Fishman: The NRA Has Given New York State Regulators the Power to Destroy It

National Rifle Association

Bigstock

How’s this for “risk appetite?” The NRA has managed to leave its own fate in the hands of New York State regulators.

An official assessment performed by (NRA managing director of tax and risk management Emily) Cummins last summer dryly describes the N.R.A.’s decision-making during the previous year as “management’s shift in risk appetite.” The document analyzes the organization’s executive-liability exposures and discusses insurance policies that “protect NRA directors and officers from claims by third parties that they have breached their duties, such as by mismanagement of association assets.” From 2018 to 2019, it says, insurance costs increased by three hundred and forty-one per cent. “To say this is a major increase would be an understatement,” Peter Kochenburger, the deputy director of the Insurance Law Center at the University of Connecticut, told me. “This seems to be pretty direct evidence that the N.R.A.’s problems are not due to New York but rather to how the organization conducts itself.”

The memos urged the audit committee to “step up + fulfill its duties!,” but it’s not clear what the board has done to root out malfeasance. James Fishman, a co-author of “New York Nonprofit Law and Practice: With Tax Analysis,” a leading text on nonprofit law, told me, “There is no such thing as a director who doesn’t direct. You’re responsible to make yourself aware of what’s going on. If the board doesn’t know, they’ve breached their duty of care, which is against the law in New York,” where the N.R.A. is chartered. According to Owens, the former I.R.S. official, New York State “could sanction board members, remove board members, disband the board, or close down the organization entirely.”

– Mike Spies in Secrecy, Self-Dealing, and Greed at the N.R.A.

comments

  1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Thanks to Wayne’s mismangment and the capitulation crowd at Negotiating Rights Away,past time to return the organization to it’s members.

    1. avatar Rincoln says:

      I’ve written letters and emails to this effect. If Wayne, Cox, Hammer, and the rest of the capitulators step down; I’m willing to become a life member. But, they’ll receive not one cent until that happens. When you lobby for and succeed in getting new infringements, you are no longer a civil rights organization. You are the enemy.

      1. avatar Forward Assist says:

        Don’t forget the brilliance of a boardroom full of old men thinking that TV will be the next big thing. The NRA not only missed the boat, they missed the century.

        Probably time to cut ties and clear the playing field so an effective organization can spring up and save the day. Misguided leadership, loss of purpose, and massive groupthink turned the NRA from political engine to boat anchor.

        Just nature taking its course. Move along. Nothing more to see here.

        1. avatar Anymouse says:

          NRA TV is their streaming service, not broadcast TV. They don”t know how to utilize it, which is the crux of the case against their ad agency that runs it.

        2. avatar Kenneth says:

          That is exactly what I thought when I cut my cords to the NRA… in 1980. Once I reached the age of reason…

      2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Those who are Life and unfortunately stuck have another option,I sent Negotiating Rights Away not a cent,it goes to GOA and SAF and my state organizations. When I do receive a NRA mailer or email asking,please send money,it goes to trash or the circular file,I’m through padding Wayne,Chris and Marion’s retirement accounts.

      3. avatar barnbwt says:

        Bingo, plus one, and I ain’t the only one

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Bing go, plus 2! Never like the NRA from the start.
          Life membership for two, with the GOA!! Support two
          pro-firearm organizations in Minnefornia. The NRA is
          dead to me.

      4. avatar Nanashi says:

        It’s when I saw the LaPierre Laval interview where he openly says he has supported the existed law on automatic firearms, despite his earlier claim repealing these laws was his top priority, that I realized they didn’t need to be reformed: They needed to be destroyed.

  2. avatar Full Otto says:

    “Let’s see. We can be fiscally responsible and work for our members or pay ourselves multi-millions of dollars and walk away unscathed after we crash and burn the NRA. What to do? What to do?”

  3. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    Sound like the perfect way to destory a “Pro2A Civil Rights Organization” by placing moles, disruptors, money 💰 leaches, parasites and other ill will…Something that could only be dreamed up by the “Deep State.”
    “Divide and Conquer !” The olds trick in the dirty politics Rule book….

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Interesting that Wayne LaPierre was a democrat lobbyist. The executives, along with their friends and relatives have used the NRA to become multi-millionaires. It’s almost like they’re members of congress.

      1. avatar User1 says:

        Don’t forget they were hanging out with Russian agents and went to Russia to have a nice get together like old Bernie Sanders did.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      I indeed think LaPierre has been effectively “controlled opposition” this whole time. Not that I think he has secret robed meetings with Pelosi, but I think he’s cut from the same “go along to get along to get more money” set that makes up most of our useless & corrupt officials in DC. Apart from Heller –which I’m starting to think was an accidental fluke as opposed to a strategic decision by SCOTUS– the NRA hasn’t done much of anything locally or nationally besides use the concealed-carry market opened up by that decision (which they didn’t even do the legwork on) to make a ton of money selling insurance. Well, they did expend tremendous effort driving out Neal Knox and his supporters in the late 90s when he started sniffing around LaPierre’s mismanagement of the organization’s finances…

      I’d love to see the numbers on Carry Guard, too; how much support users actually received or needed, how many had their finances protected, how many were able to escape conviction/lawsuits…and compare those numbers to non-users. I have a feeling there’s a big “gee whiz!” realization there as well, as with so many other aspects of NRA org activism.

      1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

        Carry Guard is a bad deal for the gun owner, which is why it is compleatly defensable in court, even under NY law. It only pays out after the fact and you are found not guilty. In the mean time you have had to sell your house and raid your retirement to pay for lawyers to defend you from the essentially unlimited resources of the state. Since it is reimbursement only, and only if you are found not guilty, they should be able to succeed against NY.

        I think Wayne is lining his pockets with membership money, but that is separate from their fight with NY.

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          This is pretty typical of how most such policies have been written, so as to avoid indemnifying for intentionally wrongful conduct, which is prohibited under the insurance law of most states. More recent products have found a way around this restriction, but I do not know how they have done it.

      2. avatar Nanashi says:

        The NRA, despite its claims, actually opposed Heller for most of Heller’s efforts. Look it up.

      3. avatar JW says:

        Heller actually owes more to the 2nd amendment foundation than the NRA. I’m a life member of the NRA, so that I can have some influence on the the largest organization speaking for gun owners, but my annual gun-rights donation goes to the 2A foundation and will continue to do so until the NRA begins to work for all of my 2A rights and stops giving cover to anti 2A Republicans.

  4. avatar NoAdmiration says:

    And that’s why I didn’t renew my membership this year.

    Calls me for money…

    Continues to actively promote Trump after:
    No national reciprocity…
    No hearing protection act…
    Machines guns redefined by executive order to ban bump-stocks…

    The NRA is not my friend. It’s OK to leave abusive relationships.

    Join SAF and GOA.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Also FPC

    2. avatar User1 says:

      Didn’t Trump also sign the Fix NICS?

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Yup; gave away the one bargaining chip we were going to use to get Reciprocity or HPA passed…in exchange for nothing. Just like bump stocks. It’s almost like he’s anti-gun or something…but that’s impossible.

  5. avatar Carl B. says:

    “Peter Kochenburger, the deputy director of the Insurance Law Center at the University of Connecticut, told me. “This seems to be pretty direct evidence that the N.R.A.’s problems are not due to New York but rather to how the organization conducts itself.”

    Yeah, i’m going to believe the word of some UConn hack. Eff New York and eff the anti-NRA trolls.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      The problem with the NRA is not new,the struggle to return the organization to it’s members has been ongoing for the last 40 or more years.If one hasn’t lived under a rock or tree and instead being involved in the fight for the 2 nd. amendment the problems with the organization would be clear,no trolling to it.

      1. avatar Powderfinger says:

        Strange when pro-2A folks are called anti-NRA trolls. Guess we know who’s on what side now.

        Anyone who gives money to the NRA is living in a fantasyland where corporate lobbyists simultaneously sell off your constitutional rights then charge you an annual fee to get them back. No wonder the NRA had too much money to properly manage it, let alone actually do the work it promised. The NRA is dead to me. Tough love but if not now, when?

    2. avatar Dude says:

      The New Yorker is very left wing, and want’s to intentionally put the NRA in a bad light. But read the source article and explain to me which parts are lies.

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        The NRA management has chosen a position and path where it can be put in a position it now finds itself in,a less than favorable light.

        1. avatar Forward Assist says:

          I don’t need the NYT to tell me anything. The NRA newsblasts do a fine job of highlighting the NRAs failures on their own. The internal fighting on the board is just proof of the source.

          NRA is committing suicide on their own. No liberal media needed.

        2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “I don’t need the NYT to tell me anything.”

          I rely on the NYT to continually remind me of how feckless, corrupt, and flat-out *evil* the Leftists really are…

    3. avatar Hans says:

      Carl is a pro-shill for the NRA,

      1. avatar Carl B. says:

        How much does Soros pay you?

  6. avatar Greg says:

    GOA is the way to go. They actually care about rights more than money.

  7. avatar former water walker says:

    Explain to me what GOA actually succeeds at? After NEWTOWN we’d all be screwed. Thanks NRA. Now not so much. Getting rid of old Wayne should help. NRA is still the big dog…

    1. avatar Grumpster says:

      Yep. I dumped the GOA and instead sent those funds to NRA-ILA and SAF. A little bit of research showed that the GOA has done next to nothing in the courts compared to NRA, SAF, and state Second Amendments Rights organizations. Email bombs and talk mean nothing with no action.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      And after Parkland we *have* been screwed, thanks directly to the NRA.

      The Newtown stance was one of the very few times the NRA took a hard line against any form of gun control…and given subsequent developments I can safely say it was only because the GOP was out of power and was going to use the gun issue to fund raise in 2014. Because the Dems were proposing it, the GOP had to oppose it (compare to Trump’s & Scott’s gun control) and since they controlled a house of congress, there was no risk of anything happening or anyone having to make a hard decision. So it was *easy* to make bold-talk about how strong the NRA’s loyalty to gun owners was.

      LaPierre still managed to throw video games under the bus in the process (you know, the things that inspired an entire 2-3 generations to get into firearms & the NRA, as the shooting sports were dying in the late 80s)

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        The real reason we’re in the situation we’re in is Bloomberg and his money. Nothing special would have happened after Parkland either, but there was a well-funded campaign ready to go, just waiting to plug the faces in. The media, of course, were on board with it 100%.

        The NRA hasn’t worked out yet how to cope in this environment but neither has anyone else. Certainly not GOA, and I have yet to hear anyone identify anything they have ever achieved.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          This is one of those things that’s been discussed here before but not for a while so maybe it bears repeating and a bit of expansion.

          Yes, the antis have a well-oiled machine that’s ready to go as soon as there’s a shooting for them to take advantage of. I’m not going to describe how such a lobbying effort works again but it’s similar to the way a serious political campaign swings into “damage control mode” in a lot of regards. The difference is that this is larger. Sans a group of billionaires who decide that a pro-2A stance is their hobbyhorse, and therefore serve as a fiscal counterweight to people like Bloomberg, we’re not going to have the same capabilities in waiting. Really, we never could because after a shooting, when the pressure gets jacked up to “DO SOMETHING!!!” we’re on the defensive and bolstering all our defenses to match their capabilities would take many times the resources they have marshaled to attack us. That’s the breaks of the game.

          This is part of why I have repeatedly said we have to get better at optics and messaging on our side, to counter this to some degree. We can never have absolute parity with these people in terms of response time for a simple reason: their message need not be nuanced, ours must be and we cannot start speaking publicly about policy immediately because the optics of that are fucking terrible.

          At this point things have gone far enough down the gun control road that the best we can hope for after a major incident like Las Vegas or MDSH or Newtown is to throw an effective counter-punch because we are, by definition, getting hit first. On top of that, due to the way people already tend to think and the emotions at the time the best we’ll be able to muster is a “Yes, but…” type of response which is really just a play for time until people calm down and start thinking again.

          As such, preparing the field with advertising and messaging before the incident is important because we already have enough problems, particularly with the “NOT ONE MORE FUCKING INCH!” crowd who, while correct in what they say, are rather impolitic about how they say what they say. Their style usually ends up doing more damage than it does good. The best car ever made doesn’t sell for shit if no one ever sees it. It doesn’t matter how much that frustrates the dealership, if their actions don’t get people on the lot to check out the car world’s GOAT, they’re not going to sell them.

          The simple fact that a lot of people don’t seem to really understand is that we are selling something. As such we’re salesmen/women. When we undercut our own product we screw ourselves. The immediate time after a major shooting is the time when the danger for this rises to it’s highest levels. Appearing callous, uncaring or overly political is unacceptable to the public and therefore, if we want to make a sale, unacceptable to us because if the salesman is perceived to be an asshole the chances of a sale go way, way down. This is part of why the NRA and other right’s groups stay silent for a few days after a shooting. Inserting pro-gun politics into the mourning process isn’t wise and is usually self-defeating because it makes us look like assholes to exactly the “squishy middle” people we’re trying to reach by playing in to a caricature of us created by the antis. It also provides the antis the opportunity to hit us yet again with a “Look at this survivor, why would you re-victimize them? You’re a fucking monster!” line of attack which only, again, plays into that caricature.

          Unfortunately this gives the antis time to operate unopposed but that’s how it goes when they get to make the first move. It’s not like we invaded the Marshalls and Marianas the day after Pearl Harbor. It took us three and a half or so years to get to that point.

          As such the best way to deal with this is to let the antis play to the emotion of the time (because we can’t make a good move at that point anyway and no move is better than a self-defeating one), make our own play for time legislatively, and try to ensure the cooler heads prevail when it actually comes to the kind of legislation that antis want passed following a tragedy, hence killing the bills the antis advance. That seems counter intuitive to a lot of people but it’s really all you can do. You’re not going to win a boxing match by attacking the other guy before the boxing match starts. Sure, you might land some good shots but you get yourself is a whole hell of a lot of trouble for doing it and you never win the actual match that way because you got DQ’d.

          Simply put, I know people get impatient but this is a long game and some people don’t like chess or baseball. We’re not going to KO the opposition tomorrow. Like an athlete getting ready for a match by watching tape of the opposition we have to study their strengths and weaknesses, attack the weaknesses and avoid their strengths. Over the longer term, which I personally view as about a decade if we’re smart, dedicated and cohesive (the last part we most certainly are not) this is winnable. Love him or hate him that’s why the antis are freaking out about Trump. His appointments to the various judiciary benches make their go-to strategy of running to a cherry-picked court much harder.

          I would also point out that many people are myopic about this, especially in terms of court case dispositions (which also take for-fucking-ever). Winning on “the 2A”, while nice, isn’t the end-all-be-all in many cases because the authority that antis claim the government has to regulate conduct and ownership in regard to firearms lies elsewhere. As such, winning “on” the 2A isn’t really useful in the longer term because the antis will just tweak the laws and come at us again. Their plan is to exhaust our resources by making us fight a ton of battles on various fronts from straight up 2A to zoning regs. From our point of view the answer is to attack the underlying legal justification for these laws in a way that creates court cases that end with the government being stripped of the authority to create such a law in the first place. That puts the antis in a box where they now can’t play both ends against the middle but instead have to deal with the 2A head-on, which politically speaking is probably a huge loser for them, which is why they have avoided doing it so far.

          Much of how this kind of infringement is conducted rests on pitting one part of the Constitution against another part, such as the Commerce Clause against the 2A and/or 10A. Or claiming taxing authority or some other such nonsense. (Just look at Reno’s arguments in United States v. Lopez (1995) and subsequent end-run to tax authority for the GFSZA back in the 1990’s. The outcome of that case, the first of it’s kind since the Wickard in ’42 led to the 1999 United States v. Morrison outcome which, while dealing with the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, continued to roll back the power of fed gov under the Commerce Clause. While the two don’t seem super related, they are, because the Commerce Clause has been and is still a major pillar of antigun arguments in terms of the authority to regulate guns due to their presence in inter-state commerce. Roll back the government’s Commerce Clause authority and at least half of the basis for anti-gun legal arguments is gone.)

          The way to get around these arguments is to appoint judges and justices who have a more originalist interpretation of the Constitution in more areas than just the 2A. It’s important to remember that, really, the authority to which the government often appeals in cases of 2A infringement rests on court cases that didn’t start coming out “their way” (for political reasons thanks to the Japanese attack on Pearl at the end of 1941) until 1942. If we can get the courts, particularly the SCOTUS, to view things more the way they did in 1940 or even late 1941 (when they were striking down parts of the New Deal right and left), a great many of the ways the 2A is currently attacked simply disappear because the underlying basis for the attack is gone. That would still leave the taxing questions that arise from the NFA but it would still be a massive set of steps in the right direction and Rome wasn’t built in a day.

          So overall, I would tend to put aside concerns about being able to react immediately because, really, we can’t in a useful way. It is, IMHO, better to look for places we can change the landscape in our favor.

          I don’t think I can win a foot race against Usain Bolt right now. But if I cut his legs off before the race…

  8. avatar Freebird says:

    N. R. A. , is now just a ‘ branch ‘ of the B.A.T.F. since they work so closely together.

    ” The court ruled in United States v. D.J. Vollmer & Co. that “the B.A.T.F. has jurisdiction over the first sale of a firearm imported to the country, but they don’t have jurisdiction over subsequent sales.”

    Why do we never hear this from NRA ?
    http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/BATF-IRS%20Criminal%20Report.html#tgotm

  9. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I knew when they NRA got into the gunfighter insurance business if they were headed down the wrong path. And then when they kicked out the uscca from their meeting last year that was the end of it. The NRA is out of its Lane. Their Lane is protecting gun civil rights. It is not being in the gunfighter insurance business.

    Instead of trying to grow membership by increasing their presence in the Inner City or the gay community or women. Instead they tried to get into the insurance business.

    I don’t normally read anti civil rights news organizations such as the New Yorker or The Trace. However it seems they have actually done good journalism. And the NRA is going to have a very difficult time overcoming this. The leadership needs to change.

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Inb4 the NRA pushes for mandated insurance for gun owners.

    2. avatar User1 says:

      You don’t have to lie when it’s true.

  10. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    The NRA promotes itself as a member focused and run organization. However, when was the last time Wayne or Chris were on a ballot? Can the members vote to remove them? Can the board? No.

    What do you call a democracy where the people can not vote in their leader and their elected representative body has no power? A dictatorship.

  11. avatar Kyle says:

    Seriously? They’re a NEW YORK BASED COMPANY?!

    Irregardless of anything else, they need to get the hell outta that state, I’d recommend this weekend.

    1. avatar Hans says:

      Kyle, me thoughts also. The management and the
      board of trustees, must have alot of estates along
      the Hudson.

  12. avatar Wiregrass says:

    I get that the NRA is chartered in NY since that happened in the 19th century, but really somebody should have thought about moving that charter to a free state sometime around 50 years ago.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      If they had ,what would Wayne and Chis and the compromised directors do for supplies of their wine and cigar club.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Delaware has plenty of wine and cigar places near by.

        Dunno how that works for non profits but Delaware is the preferred state to incorporate your company for a number of reasons.

        1. avatar Hans says:

          Be-A-Ware, no thanks. The incorporation laws
          are little more than a honey pot for another leftist
          state.

  13. avatar jeremy says:

    The NRA’s internal struggles aside, it would be a *big deal* to many people who don’t even care about guns if the state of New York were to dismantle them. I’m positive something would rise to fill the space, and probably be a *much* more focused and less diplomatic entity.

    How’s the line go?

    “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”

  14. avatar Xaun Loc says:

    New York is never going to shut down the NRA…

    Not because of any strength of the organization, but because the handful of people at the top of the Anti-RKBA cabal all know that they need to keep this paper tiger alive.

    The Anti-RKBA movement needs the NRA because it accomplishes three things that are vital for their cause:

    1) The NRA provides a focus for the grassroots Anti-RKBA movement – it gives the Marching Mothers etc a visible target to hate;

    2) The NRA is the greatest fund raising tool that the Anti-RKBA movement has;

    and, perhaps most importantly,

    3) The NRA drains off the financial and political support of the pro-gun community, while wasting most of it and accomplishing almost nothing

    If the regulators in New York were to disband the NRA, the pro-gun community would be forced to turn elsewhere. There might well be turmoil for a brief period while the lower-level Anti-RKBA crowd rejoiced at the ‘defeat’ of the NRA – but we would quickly see GOA and/or FPC absorb the former-NRA members and step up their efforts – which are already more effective than the NRA.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      They are also the greatest allies in the infringement of the 2 nd. amendment that the anti’s have,as the list of NRA approved infringements they either suggested or approved of speaks for it’s self.

      History
      1791: The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is ratified.
      The amendment reads:

      “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
      the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

      After That
      1871: The National Rifle Association was formed by Union Army veterans Col. William C. Church
      and Gen. George Wingate.

      After that, they start going the other way

      The NRA actively supported the National Firearms Act of 1934.
      The NRA actively supported the Federal Firearms Act of 1938
      The NRA actively supported the Gun Control Act of 1968
      The NRA actively supported the misnamed Firearms Owners Protection Act including the Hughes Amendment (1986)
      The NRA actively supported the final version of the Assault Weapons Ban (1994)
      The NRA _proposed_ the bump stock ban
      The NRA is actively supporting “Red Flag” laws at the state and federal level.

      A track record of infringement that any Anti would be proud of.

      1. avatar Nanashi says:

        Don’t forget WRITING the LEOPA and Undetectable Firearms Act.

  15. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I havent in the last 5 years given and wont give the NRA 1 cent. Until Wayne and present cronies step down as officers.
    As for NY. Abandon it. Give it away to the other side. They deserve little Mussolini Cuomo. Once he and his kind are gone. Maybe go back in……….maybe. Im from the other 80% of NY that still cares. But as long as they stay. It pay the piper time.

  16. avatar possum says:

    I’m just going with the headline and be happy, NY legislators destroying NY, works for me. All ah snak bar Salem a lakem

  17. BE AWARE THAT THE ORIGINAL STORY WAS WRITTEN IN COOPERATION WITH THE BLOOMBERG PROPAGANDA OUTLET “THE TRACE”!!!!

    I am definitely not happy with the current NRA leadership, but I am also disappointed that The Truth About Guns either did not disclose the Bloomberg link or got fooled by them. The Trace is completely owned and operated by Bloomberg and poses as a legitimate news organization, which they are not.

    That said, this certainly does not mean that everything they say is false. It does mean that they certainly do not have the best interest of the NRA or the wider gun rights movement in mind – rather they are out to destroy both. What they say should be taken with a 5lb bag of salt.

    At the next NRA election, I intend to vote for candidates who commit to completely replacing the upper management team at the NRA. Therefore, coverage that would be helpful to me is reporting on which candidates are committed to doing this.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      Yep. It was published in the New Yorker!

    2. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

      Conservative news outlets are still busy sucking the NRA’s d**k, so members of the NRA Board of Directors who want to leak information about the corruption inside the NRA have no other choice than to go with news outlets that actually are willing to publish this information.

      Realize that this article is based on information from a member of the NRA Board of Directors that you actually would vote for. The members of the NRA’s Board of Directors have no power, except for when they leak internal information about the corruption in the NRA to the press. The NRA Board of Directors consists of 76 people and they simply do not have the power to replace NRA officers, like LaPierre.

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        If a large contingent of voting members show up at the 2020 Annual Meeting and demand the removal of the leadership, it will happen.

        1. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

          No, it won’t! A repeat of the Cincinnati revolt is impossible due to changes in the NRA bylaws that, ironically, voting members approved.

          I won’t be at this year’s Annual Meeting, but at next year’s. It will be as pathetic as this year’s will be, though. The President and Vice President speaking and the crowds cheering, all the while more rights are being negotiated away.

        2. avatar Mad Max says:

          Well then, perhaps the loss of donations will cause a change. Maybe, once there isn’t any money in it, LaPierre & Cox will look for other jobs and we can take the NRA back.

          All of this is good for GOA though.

    3. avatar Hans says:

      Good find, Mr Ward!

  18. avatar Mad Max says:

    As I said in a previous post, we need retired OFWGs that are dedicated to the cause and don’t need a salary to run the NRA.

  19. avatar David Bradford says:

    The collapse of the NRA would be a boon to gun rights in America. If they are gone somewhere in the vicinity of $400,000,000 annually would be freed up to be shared by the gun rights organizations that actually fight for our 2nd amendment rights. The GOA, SAF, FPC, FPF, CCRKBA and many State and local organizations would benefit greatly without the NRA sucking up dues and donations that they fail to put to good use. The NRA claims to be the Big Bad Wolf but is actually a toothless old and lame hound dog that won’t hunt.

  20. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

    It’s 4D chess. Have some faith and gratitude. You owe the NRA for all the gun rights you have. They protect those for you with money and livbying power that they created on their own, out of the goodness of their hearts.

  21. avatar Imayeti says:

    Wayne’s ANNUAL salary plus bonuses are well over $1 million.
    The NRA can’t afford it’s employees coffee.
    There must be some way to fix these two gross mismanagement’s. If only there were some way to fix both at once!

  22. avatar Hans says:

    TO THE EDITOR:

    The edit button is MIA. And why does a post
    which is directed at a poster [reply button] does
    the responding post appear way down the list?

  23. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

    You people all strike me as fools, no offense. If/when the NRA is gone, gun rights go the way of the dodo, period. There is no organization with the influence to step in and do what the NRA can.

  24. avatar Canon says:

    Strych9 said it, well in his unique way, you can’t be Usain Bolt during the race but he can cut off his legs… address the problem earlier in the process so it isn’t a problem when typically expected. The NRA, while far from perfect, does still have clout with elected officials. It also has an education program and kids that learn about guns aren’t afraid of them. We should be pushing for all kids in America to be educated, you know, to keep them safe – it’s “common sense”, who can argue with that? On a serious note, I saw this with my kid who went from learning in NorthEast schools that guns are bad to being exposed to guns, to learning the 4 rules, to repeat exposure to firearms, to realizing they are just a tool and to now asking for her first gun. Education is the key. The facts are on our side, the Constitution is on our side and we should be pushing for firearms safety training in our schools, the Eddie the Eagle program is a good place to start, we need to push at the local, state and national levels and we need to set the curriculum and have education continue every other year throughout a child’s schooling. A well educated society will do the right thing, grab their guns, when a loon looks to a harm our families and our way of life, rather than do the illogical and demand disarmament. Maybe I should run for the NRA board? 🙂

    1. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

      No, the NRA, does NOT have clout with elected officials at the state level. The NRA is completely absent at the state level when gun laws are being written. The only thing the NRA does is fund raising and sending e-mails to people that they should contact their representative. The state NRA’s lobbyist seems to be non-existent!

      At the federal level, the NRA is conspiring with Congressional Republicans to get the red flag law bribe bill though. So, yeah, they still have a clout there. They are still helping to write gun control laws.

      Good luck running for the NRA Board of Directors. I guess you don’t even have a clue how that works. The bylaws are designed to prevent outsiders to run in the first place.

  25. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    I read some time ago that a change in rules especially election rules completely destroyed the Cincinnati Revolt and Reform of the 1970’s meeting when the NRA wanted to get out of gun lobbying and construct a multi-million dollar shooting range in Raton AZ and forget all about politics. The election process is now so corrupt that the rank and file have zero say in the organizations decisions.

    Still I am a member and yes they still do save our ass many times in the gun control wars. No one who has followed them can deny that. I take the good with the bad and not throw the baby out with the bath water. Without them we would lose our gun rights in a matter of months not years. They do not always win but they do win a lot of times.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email