• DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Same, I just want responsible laws regarding gun ownership and the NRA is opposed to any regulation no matter how sensible or popular.

      • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        7 months ago

        They have a whole responsible half, it’s just that the other half is so wildly irresponsible that you can forget.

        Also, it’s crazy just how powerful they were in their heyday. All politicians had to kiss the ring.

        I guess some things are OK.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    They stopped performing their primary mission, which is why others have quickly taken their place to defend the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            No.

            It was a straightforward matter of using guns responsibly such as financially supporting ranges and providing training. Things that should happen in a society that’s going to have guns around. Stopping black people from having guns started popping up when the Black Panthers realized they had gun rights, too, and started using them. That was much, much later in the organization’s history, and is when they started being directly involved in politics.

            Now it’s so deep down the right-wing rabbit hole that its original mission is barely worth talking about, even though they still technically do it.

    • LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Their primary mission was training and education, they only got into politics when it turned out to be a cash cow, and that was their downfall. It just had a long tail of money making first.

      • vivadanang@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        safety training no less. basic gun safety and security was one of the biggest things the NRA did until they transformed into a lobbying org for the arms industry.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        They got into politics after a string of federal gun control bills became law; most notably the NFA and Gun Control Act of '68. Suddenly there was a need to protect the right to keep and bear arms and they were in the optimal position to do it. Then they got greedy and others have thus taken on the mantle.

        • chaogomu@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s not quite the story. Or it is, but only in the broadest of strokes.

          The real story boils down to Harlan Carter, and his bullshit.

          See, prior to 1968, the NRA did get involved in politics. They were consulted on gun regulation, and even had a hand in helping to write the NFA and Gun Control Act of '68.

          This pissed off Harlan Carter, who was a racist, unrepentant murderer, and former head of the US Border Patrol, into staging a coup for the control of the NRA leadership.

          He then instantly started running the NRA as the propaganda arm of the gun manufacturers, and was paid handsomely to do so. It’s also when the NRA “got into politics”.

          It’s also when they somehow collectively forgot about the second half of the Second Amendment.

          • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s also when they somehow collectively forgot about the second half of the Second Amendment.

            The second half?

            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.

    • popcap200@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah! It’s not surprising.

      20% of gun owners (including me) claim to lean or be Democrats. That’s a fifth of possible customers you’ll never get a penny from. 44% claim to be or lean republican and the remaining 36% didn’t swing either way or didn’t answer. I’m sure a lot of them also have moved on to more inclusive organizations like you’ve said.

      Gun safety and ownership shouldn’t be a political thing, but the NRA makes it one every chance it gets. Like, from my understanding, they’ve been quietly uppity on preventing smart guns from being sold in the US for years now for no reason.

      • dan1101@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Same. I realize the politicians voting against gun rights are almost all Democrats, but the NRA needs to quit being political and stick to the topics instead of demonizing half their potential membership.

        • popcap200@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Shit, or work with the Dems and Republicans to make reasonable gun legislation that everyone can support, for example the gun show loophole IMO.

          • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            The “gun show” loophole is the “I want to sell my gun to someone who isn’t a firearms dealer” loophole.

            Terming it a gun show loophole makes legislators go after gun shows as if dealers are selling firearms there to anybody without a background check.

            It also leads into legislation like the recent proposal for preventing non-dealers from turning a profit on gun sales( many guns increase in value over time, discouraging private sales in general)

            What most people can agree on is universal background checks for private sales, but because of weasel words the conversation is poisoned.

            • popcap200@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yeah, I call it the gun show loophole because that’s the common phrasing, but I see your issue with the phrase. Do you have a preferred name for it?

              I personally still think any gun sale should be facilitated through an FFL whether directly or as a third party for the purpose of background checks being done.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Let it burn to the ground at this point. Other organizations can take up the mantle in a less shitty way.

    • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Correct, I rather support the Firearms Policy Coalition because they are actively defending individual’s rights in court and winning.

  • wildcardology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well giving senators and congressmen money to push their constituents to buy more guns isn’t really paying off huh.