quote:

Originally posted by radioman:

Horseshit.

OK. well, i guess we disagree. To me, their communication seems as much spin as the other guys. Not uncommon nowadays as everything seems to be sensationalized for attention.

Keep in mind that I am a life member and I support the NRA's goal in general. But to me, the propaganda feels like a little much. I don't think 'horseshit' is the way to constructively address that, but OK. I'd be open to hearing your views on that. Keep in mind I said 'some'. there is GROSS misinformation about firearms out there and they do seek to correct that which is fine...but some of the way the political stuff is framed...it's not quite the whole story.

^^^ If you want an expanded response, it might help if you let us know what the hell you're talking about.

Statements like this won't give you much of a response beyond what you got.

quote:

I don't really feel like I'm going to get an honest assessment from them on anything.

back up your statements.

Radioman,

I was sharing my impression built over years of reading American Rifleman and getting called about the latest disastrous legislation and relentlessly solicited for $$. Perhaps it's alert fatigue, I don't know. Everything is always a disaster, everything is always sensationalized. The sky is always falling. That, I would imagine, increases donations. I do not have any specific examples to share as I am not interested in blowing my Saturday re-reading the last couple of years of the magazine and posting my reasoning here, which, from your reaction, you are likely to disagree with anyway. So we will have to leave it that that, which is cool. We can both love Sigs, support the NRA in general, and agree to disagree on this point.

In any case, I regret posting something slightly negative about the NRA on a firearms forum. I should have known better.

I will continue to be a member and support their legal battles, but will continue to form my opinion on said battles and the politics surrounding firearms based on sources other than those designed to rile up the base and increase donations. That is what I was alluding to earlier when i was talking about 'guility of the same thing' - sensationalism to rile up the base. I will cede the point that it's not done to the same level; the misinformation on the left is certainly far worse and more disingenuous.

While we can surely disagree, I do not believe my position is unreasonable.

FWIW, I mostly agree with your reply to V-Tail earlier in the thread and voted the same way you did for the same reason. But I do not think that any of those things make them immune to criticism.

I am also a life member.

I always wondered if it was actually the NRA that made the annoying phone calls or a company that gets a % of the donations. In either case, that just adds to the frustration if the NRA is giving out members phone numbers.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
Why would you waste your time and theirs? Jesus dude, who do you think you are.

I don't care if the guys at the top make money if they are effective. What do I care

They keep asking me for money. They have a lot, I just have a little.

I'd kind of like to know what their dudes pull in, compared to me, and how much their dudes contribute.

FWIW, I have given them a bunch, I am a life member, but there's a limit to how much I can give.

The NRA is the 800-lb gorilla in DC. Check.
The NRA wins some battles. Check.
The NRA lose some battles. Check.
The NRA could stop with their over-the-top fear mongering campaign. Check.
The commie gun grabbers are out to get your guns. If you think they only want to ban some guns, then you're more naïve than a rock. Check.

We are in agreement with the above? Check.

So what are we pissing at each other about?

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:

quote:

doesn't compare with that of Michael Bloomberg

Actually, Bloomberg makes a lot less.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman, is entitled to a $195,000 annual salary, but refuses his pay, collecting only $1 per year

He's currently worth almost 50 billion. doubt he needs a salry at this point.

Two things;
1) During his term as mayor of New York (2002 to 20013) his estimated wealth increased from 4.8 BUSD to 27 BUSD (462.5% increase) from his personal business interests.
Over that 12 year period, him not taking an annual salary of 195,00 per year (2.34 MUSD total) is about same as as someone (LaPierre perhaps) earning 12 MUSD in that same 12 year period and not taking about $1265 total over that time period or about $126 per year.

For the common man, giving up his salary is about the equivalent of having $100 in your pocket and losing a penny.

2) He hasn't been the mayor since Dec, 2013 and his (estimated) wealth has since increased to close to the 50 BUSD previously mentioned, almost doubling his worth in about 3.5 years.

The point being he actually made LOTS more from his business interests, even foregoing his salary as mayor, than Wayne LaPierre earned from the NRA over that time.
Subsequent to his term as mayor Bloomberg stated, he intended to give 50 MUSD to anti-firearm causes in 2014.

Disclaimer: I do not like (democrat > republican > independent) Michael Bloomberg

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
Why would you waste your time and theirs? Jesus dude, who do you think you are.

I don't care if the guys at the top make money if they are effective. What do I care

They keep asking me for money. They have a lot, I just have a little.

I'd kind of like to know what their dudes pull in, compared to me, and how much their dudes contribute.

FWIW, I have given them a bunch, I am a life member, but there's a limit to how much I can give.

Based on the latest 990 forms I have seen (linked in previous post) Executive Compensation is less than 2% of the total take.
LaPierre in particular was about 0.3% of the take that year.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
The NRA is the 800-lb gorilla in DC. Check.
The NRA wins some battles. Check.
The NRA lose some battles. Check.
The NRA could stop with their over-the-top fear mongering campaign. Check.
The commie gun grabbers are out to get your guns. If you think they only want to ban some guns, then you're more naïve than a rock. Check.

We are in agreement with the above? Check.

So what are we pissing at each other about?

Not sure, Q. I'm on the same page as you at least!

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
The NRA could stop with their over-the-top fear mongering campaign. Check.

This is the only point we might differ on.
Many on this forum have a good barometer on what is happening politically and to those I could see it could be irritating.

The average chump may not be as well informed and may be complacent, especially since the last great panic seems to have ebbed.
I think the "over-the-top" rhetoric is to poke those guys in the ass and get them involved or at minimum, to become ever vigilant of the threats against us.

quote:

Originally posted by Floyd D. Barber:

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
At a gun show I went to a guy at the NRA booth told me he could renew my life membership at a discount if I did it today. I just kept on walking.

Why is this in the Pistola section?

Thought I put it in What's your deal. It's been a hectic week.

Oh crap.
I got wrapped up in the discussion and forgot we were in the pistols section.
Apologies to the other members for my numerous responses here.

How the hell does this stay on the "SIG PISTOLS" forum? Move it out!

It should be in "Mason's Rifle Room". It's the NRA, after all.

I begrudgingly support them, but oppose much of the nonsense they engage in and think they are marginally effective on their best days. Frankly, I hope to see them change significantly or be superseded and marginalized by someone better at some point, but as it is they're the only big game in town when it comes to 2nd Amendment lobbying.

I give them a D- to a C+ overall, but the occasional C+ days are better than nothing I suppose as every inch of progress matters.

I dig the NRA, but...
Before I retired they called me at work constantly. When I saw the phone number was many states away and not leave my work station, they would change the phone exchange nearer and nearer to me till they were calling with a local number. I would leave work (which was difficult) because I didn't know if it was a family emergency or not.

I finally got fed up and called NRA directly. I said I would sign up for 5 years if the calls stopped (previous I was a year by year member). The person who set up my membership said he would personally ensure that the calls stopped. They never did.

I have never answered an unknown caller since. It is a hassle because delivery people can't reach me, but I'm done. I will always belong the NRA, but since I'm paying I want it to be on my terms. I think that's fair.

Life member, too. Several years ago I called Member Services and asked them to put me on their "do not call or mail" list. I never get any calls or mail from them, aside from my magazine. I think that NRA may be the ONLY organization/business that has honored such a request for me.

Regarding NRA effectiveness -

Through our donations the NRA funds court challenges to laws which violate the Second Amendment. But it is only our vote for candidates that support the Second Amendment that gives it leverage with legislators. So in the final analysis the NRA can only be as effective as WE are.

I don't get nearly as much mail after getting on their "don't send" list.

My issue is their destroying the educational division with their "blended method" that put money in their pocket and out of their own instructors. It made it economically impossible to run classes in many cases and the result was NRA training, in this area, dropped to almost zero.

They continue to screw up the availability of the materials needed, change their requirements overnight and generally get piss off too many that support them.

The latest issue with their Carry guard left a poor impression. Already we see the entire program is a custerf*ck with daily changes, modifications and screw-ups.