NRA in Massachusetts

[Len-2A Training]

It would have been very easy to find someone with "Standing" - just fund a suit by a dealer. Someone dropped the ball on this one big time.

The dealers WERE party to the suit. GOAL was also part of the same suit. GOAL was "dismissed" by the judge and the dealers continued the suit. The judge ruled that the AG had the legal authority to do this and the DEALERS FAILED TO APPEAL THE RULING. Thus, the AG was free to do his dirty deeds.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I knew someone dropped the ball - this detail shows who.

I wonder if the dealers even asked for financial backing from GOAL.

 

[LoginName]

Why Hasn't This Been Brought to Court?

It has. The Attorney General first proposed these regulations in 1996. At that time, a group representing the industry, the American Shooting Sports Coalition, sought and received an injunction against the regulations, so that they were not allowed to take effect until the court case had been heard. Although the manufacturers won at the lower level courts, they lost at the higher level due to a failure to appeal a certain decision. This was compounded by the fact that the ASSC was dissolving at the time. Their attorney failed to notify other groups, such as GOAL, NRA, or NSSF of the pending appeal, or we most certainly would have picked up on the appeal. Because of this court action, many of the avenues we would have chosen have been closed to us.

http://www.goal.org/misc/faq/handgunsales.html

 

[ArmedMainer]

Bill Clinton said the reason Al Gore Lost ( including his home state ) was the NRA. For that alone they should be funded for ever.

Actually Bill Clinton said Al Gore lost FIVE very important states due to the gun issue before the results of Florida were submitted. He was saying even if the Florida results were tampered with it had no bearing on the final outcome of the election. I'm sure the NRA helped win those states but it was far from the only reason Gore lost. If you figure out how many households have firearms in them and how many of them belong to the NRA you see one thing. If the NRA is our 800 lb. gorilla, it is overshadowed by a even larger block of voters that are gun owners in some shape or form. I find it comical that anyone {not you}would presume that a gun owner would vote for a liberal and aren't fighting the good fight just because they don't belong to the NRA. If that was true Al Gore and John Kerry would've won. I think the NRA's biggest triumph is with their youth programs that start the kids out right at an early age. When those kids get to be voting age they are more apt to vote pro-gun.

 

[Garys]

Bill Clinton said the reason Al Gore Lost ( including his home state ) was the NRA. For that alone they should be funded for ever.

Bill Clinton also said that the House of Representatives went to the Republicans in 1994 because of the NRA.

Chris not renewing with the NRA will make Tom Menino very happy.

Gary

 

[M1911]

Think about it from the NRA's point of view

I think they are just being pragmatic. MA is full of moonbats, from Cambridge to Northampton. Where should they spend their money? Should the NRA spend a bunch of money to fight battles here that they probably can't win? Or should they instead spend money to get shall-issue licensing in Wisconsin, something they've come ever-so-close to a couple times?

I despise the MA gun laws. But the reality is that most people in MA are anti-gun. Most politicians in MA are anti-gun. The judges and prosecutors are mostly anti-gun. The NRA can't perform miracles here and expecting that they should be able to just because we sent in our dues (which they can't use towards lobbying) is not very realistic.

If we stick together, hopefully we can reduce our losses and maybe now and then get a victory or two.

 

[LoginName]

One of the NRAs most recent victories...

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=8299

"Fairfax, VA- President George W. Bush signed into law the prohibition of confiscation of legal firearms from law-abiding citizens during states of emergency. This action became necessary following practices by local officials in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. This new law was part of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill.

“I want to thank President George W. Bush for signing this vital measure into law,” declared Chris W. Cox. “The chaos and civil disorder our country witnessed in New Orleans after the city abolished the Second Amendment confirmed every law-abiding gun owner’s worst fear - that pervasive gun confiscations can happen right here in America. As promised, NRA set out to pass legislation at both the federal and state levels to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens.”

H.R. 5013, the “Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act,” was introduced in the House by Congressman Bobby Jindal (LA - 1) and passed the House on July 25, 2006 with a broad bi-partisan margin of 322-99. Senator David Vitter (R-La) introduced the Senate version of the bill and an Amendment to Homeland Security Appropriations, which passed the United States Senate by 84-16, the largest margin of victory for a NRA-backed measure.

“The essence of the ‘Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act’ was so compelling that it received strong, bipartisan support in Congress,” continued Cox. “When 911 is non-existent and law enforcement personnel are overwhelmed with search-and-rescue missions and other emergency duties, law-abiding Americans must have legal protection to defend their families and loved ones in times of emergency. The NRA is honored to have helped guarantee this fundamental freedom.”

Of course, how much Meninostan and it's allies would obey this law in the event of an emergency is another question.

 

[calsdad]

I think you have to think a little of the big picture when you decide whether or not to renew your NRA membership. As a short time observer of the state of gun rights here in MA I have to agree with you that it seems as if the NRA has forgotten about MA in it's fight for gun rights. But you have to also think of the type of resistance they would get if they came here and think of that in comparison to the NRA going up against anti-gunners in states where there are far less moonbats.

The same amount of money spent in MA just to keep our gun rights where they are might actually make significant progress for less strict gun rights if it was spent in another state. I know this does not directly address the problem of gun rights here in MA - but think of it this way,

If the gun laws in the rest of the country were to somehow magically go back to where they were in say the 1900's - and Massachusetts stayed where it is now - gun owners might vote against MA with their feet by just moving out of state. Last time I checked there are something like 700,000 gun owners in MA. What kind of political pressure would applied if the newspapers published stories about how every other state in the union has Vermont style gun rights - and lower crime rates, and MA with all of it's whining liberals has strict gun control - and and out of control murder rate in Boston? Sooner or later we here in MA would get relaxed gun control by simple force of logic. Either that or all the smart people would just move out of the state.

I believe in the end any fight against gun control - whether it happens here or happens nationwide helps me out. If for no other reason than it gives me the option of responding to somebody as to why I am moving out state by saying that it is because of the draconian gun laws in this state - and the lack of gun laws in state X where I am moving.

The other thing you have to understand is that if the federal goverment decides to do something like totally outlaw assault weapons, or outlaw concealed carry , then whatever your local state does will become irrelevant. In fighting against this the NRA is the only game in town. When the local sheriff in New Orleans went around and confiscated law abiding citizens' firearms it was the NRA that went after them. And the fallout from that was other states did pass laws against confiscation. So the national fight does affect us - and your dollars to the NRA do help us - even if the effect is not immediately obvious.

 

[Lynne]

The only way the NRA will make any headway here will happen once OUR numbers have increased. We aren't a threat - our numbers have decreased 10 fold. So...the only way the legicritters will take us as a serious group is if we increase, so ladies and gents, find a newbie and take them shooting. Then get them to apply for a license and show them the PITA laws we have to deal with. Be fruitful and multiply children. (And don't forget to get them to join GOAL and the NRA after they get their license)

 

[tele_mark]

I'll tell you why I'll re-new, and get a life membership if I can swing it. Despite the freakin' mind-boggingly annoying, constant train of junk mail, email SPAM, and the constant badgering regarding the "10 Greatest Guns" DVD, which is rivaled only by WGBH's tactics towards anyone stupid enough to have sent a donation over the last 25+years --

Today I got the newest edition of Rifleman, and in it was the coolest little folder, personalized for our area, of the candidates and where they stand for gun rights. Since I moved back here from NH almost 4 years ago, I'm still confused about what Worcester district I'm in. All I have to do is bring this little folder with me to the polls, and I'm set! I'm sure everyone around the country got copies personalized to their areas. Not to mention, the article on 1911's!

I know they're the only game in town. I just wish they'd have the technology (or clairvoyance?) to figure out what my personal giving limit was. There's only so much of my wallet to go around, and I know what the slice of the pie is, thanks very much!

 

[DavidC77]

I just got my NRA mag in the mail today and they have the "who to vote for" section in it. they say Healy for Gov.

 

[wilfx]

When I first read this thread I thought it was a bad idea for anybody not to renew membership in the NRA. I am not very good at explaining things so I asked an expert. This message is from Jim Carswell. He is the NRA rep for the North east, including MA. I recently started working with Jim for the Friends of NRA. Trrying to raise money for the NRA and Ma clubs. Enough explaining. Here it is in his words.
Hi Bob:

Well, there is a NRA Rep for MA, me! I'm listed on the NRA website with contact info and the person could have called the NRA if they don't have web access.

The NRA has not thrown in the towel in MA. The ILA supports GOAL with cash and provides political e-mail alerts to members. A network of election volunteers is also maintained. We don't lobby directly but do it through GOAL which is why our lobbying effort is not very visible in MA. Obviously, the NRA does lobby nationally which will be very important if the Democrats take control of Congress in the next election. Who is going to do this if not the NRA?

In terms of NRA activities in MA, the FNRA program gave $50K last year in grants in MA, we had a Club University in 2005 in Burlington, MA, national programs such as Women on Target are funded and given in MA, and the Range Grant grant program is available to MA Clubs. In short, the NRA does quite a lot in MA.

The NRA is a volunteer based organization. We don't have the staff or money to do it all with paid staff. For that, the dues would have to be much higher or we would need our own George Soros to bankroll us. I would encourage your friend to get involved in the FNRA program or become an Election Volunteer Coordinator. These are both NRA supported programs that will provide an outlet to make a difference. Failing that, then he should write pro-gun letters to the editor of the local newspaper, volunteer for a pro-gun political candidate and make a meaningful donation to the candidates re-election effort. That's how things get done.

I hope this outlines what the NRA does and why it is vital that local volunteers get involved. The NRA can't solve the problems facing MA gunowners without their involvement and support.

Jim

 

[ArmedMainer]

I just got my NRA mag in the mail today and they have the "who to vote for" section in it. they say Healy for Gov.

I wonder if the NRA will still back her after she and Deval's running mate got into it last night. Someone needs to inform her that the Second Amendment is not about hunting !! I'd expect that line from Patrick but was surprised to hear that coming directly from her. There's a name for people like her.........anyone here know what that name is??

 

[Executive]

Member ID: 1448XXXXXX
Member Type: Regular Annual
Member Status: Active
Expire Date: 10/31/2011
Magazine: American Rifleman

I have to agree that membership is better than non-membership. I remain disappointed with the NRA's lack of resistance against the anti-firearm Massachusetts pols, but realize that they are limited to a certain extent. I renewed today for five years (see above). I hope that this post has caused many of the NES members to reexamine why they are NRA members and remind them that they need to stay active and aware of what organizations like the NRA are doing. Thanks for all the productive posts here.

Chris

 

[LoginName]

I wonder if the NRA will still back her after she and Deval's running mate got into it last night. Someone needs to inform her that the Second Amendment is not about hunting !! I'd expect that line from Patrick but was surprised to hear that coming directly from her. There's a name for people like her.........anyone here know what that name is??

In her defense...

She was caught off-guard (at least from what I understand), on the gun issue.

She's easily flustered and frustrated (not a good trait to have when in a debate or mixing it up with opponents).

While it's not the response we want to hear... it's a wise response given the fierce anti-gun sentiment in this state. There's plenty of Fudds out there that would sell-out in a heartbeat on other firearms issues just as long as they got to keep their deer rifles and slug guns.

I'm also willing to bet Healy doesn't know squat about guns, gun owners and the 2nd amendment... she probably wouldn't know a handgun from an "assault rifle" if came up and bit her in the ass. All her firearms info comes from aides and campaign advisors.

 

[M1911]

Christosx:

What gets the attention of legiscritters is simple: votes. We don't have the votes. The NRA could spend a bunch of money here in MA, but that doesn't change the fact that most people here in MA are anti-gun.

Until we can get more gun owners voting and supporting candidates, it doesn't matter a bit what the NRA does or doesn't do. They can make all the noise they want. The legiscritters won't care until we have the votes to defeat people like Sen. Fargo.

But the fact is, we don't have the votes.

That's not the NRA's fault.

 

[reinbeau]

In her defense...

She was caught off-guard (at least from what I understand), on the gun issue.

She's easily flustered and frustrated (not a good trait to have when in a debate or mixing it up with opponents).

While it's not the response we want to hear... it's a wise response given the fierce anti-gun sentiment in this state. There's plenty of Fudds out there that would sell-out in a heartbeat on other firearms issues just as long as they got to keep their deer rifles and slug guns.

I'm also willing to bet Healy doesn't know squat about guns, gun owners and the 2nd amendment... she probably wouldn't know a handgun from an "assault rifle" if came up and bit her in the ass. All her firearms info comes from aides and campaign advisors.

True, she was caught off guard by Tim Murray, however, she mouthed the usual mamby-pamby talking points about 'defending the gun rights of hunters and sportsmen', but she also said that she 'won't do anything to weaken the gun control laws as they are' in Massachusetts. I heard those words myself. That's a bit further than the usual talking points. As I've said many times, she's a politician, and our gun rights are up for grabs if it comes to her political career

As for the NRA, we (hubby and I) have discussed it many times. It's like holding your nose to vote - I'll bring myself to it but still don't think they do much for us here in MA. Do I blame them? Not exactly, but I expect more from them.

 

[Coyote33]

NRA/GOAL member here .

We Should bitch TO the NRA for more Ma activism. But as members , not outsiders. ...

Every time they send a survey or other money begging scheme, I fill it out and under amount, check off "Other", and put in 0.00 and write in the margin why.

Hopefully, someone somewhere will see this. If nothing else, it makes me feel better.

 

[M1911]

Look at it this way, Healey felt it necessary to answer GOAL's survey and to mark the answers in ways she thought we wanted to hear.

Our alternative is Deval Patrick.

The choice is between not as good as we'd like and the Devil.

 

[Coyote33]

I think they are just being pragmatic. MA is full of moonbats, from Cambridge to Northampton. Where should they spend their money? ...

They can start with Menino. He is getting after all the other mayors in the country. Someone will most likely be fooled by his lies. Time to stop that nonsense.

...Someone needs to inform her that the Second Amendment is not about hunting !! I'd expect that line from Patrick but was surprised to hear that coming directly from her. There's a name for people like her.........anyone here know what that name is??

Stunt? Hunt? See?

...She was caught off-guard (at least from what I understand), on the gun issue.
...
I'm also willing to bet Healy doesn't know squat about guns, gun owners and the 2nd amendment... she probably wouldn't know a handgun from an "assault rifle" if came up and bit her in the ass. All her firearms info comes from aides and campaign advisors.

Which comes back to the NRA (GOAL) argument. Why isn't she being educated in this?

 

[howie]

nra

When I first read this thread I thought it was a bad idea for anybody not to renew membership in the NRA. I am not very good at explaining things so I asked an expert. This message is from Jim Carswell. He is the NRA rep for the North east, including MA. I recently started working with Jim for the Friends of NRA. Trrying to raise money for the NRA and Ma clubs. Enough explaining. Here it is in his words.
Hi Bob:

Well, there is a NRA Rep for MA, me! I'm listed on the NRA website with contact info and the person could have called the NRA if they don't have web access.

The NRA has not thrown in the towel in MA. The ILA supports GOAL with cash and provides political e-mail alerts to members. A network of election volunteers is also maintained. We don't lobby directly but do it through GOAL which is why our lobbying effort is not very visible in MA. Obviously, the NRA does lobby nationally which will be very important if the Democrats take control of Congress in the next election. Who is going to do this if not the NRA?

In terms of NRA activities in MA, the FNRA program gave $50K last year in grants in MA, we had a Club University in 2005 in Burlington, MA, national programs such as Women on Target are funded and given in MA, and the Range Grant grant program is available to MA Clubs. In short, the NRA does quite a lot in MA.

The NRA is a volunteer based organization. We don't have the staff or money to do it all with paid staff. For that, the dues would have to be much higher or we would need our own George Soros to bankroll us. I would encourage your friend to get involved in the FNRA program or become an Election Volunteer Coordinator. These are both NRA supported programs that will provide an outlet to make a difference. Failing that, then he should write pro-gun letters to the editor of the local newspaper, volunteer for a pro-gun political candidate and make a meaningful donation to the candidates re-election effort. That's how things get done.

I hope this outlines what the NRA does and why it is vital that local volunteers get involved. The NRA can't solve the problems facing MA gunowners without their involvement and support.

Jim

we all need to help any way we can . my self i am a life member and a NRA recruiter . email me if any body want a membership application if you join for the first time i can save you 10.00 on your 1ST years membership
howie

 

[Rob Boudrie]

A paralegal at NRA ILA was kind enough to email a lengthy reply to my plea for assistance with the MA mail order ammo harassment. Although this only happened after my comments on this thread (which I doubt is a coincidence), it was obvious they had found my actual letter - which actually impressed me.

The only problem is that the answer did not address the central focus of my suggestion - a challange to federal court challange to the assertion that an FOB transaction occurs in a location other than that where the vendor delivers merchandise to a common carrier. The paralegal who answered my letter provided extensive info on MGL - stuff I knew, and which was totally irrelevant to a challange based on "the sales does not occur in MA under the universally accepted definition of FOB." She did a great job of answering a question - just not the one that I asked.

I have emailed a follow-up which very clearly states the limited scope of an FOB and interstate commerce based challange. Hopefully, someone at the ILA will be able to address those questions directly the second time around.

On another topic - the NRA competitions division did a great job responding when I needed to quickly obtain "NRA Recognition" for an event I was working on in New York state (which has a handgun exemption specifically for NRA or IMHSA matches).

 

[M1911]

They can start with Menino. He is getting after all the other mayors in the country. Someone will most likely be fooled by his lies. Time to stop that nonsense.

How? You can't buy the print that Menino gets for free, even if you had unlimited funds. And even if you could, the vast majority of Boston residents agree with him.

Even if you fund a candidate who can beat Menino, that candidate will be no better than Mumbles when it comes to guns. An openly pro-gun candidate cannot win in Boston, end of story.

 

[LoginName]

True, she was caught off guard by Tim Murray, however, she mouthed the usual mamby-pamby talking points about 'defending the gun rights of hunters and sportsmen', but she also said that she 'won't do anything to weaken the gun control laws as they are' in Massachusetts. I heard those words myself. That's a bit further than the usual talking points. As I've said many times, she's a politician, and our gun rights are up for grabs if it comes to her political career

As for the NRA, we (hubby and I) have discussed it many times. It's like holding your nose to vote - I'll bring myself to it but still don't think they do much for us here in MA. Do I blame them? Not exactly, but I expect more from them.

I understand where you're coming from, but given the political reality of our current situation (which borders on hopeless), there's some shit we have to eat.

I'd be more than thrilled if gun owners in this state actually made some gains (enter Larry Frisoli), but for right now the fight is to keep things from getting worse (enter Deval Patrick and Martha Coakley),... this isn't Texas or Vermont we're talking about.

Yeah, I wasn't too pleased about the "'won't do anything to weaken the gun control laws as they are' in Massachusetts" comments myself, but what would you have her say as the alternative? "We need to repeal the "assault weapons" ban? "Concealed carry should be the right of every MA resident"?

Saying too much in support of gun ownership in this state would be political suicide... especially when that bloated waste of skin Menino is on a roll with his mayors against guns side-show.

We're facing some real serious shit here. I wasn't a big fan of Healy from the start, but she's all we got right now for a potential governor.

 

[wilfx]

but she's all we got right now for a potential governor. The lessor of 4 evils.

 

[Len-2A Training]

. . .

 

[vellnueve]

Frankly, everyone needs to vote for Healey based on the sole fact that things will get at worst slightly worse, while with Patrick the shit will hit the fan immediately.

 

[reinbeau]

It's good to see that nobody here bothered to waste their time reading Post #72 in this thread before spouting off on the NRA (without any facts)!

What makes you think I didn't read it, Len? Because I wasn't totally swayed? Sorry, actions speak far louder than words.

And we are the "educated voters"?? We are in deeper trouble than we know!

We certainly are. There are all different flavors and kinds of koolaid out there

 

[Ericman]

Some meatheads are angry with the NRA because we all dont have vermont style carry with select fire glock 18cs that are unregistered right now. They dont seem to realize that the JPFO and other minor pro gun groups only ride along with the sucsess of the NRA and their extreme childish view has nothing to do with "their victory" because the NRA won it for them. The only reason why we still have guns is the NRA, every year they protect gun ownership and slowly return it to what it is. I dont understand why any level headed gun owner would complain about the NRA. The only reason why the Federal AWB is gone is because the NRA fought tooth and nail to have an expiration date on it. Yes, the NRA has not done much in MA but you will find that very few "conservative" organizations can get anything done in MA, it is simply too liberal here. Goal and the NRA have stopped bad legislation that would make gun ownership from bad to worse though in MA. Renew your membership.

 

[drgrant]

That's a bit further than the usual talking points. As I've said many times, she's a politician, and our gun rights are up for grabs if it comes to her political career

I still see her being markedly better than Deval on guns. We -know- deval is
going to go for the jugular right out of the box. (The bradyites basically
-endorsed- him!) I figure worst case Healy will be like Romney was, which
is apathetic or opportunist. It's still better than Deval- who basically is
ready to give us the legislative anti gun enema. If Deval gets in, expect a
bill to magically appear from someone like Barrios, and then deval will do all
sorts of pomp and circumstance to promote and drive the thing, and then it
gets signed and the game is over here, and the price is right "failure" horns will
sound, and we'll experience another chunk of our rights gone. And
that's just in the first round....

I guess what I'm getting at, is I'll take a halfway pro gun "waffler" over
a bona-fide anti any day of the week. At least the waffler is probably going
to be passive about the issue unless provoked... whereas deval... this is going to
be a "proactive" issue for the guy, you can smell it... mumbles will get him in the little
anti-gun mayor douchebag huddle, and he'll be their bed-buddy....

-Mike