The NRA Is Going Broke And Moving To Texas

Dana Farber Cancer Institute is a nonprofit as well. Guess how much those executives make?

It's the price of doing business gents (and lady)

It is far more than his salary. It is all the other stuff going on with his "expenses" and percs. It is the sweetheart deals with his friends and family that charge the NRA 2x - 3x the market price for services. It is his continued practice of disguising and mis-categorizing expenses to cover up his gain and make it harder to tell where the money really went. It is his ruthless actions to squelch and silence anyone who isn't 100% committed to him.
 
The NRA called me last night. The woman on the phone gave me her little pitch. I asked if Wayne is still running things over there. No shit, her response was, "Unfortunately, yes." I told her FPC and GOA will get all of my money until Wayne is gone. She said, "I totally understand." I couldn't believe it.
They were calling me quite a bit. The last time they called I politely stopped the woman and asked her to relay the message that as long as Lapierre is involved in the NRA in any way, they won't get anything from me, and when my membership is up I won't renew. She said she'd send the message along and take me off the call list. I haven't received a call since, and it's been close to a year.
 
Dana Farber Cancer Institute is a nonprofit as well. Guess how much those executives make?

It's the price of doing business gents (and lady)
Yeah, well, when the NRA has annual revenues of $2.4 billion, net annual income of $190 million after expenses, and a net asset valuation of $3.9 billion, you can call and make that comparison. Until then, you're likely going to come off as another apologist blowing smoke.

 
Jesus trucking Christ.....don't dance around with semantic bullshit.....
That seems surprisingly defensive.

It certainly isn't "semantic bs" to ask what percentage of their budget is spent on "useful" versus "useless" items, regardless of how you wish to define each of those categories. If they're spending 5% on executive salaries / perks vs 95% on objective 2A goals, I don't think anyone would care. If it's 95% / 5% the other way, then it's wholly appropriate to ask how much goes into each pile.

So, instead of getting your back up, perhaps you could tell us the size of each pile.
 
I hope it makes me a bad person for saying hasta la vista baby. By now Wayne must realize he is hated even by gun owning purists like myself, but that SOB won't pack it up and call it a day. He's going to drain every last penny out of the NRA along with whatever good will is left. Just being an NRA member pi**es me off.
 
I'm not happy with everything the NRA does either, and LaPierre is a suckubus.

However, it would be foolish to let them go under. No other gun org has the member numbers, recognition, clout, relationships with politicians who vote for or against gun legislation, and this is not to mention what they do for gun education/safety and marksmanship programs. You can whine, as I do, but then grow up and think less emotionally, as that's exactly what fat fuque Karens do in the suburbs.
Sometimes a thing is too far gone to save.
You need to tear it down and start over.
Pains me to say it , but it's the only way you are going to dig Wayne out.
Then make sure that this type of thing can never happen again.
 
Yup. Oh, yes.....yup! Right from the early days in the 1970s when we had no GOAL and some corrupt Middlesex County sheriff put a referendum question on the Massachusetts ballot to disarm us peasants but completely exempt his fellow badge carriers. NRA sat on the sidelines, figuring us Ma**h***s deserve to take the big one right up the puckered hole. The associated groups that banded together and became united as GOAL pushed back and saved our 2A rights by getting this proposal voted down. It was a come-from-behind victory and damned close. Washington DC residents lost their rights to their private possession of handguns just a few short month later. Once again, where was the NRA? I might be old but I still have my memory. Senility hasn't set in quite yet!

Not true at all. NRA was responsible for defeating the MA Handgun ban and starting GOAL.


In 1976, a handgun confiscation initiative appeared on the statewide ballot in Massachusetts.

It was proposed that authorities confiscate all handguns in the state, including BB guns. Gun owners would have six months to surrender their firearms, after which they would face a mandatory year in prison for owning a handgun.

The confiscation law seemed poised to pass. The most liberal state in the nation, Massachusetts--along with the District of Columbia--was the only place that had given its electoral votes to Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern in 1972. (McGovern had run on a platform calling for a national ban on all handguns considered "unsuitable for sporting purposes.")

Most of the Massachusetts media strongly supported a handgun ban. The Boston Globe, whose reach extends throughout the relatively small state, vehemently opposed handgun ownership. So did the television stations in Boston.

Early polling suggested that a handgun ban would pass handily. Further, in the 1974 election, voters in several state legislative districts had overwhelmingly supported measures instructing their state legislators to vote for strict anti-gun legislation.

In the early 1970s, Massachusetts gun owners were numerous, but they were disorganized, disillusioned and defeatist. That began to change in 1974, when the NRA helped organize a joint sportsmen's committee, which soon became the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL). With gun owners cooperating and contributing, goal was able to hire a full-time executive director, and then a secretary. To have two people working full-time on gun rights issues made a big difference, starting in the state legislature.

Together, GOAL and NRA began a grassroots education campaign against Question 5. It started with county-level meetings throughout the state in August. Voter registration information was distributed in English and Spanish. The meetings were attended by 18,000 people, and from them came nearly 2,000 volunteers. The meetings also raised money for billboards, fliers and other advertising.

The GOAL and NRA activists made their case to other organizations, including the Farm Bureau, Grange, Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, the Western Massachusetts Labor Council and many local union members, who joined them in opposing Question 5.

In the early 1970s, Massachusetts gun owners were numerous, but they were disorganized, disillusioned and defeatist. That began to change in 1974, when the NRA helped organize a joint sportsmen's committee, which soon became the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL). With gun owners cooperating and contributing, goal was able to hire a full-time executive director, and then a secretary. To have two people working full-time on gun rights issues made a big difference, starting in the state legislature.

Together, GOAL and NRA began a grassroots education campaign against Question 5. It started with county-level meetings throughout the state in August. Voter registration information was distributed in English and Spanish. The meetings were attended by 18,000 people, and from them came nearly 2,000 volunteers. The meetings also raised money for billboards, fliers and other advertising.

The GOAL and NRA activists made their case to other organizations, including the Farm Bureau, Grange, Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, the Western Massachusetts Labor Council and many local union members, who joined them in opposing Question 5.

Complete details at:

Against All Odds​

by Dave Kopel Jan. 25, 2012

 
Tom King


"Now, it can’t be said enough that this case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, would not have moved forward without the NRA’s legal and financial support. This case would not have begun without the NYSRPA and it could not have made it through the process without the NRA." Tom King, president of the NYSRPA

 
Not true at all. NRA was responsible for defeating the MA Handgun ban and starting GOAL.


In 1976, a handgun confiscation initiative appeared on the statewide ballot in Massachusetts.

It was proposed that authorities confiscate all handguns in the state, including BB guns. Gun owners would have six months to surrender their firearms, after which they would face a mandatory year in prison for owning a handgun.

The confiscation law seemed poised to pass. The most liberal state in the nation, Massachusetts--along with the District of Columbia--was the only place that had given its electoral votes to Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern in 1972. (McGovern had run on a platform calling for a national ban on all handguns considered "unsuitable for sporting purposes.")

Most of the Massachusetts media strongly supported a handgun ban. The Boston Globe, whose reach extends throughout the relatively small state, vehemently opposed handgun ownership. So did the television stations in Boston.

Early polling suggested that a handgun ban would pass handily. Further, in the 1974 election, voters in several state legislative districts had overwhelmingly supported measures instructing their state legislators to vote for strict anti-gun legislation.

In the early 1970s, Massachusetts gun owners were numerous, but they were disorganized, disillusioned and defeatist. That began to change in 1974, when the NRA helped organize a joint sportsmen's committee, which soon became the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL). With gun owners cooperating and contributing, goal was able to hire a full-time executive director, and then a secretary. To have two people working full-time on gun rights issues made a big difference, starting in the state legislature.

Together, GOAL and NRA began a grassroots education campaign against Question 5. It started with county-level meetings throughout the state in August. Voter registration information was distributed in English and Spanish. The meetings were attended by 18,000 people, and from them came nearly 2,000 volunteers. The meetings also raised money for billboards, fliers and other advertising.

The GOAL and NRA activists made their case to other organizations, including the Farm Bureau, Grange, Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, the Western Massachusetts Labor Council and many local union members, who joined them in opposing Question 5.

In the early 1970s, Massachusetts gun owners were numerous, but they were disorganized, disillusioned and defeatist. That began to change in 1974, when the NRA helped organize a joint sportsmen's committee, which soon became the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL). With gun owners cooperating and contributing, goal was able to hire a full-time executive director, and then a secretary. To have two people working full-time on gun rights issues made a big difference, starting in the state legislature.

Together, GOAL and NRA began a grassroots education campaign against Question 5. It started with county-level meetings throughout the state in August. Voter registration information was distributed in English and Spanish. The meetings were attended by 18,000 people, and from them came nearly 2,000 volunteers. The meetings also raised money for billboards, fliers and other advertising.

The GOAL and NRA activists made their case to other organizations, including the Farm Bureau, Grange, Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, the Western Massachusetts Labor Council and many local union members, who joined them in opposing Question 5.

Complete details at:

Against All Odds​

by Dave Kopel Jan. 25, 2012

NRA and GOAL did some great things back in the day. That doesn't change the fact that a couple decades later GOAL leadership went off the rails. GOAL is now a much better organization than it was at one point.

NRA has done some good things. That doesn't change the fact that Wayne LaPierre is looting the organization. I'm a life member of both GOAL and NRA. NRA won't get another dime from me until and unless Wayne and his cronies are gone. Until then, I'll donate my money elsewhere.
 
I don't think anyone disagrees that the NRA has done, and continues to do good things for gun owners. I also don't think anyone disagrees that Lapierre will continue to siphon money from the NRA for him, his family and friends as long as he's allowed to.

Stating that fact and deciding not to support an organization that is complicit in his thievery doesn't mean someone is opposed to the mission of the NRA. I would say most of us don't want to see the NRA fold up, but instead perform a major restructuring of its leadership, starting with Lapierre.

As for the New York State issue, no doubt the NRA played a big part in that. I wouldn't expect anything other than praise for them from their NY State affiliate as well as in one of their publications.

I heard about this podcast from someone here, and highly recommend it. Gangster Capitalism. They have several episodes about the NRA and Wayne's BS. Pretty troubling shit!!
 
Back
Top Bottom