NRA ratings: useful or useless
supporter
Posted by Don Birkholz (+990) 3 years ago
Apparently two methods used to decide NRA ratings: legislators votes, or if no legislative experience, questionnaires are used. My opinion is that NRA ratings based on legislative votes are useful. NRA ratings based on a questionnaire useless.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13722) 3 years ago
The higher the NRA rate the lower the probability that you should vote for the candidate. IMO, our inability to see the big picture a vote for the candidate with the best overall balance on all the issue, in which he/she could potentially vote is a huge problem. There are too many single issue voters out there. Single issue voter guides, like the NRA's, are not helping the problem.
Top
Posted by Elizabeth Emilsson (+794) 3 years ago
What I would find useful is how would you rate the NRA. My brother and cousin gave up their NRA memberships after their shameful attacks on people like James Brady who was trying to promote safe and SANE gun legislature.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+9296) 3 years ago
As I have said before, when the NRA regains its sanity, we may rejoin. Until then. . .
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+11728) 3 years ago
At least the Republican party makes an effort to keep the crackpots known as the tea party at bay.. The NRA was taken over by crackpots in the late 1970s, and hasn't been the same since.

Which is really sad. I'm quite sure the NRA founding fathers are rolling in their graves.
Top
Posted by Steve Allison (+977) 3 years ago
The trouble with the NRA, and the liberals that want national gun regs., Is they draw one unchanging line in the sand for the whole nation. There is no way the small population and large area of Montana Has close to the same needs for gun or any other kind of regulations as New York City were people are packed together like sardines in a can. If one checks most of the gun deaths are coming in larger population areas ands they should do something to help prevent them. The NRA goes to small population areas like Montana Collect money and support to fight efforts in these large population areas so in my opinion look like fascist idiots trying to destroy the world. Trying to make one rule, either way, to cover this whole diverse nation, makes you look stupid and unthinking.
Top
supporter
Posted by MRH (+1281) 3 years ago
Bravo Steve!!
Top
Posted by Lorin Dixson (+593) 3 years ago
I agree with most of what you say Steve, except the money they collect from people in rural areas such as Montana doesn't mean anything to the NRA. The NRA gets its' funding these days from gun manufactures and large gun retail outlets. If the NRA got all or most of their funding from gun owners like they used to, it would be a entirely different organization.
Top
Posted by Oddjob (+134) 3 years ago
Disclaimer..

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the NRA, nor do I ever plan to be one.

I do agree with the fact that the NRA has the right to do whatever they do with the money as long as the members of the organization are willing to support it, which apparently, they do. I would also agree that George Soros, Michael Bloomberg and the Koch brothers are free to spend their money any damn way they please. Because certain agendas may or may not agree with what they are promoting, has no bearing on their right to do it.

http://www.factcheck.org/...-salaries/

What I found interesting in this was..

Most of the NRA funding still comes from it's members.

Additional funding comes from voluntary contributions by gun purchasers at the point of sale.

The NRA spends most of the money on education, safety training and support of all legal shooting activities.

That the big increase in funding for the NRA-ILA (lobbying and litigation arm) started in 1992 when Bill Clinton and the Democrats kicked off the ridiculous war on "assault" weapons. The 1994 AWB turned out to be the biggest gun manufacturer and lawyer\lobbyist relief act ever passed by Congress, prior to the ACA.

Looks to me like the major cause for gun proliferation in this Country is Democrats.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeri Dalbec (+2504) 3 years ago
That is interesting, Oddjob. I always like to check Charity Navigator and this information is close to the January, 2013 Fact check...

http://www.charitynavigat...FD50DTF9Go

Interesting that it appears that Wayne L. LaPierre's $833,312 per year comes from affiliates????
Top
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+12373) 3 years ago
Oddjob wrote:
"Looks to me like the major cause for gun proliferation in this Country is Democrats."

Wasn't the NRA's response to the Sandy Hook school shooting that we need to have more armed people in America? Gun proliferation is the fault of the Democrats, indeed.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+8059) 3 years ago
muzzle-fondling ammosexuals....
Top
Posted by Oddjob (+134) 3 years ago
I think what he asked for was armed resource officers in the schools.

You can Google as well as I can.
Top