s Eddie Eagle and the NSSF’s Project ChildSafe initiatives. What Kelly does not say, of course, is that “the other side” of which he speaks has been unanimous in calling for full use of the numerous existing laws against the criminal misuse of guns. When unpacked, the “common sense changes” he calls for in this vague way would do little or nothing to actually enhance public safety. The laws already on the books do exactly that, but they have to be enforced.”
Mama’s Note: Ah, the old, old lie… and one the NRA has promoted almost endlessly for a very long time. “Laws” do not enhance public safety, and neither does arbitrary “enforcement.” Murder, rape, theft, assault, and intimidation are already illegal, regardless of the tools used in their commission. And that includes bare hands! “Laws” designed to limit the availability of certain (or any) tools, simply make it more difficult – or almost impossible – for people to defend themselves. But of course, that’s the real goal in a nutshell.
The article at least goes on to challenge Kelly’s demand for people on the terrorist watch list to be denied weapons. But they do not challenge the demand of Kelly and others that anyone accused of anything which can result in a restraining order being issued by a judge (or magistrate) on nothing more than a “preponderance of evidence” and a 15-minute hearing: a total lack of due process which can strip a person not just of the right to purchase firearms but to own or be in a house WITH firearms or edged weapons.
The plain truth of the matter is that there are tens of thousands of “gun laws” on the books that common sense (and a modicum of objective observation) demonstrates DO NOT keep us safe from criminals who use firearms to threaten, wound, and kill their victims – no matter how “fully” those laws are used by the minions of the state. Yet NRA, NSSF, and other organizations still do not object to these laws which are in clear violation of constitutionally-protected rights of the federal constitution and most state constitutions. Organizations like NRA and NSSF constantly are willing to compromise away our liberties for the sake of being allowed to speak up in the presence of the elites, and to get money to feather their nests. NSSF and NRA can boast all they want about gun safety, but they ignore the fact that, just as important as using guns safely, using guns to PROVIDE safety to individuals, families, homes, businesses, and communities.
It’s about time that these organizations really did what they claim to do, and stand up for what has been shown over and over to be the way society and humans work: a well-armed populace keeps down not just individual and non-governmental crime, but tyranny at home and invasion from abroad.
Mama’s Note: Do any of these organizations, pro or con, actually represent YOU in some way? Please use the comment section to tell us all why, or why not. Note that all comments will be moderated, so keep it civil and clean.
It seems like a long time ago (almost 30 years) but I remember a day when 700 of us showed up to discuss gun bans with the state legislature here in NH. All teh organizations were there, opposing the proposed bans. (NRA, GONH – and others)
Everyone who wanted to speak was allowed a few minutes at teh podium and I and several of my friends took the opportunity to make our statements (pretty simple really – in a nutshell ‘don’t try it’).
After the meeting we were aproached by the leaders of two ror three of these organizations and thanked for not identifying ourselves as members, because we had made the unambiguous and plain statements.
Nothing new there, they always were and are today, just politicians by another name, and they can’t be trusted.
Thanks for the article.
Sounds about right… I’m curious what you thought the outcome of such a meeting would be. Is there any point in talking to politicians, or the organizations that ultimately support them?
At that time, I obviously believed it would help. That bunch actually got a group of legislators to come out to teh range to try all teh evil guns they were considering in their ban (not the real gun banning legislators but some who were curious).
That was a positive, and the particular ban we were discussing did not go through. So, I will say that it used to be possible to affect the legislature by showing unity and strength, and demonstrating the facts that supported our position.
It may be no more than my opinion, but what I observe today is that people are less interested in facts and reason. And I’m not referring only to the establishment-following or the left and right political orientations. I don’t find very many people at all who are willing to take a challenge to their beliefs (whether they be an actual opinion or just regurgitated swill from whatever media they use to gain information).
So, I am not optimistic about that. But You must know or have heard of the free state project and the political action goups like the liberty alliance etc. that grew after the Ron Paul campaign here in NH. I’m sure they have a more positive outlook than I.
It don’t mean a thing, if it ain’t got that swing.
I am very much aware of the “free state” projects, since I was part of the one in Wyoming. The New Hampshire folks seem to have gone political, and I’d want no part of that, but the Wyoming project simply withered and died. We may never have much of a clue why. Lots of good people moved here, and I have some awesome neighbors, but it’s never going to be a moving force to restore liberty in America… just more or less in our personal lives. That’s good enough for me right now.
Don’t know where you live, Rich, but here in Wyoming a great many people are staunch Republicans, but have no problem asking how much more the government can do for them. There’s even talk of an “income tax” now, for pity sake.
Pingback: Rational Review News Digest, 11/22/16 - Putin says Russia planning "countermeasures" to NATO expansion - Thomas L. Knapp - Liberty.me
Mama: the many “gun rights org.” are like the anti groups. All they want is MONEY. When a shooting happens, “give us money to save our gun rights”, “give us money to stop people from owning guns”.
Indeed, which is why I don’t donate to any kind of “gun rights” outfit. I have been a member of the NRA for a long time, but only so I could afford the materials needed to present the handgun and self defense classes. This year I’ve decided not to renew. I’m going to continue giving classes, especially one to one sessions, but since Wyoming no longer “requires” a permit to CC, I won’t need to issue official credentials for people to get one.