The National Rifle Association’s public and ongoing acceptance of The Brady Bill’s provisions – specifically the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) – runs completely counter to the Second Amendment. What part of “shall not be infringed” does the NRA not understand? That said, the NRA lives in the real world. They’re trying to hold the line against expanded background checks, a movement that just gained purchase in Oregon. The chances of repealing Brady at the federal level are somewhere between slim and none and slim just left town. The NRA’s mantra . . .
don’t expand background checks. Fix the current system. That’s like an anti-war organization saying don’t send more troops into Iraq. Let the ones who are already there sort out the Iraqi Army. In both cases, success is both unquantified and highly unlikely (to say the least). More to the point, the option of expanding participation after the “fix” is left on the table.
I’m not the only one who sees the NRA’s stance on Brady as “problematic”. Over at thenewamerican.com, writer Joe Wolverton II (above) highlights the hypocrisy.
The National Rifle Association-Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) reported on May 6 that the North Carolina Sheriff’s Association (NCSA) is trying to scuttle House Bill 562 because of a provision in the measure that would repeal “the requirement that law-abiding citizens must obtain permission from their local sheriff before acquiring a handgun.” . . .
In the story reporting on the NCSA’s opposition to HB 562, the NRA-ILA distinguishes the North Carolina process of approving gun purchase from the one preferred by the NRA:
This antiquated and inefficient system has been in place for nearly a century and was enacted long before the age of computers and computerized records. Unfortunately, the NCSA has determined it would like to continue to use discretion to deny permits to purchase handguns, rather than simply use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) utilized by the majority of other states.
In other words, while the NRA criticizes the North Carolina Sheriff’s Association for blocking the state bill that would end their current gun purchase approval system, the group has no problem perpetuating the federally mandated system.
Again, realpolitik. Why not beat back gun control with gun control – or anything else the NRA can lay its hands on? Because cognitive dissonance is dissonance. It’s makes it difficult for people to understand the NRA’s “true” position on gun rights. That they are inviolable.
Would the NRA lose ground in the court of public opinion if it came out against ALL background checks? Yes it would. Big style. But taking the longer view, how can the NRA promote the “proper” interpretation of “shall not be infringed” when they accept infringement?
I say go for it. You?