# Who does the NRA really represent, overzealous gun owners, or gun manufacturers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 23, 2013, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510 "2013-04-23T17:38:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/41 "2013-04-23T21:40:55Z")
He’s a beer guy, and that’s good enough for me. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/42 "2013-04-23T21:57:28Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > I stopped in to once again note the stupefyingly foolish and counterproductive nature of pretending that a lobby group like the NRA is a giant bogeyman and doesn’t reflect substantial public sentiment on behalf of its goals. It reflects the public sentiment of its members, which is not necessarily that of American gun owners in general. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/43 "2013-04-23T22:02:23Z")
> [@XT](#): > > And, of course, as soon as there is political traction, the President et al DO start making noises about new gun controls and regulation…and, what do they start with? Attempts to revive the ridiculous AWB, which is a huge red flag to gun owners since it’s so fucking stupid and pointless… Yeah, since AWB hasn’t really had a hit since “Work To Do”. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/44 "2013-04-23T22:18:59Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > He’s a beer guy, and that’s good enough for me. And a [gardener,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busch_Gardens_Tampa_Bay) too! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/45 "2013-04-23T22:54:38Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > NRA membership hovers around 4 million. Around 47% of Americans own at least one firearm [Cite](http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx) so that’s around 147 million people. > > You’d think if more people supported an organization more than 2% would join it. > > ETA: That’s 47% of households have at least 1 firearm, still that constitutes a massive amount of gun owners and makes my point. How many members does NARAL have? How about thee ACLU? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > Policy comes from the board, and it seems that the big wallets have the best seats at the table and there is little chance for a regular guy to join the board. Sure, the NRA gladly takes dues from the great unwashed, but it certainly doesn’t answer to them. Then please explain the Smith & Wesson boycott and other attempts by the NRA to punish manufacturers that step out of line. > [@RTFirefly](#): > > I have a hard time believing this. It’s been obvious for decades where the NRA is coming from, and people don’t tend to keep on sending in their dues to organizations whose direction they are unhappy with. I renew my membership every year and I think that the NRA is run by crazy people who get paid millions to be crazy. > [@](#): > > Maybe there was a period of a few years after the 1978 coup when there were still a lot of nonpolitical sportsmen and gun enthusiasts in the NRA, but that was 35 years ago. By now, if you didn’t like what the NRA stands for, you wouldn’t be a member. There are surely exceptions to that, but not in numbers that matter. My friends dad became a life member before that. He just kind of waved away any concerns about the NRA being a little batshit crazy until they started expressing views on things like taxes and unions (he was a lifelong union member). The NRA members I know who want background checks won’t march on Washington to get it because they feel like they are being vilified so they just become agnostic sometimes with a mild preference for better regulations. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > Let’s explore that, shall we? > For the last few years what gun owners wanted was for the President not to take away their guns. I don’t know if you’ve heard the President discuss AWB over the last few months but when gun owners talk about gun-grabbing, they are talking about things like an AWB. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Also, do you think that if Max Baucus believed that 90% of NRA members wanted him to vote _for_ the Manchin-Toomey amendment that he’d _oppose_ it? Not in Montana they’re not. They may all vote Democrat but all their Democrats support the second amendment. > [@Debaser](#): > > Bricker makes a good point, but it’s even more complicated. NRA membership fees aren’t used for lobbying. That’s a separate arm of the NRA called the NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action). Some of it is used to issue ads that attack anti-gun politicians. The money is used for politics. > [@](#): > > I am an NRA member and I have been since childhood. However, I pay every year since I don’t want to commit to lifetime membership. I pay every year because there is a gun show I go to where you can skip the line if you are signing up for the NRA that day. So I basically sign up for the NRA every year to skip that line. > [@](#): > > But as has been pointed out in other threads, the NRA’s power doesn’t come from money. It comes from the members. > > Many groups or companies outspend the NRA by multiple orders of magnitude, yet don’t have nearly the influence. I agree the NRA is not an astro-turf organization. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/46 "2013-04-23T23:33:21Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > Adolphus Busch, mega money beer man quits the NRA due to his belief that > the NRA speaks mainly for gun and ammo mfg. > > [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/18/adolphus-busch-iv-nra\_n\_3112750.html](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/18/adolphus-busch-iv-nra_n_3112750.html) > > “The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established,” wrote Busch. “Your current strategic focus clearly places priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members.” > > “One only has to look at the makeup of the 75-member board of directors, dominated by manufacturing interests, to confirm my point. The NRA appears to have evolved into the lobby for gun and ammunition manufacturers rather than gun owners,” he wrote… Let no one say the [Administration wasn’t grateful](http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/April/13-at-452.html)… (Link is to the DOJ’s press release stating that they’ve settled their antitrust issues with Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV and Grupo Modelo, allowing their merger to go through.) The date, Friday April 19th, is either one or two days after Mr. Busch’s statement cited by **bobot**. As to the OP, agreeing with **Damuri Ajashi** ’s quoted material, the money is nice, but, IMHO, what is more important are the votes and letters the NRA leadership can reasonably threaten to use against legislators. The NRA membership might be a small minority of gun owners, yet they are the loudest voice for firearms owners’ rights, and their advertising products influence many non-members (including myself) in their decision on whom to vote for. I do not see how the interests of manufacturers or gun owners are at cross purposes with regards to most of the activities the NRA performs. Not saying there can’t be a conflict of interest between the two, but I haven’t seen it demonstrated in the thread yet. What form would it take? Further, the cited manufacturers/vendors, Barrett and Brownells, are not really known for their hi-cap magazines, though I’ve no doubt they sell them. [Brownells](http://www.brownells.com/) sells a large variety of shooting related gear, and [Barrett’](http://www.barrett.net/)s claim to fame is their .50 BMG rifle. High-cap magazines are a very small part of both of their businesses. If you were citing a company like [Magpul](http://www.magpul.com/), I could see your point. One argument I guess you could make is that the NRA has been sponsoring competitions to benefit and increase the visibility of certain manufacturers who make ‘non-traditional’ firearms. By which I mean the various ugly black rifles and exotic handguns used in competitions like [3-Gun](http://www.3gunnation.com/) and [IPSC](http://www.ipsc.org/). Anecdotally, at first this met with disapproval from older NRA members, “[Fudds](http://hueysgunsight.blogspot.com/2011/02/fudd.html)” if you will, who didn’t understand why the NRA was sponsoring competitions with guns “only meant to kill people.” Speaking purely _ex rectum_, my guess is that Fudds were a sizable plurality of the NRA membership, say 25 years ago, yet the NRA was giving visibility to manufacturers who made products that offended this membership group. Now, of course, the AR platform is the highest selling rifle around. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/47 "2013-04-23T23:53:48Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Bricker makes a good point, but it’s even more complicated. NRA membership fees aren’t used for lobbying. That’s a separate arm of the NRA called the NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action). But, as **Czarcasm** has pointed out, those fees do pay for [some of the most unbelievably batshit foaming-at-the-mouth propaganda](http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/nra_magazine_covers.php). I mean, every group wants to convince you that the world is going to end next week if you don’t send them money to fight (fill in the blank), and I’ve read quite a bit of it from both sides over the decades. But even by those standards, the NRA’s magazine covers at the link are really quite exceptional. > [@](#): > > I am an NRA member and I have been since childhood. However, I pay every year since I don’t want to commit to lifetime membership. I want the option of leaving if they change politically and I come to disagree with them in the future. You mean the batshit stuff I linked to hasn’t done the trick? Holy cow. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/48 "2013-04-23T23:54:12Z")
> [@Gray\_Ghost](#): > > Let no one say the [Administration wasn’t grateful](http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/April/13-at-452.html)… (Link is to the DOJ’s press release stating that they’ve settled their antitrust issues with Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV and Grupo Modelo, allowing their merger to go through.) The date, Friday April 19th, is either one or two days after Mr. Busch’s statement cited by **bobot**. > > As to the OP, agreeing with **Damuri Ajashi** ’s quoted material, the money is nice, but, IMHO, what is more important are the votes and letters the NRA leadership can reasonably threaten to use against legislators. The NRA membership might be a small minority of gun owners, yet they are the loudest voice for firearms owners’ rights, and their advertising products influence many non-members (including myself) in their decision on whom to vote for. I do not see how the interests of manufacturers or gun owners are at cross purposes with regards to most of the activities the NRA performs. Not saying there can’t be a conflict of interest between the two, but I haven’t seen it demonstrated in the thread yet. What form would it take? > > Further, the cited manufacturers/vendors, Barrett and Brownells, are not really known for their hi-cap magazines, though I’ve no doubt they sell them. [Brownells](http://www.brownells.com/) sells a large variety of shooting related gear, and [Barrett’](http://www.barrett.net/)s claim to fame is their .50 BMG rifle. High-cap magazines are a very small part of both of their businesses. If you were citing a company like [Magpul](http://www.magpul.com/), I could see your point. > > One argument I guess you could make is that the NRA has been sponsoring competitions to benefit and increase the visibility of certain manufacturers who make ‘non-traditional’ firearms. By which I mean the various ugly black rifles and exotic handguns used in competitions like [3-Gun](http://www.3gunnation.com/) and [IPSC](http://www.ipsc.org/). Anecdotally, at first this met with disapproval from older NRA members, “[Fudds](http://hueysgunsight.blogspot.com/2011/02/fudd.html)” if you will, who didn’t understand why the NRA was sponsoring competitions with guns “only meant to kill people.” Speaking purely _ex rectum_, my guess is that Fudds were a sizable plurality of the NRA membership, say 25 years ago, yet the NRA was giving visibility to manufacturers who made products that offended this membership group. Now, of course, the AR platform is the highest selling rifle around. O.K. I don’t have a horse in this race. Politics pisses me off, and beer makes me happy. Is the above to say that Mr. Busch beer sold his NRA soul to Obama so that he could buy Modelo? (As a beer freak, I am slightly familiar with InBev and their buying “opportunities”) ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/49 "2013-04-24T00:46:15Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I’m sure the gun manufacturers don’t have any problem with what the NRA does, but I don’t see any evidence that they’re the ones calling the tune. > > I could be wrong, but if so, I’d really like to see some evidence. Like you, I’m skeptical of the claim that it’s all for the gun manufacturers. On the other hand, back during election season, the NRA had a [Tumblr page](http://iamthenra.tumblr.com/), and it really seems to be more of a celebration of buying more guns than anything else. Now that I look at it, I can’t recall why I remember that this was an official NRA page, but I’m pretty sure I did verify that at the time I heard about it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/50 "2013-04-24T00:50:42Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And you continue to hit new ones. Do you think that extra $1500 will give you any more of the NRA’s ear than a regular membership would? Nobody at the top levels of the NRA know who you(or any other $1500’ers) are, because you don’t contribute enough to catch their attention. If any of the gun or ammo manufacturors said, “You’ll get your usual if you kick Bricker out right now” there would be a cancelation notice in the mail before he left the building. I don’t contribute more expecting to get a seat on the Board. I do so as a convenient vehicle to send them more money and get a cool patch for my bomber jacket, when I get a bomber jacket. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/51 "2013-04-24T00:57:58Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Then please explain the Smith & Wesson boycott and other attempts by the NRA to punish manufacturers that step out of line. Good point. The gun manufacturers support the NRA not to gain control, but to avoid the Smith & Wesson scenario. Here’s a great Businessweek article on the situation, linked from the wonderful web site [longform.org](http://longform.org): > **[Why Gun Makers Fear the NRA by Paul M. Barrett · Longform](https://longform.org/posts/why-gun-makers-fear-the-nra)** > > Money, money, money. The article shows how the NRA acts out of fear that if it doesn’t take extreme positions, it will be supplanted by those who do: > [@](#): > > LaPierre’s Columbine response earned him no affection from gun control backers and mostly disdain from “the base,” says Feldman, the former NRA operative. “Wayne took incredible grief among the more extreme elements, and he must have resolved, ‘never again.’ ” > > To understand LaPierre’s reaction to Newtown, it’s crucial to know that his organization does not possess a monopoly on the gun rights movement. Smaller, even more confrontational groups jostle with the NRA for attention and give LaPierre heartburn, say people who have worked with him over the years. Gun Owners of America, for example, calls itself “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington,” an unsubtle dig at the NRA. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/52 "2013-04-24T00:59:09Z")
I’ve been hearing that the NRA is under assault from other gun owner’s associations because they aren’t conservative enough. If true, the NRA must work diligently to earn the money it’s paid by the gun manufacturers lest they find a new mouthpiece. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/53 "2013-04-24T01:01:16Z")
Wow, you poisoned the well with the title. Well done. The NRA actually represents the gun owners, though their interests surely coincide with those of the manufacturer. If they didn’t represent the gun owner, he/she wouldn’t pay to be a member of the NRA. There are other gun rights organizations around, lots of different flavors for every group you can think of, like the Gun Owners of America, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and Pink Pistols, a LGBT gun-rights organization. Yet the NRA is far and away the largest such organization. Clearly they align well with their membership. As far as representing gun manufacturers, they have savaged two different companies in my lifetime for what they perceived to be actions damaging to gun owners, Smith and Wesson and Ruger. They would put the hit on any company that they perceive to be undermining their goals, which are to preserve gun rights and to prevent creep in gun laws. I don’t necessarily like the way they do that, but that’s their goal. One would hardly begrudge NARAL for opposing any restrictions, real or tacit, on abortion, but the NRA gets creamed for it when it comes to guns. The NRA is composed of its members and it represents them relentlessly regarding its single issue, its reason for existing, gun rights. Weird, then, that they are somehow expected to compromise and give ground on that issue. thats not why they exist, and that’s not what they do. You think they represent manufacturers? Nope. they back manufacturers inasmuch as without them there are no guns for their members to buy. They are all about their membership. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/54 "2013-04-24T01:32:00Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Wow, you poisoned the well with the title. Well done. Oh really? Having read the thread, can you point to the resulting tummyaches? > [@](#): > > One would hardly begrudge NARAL for opposing any restrictions, real or tacit, on abortion Who is this ‘one’ you’re speaking of? Because even Planned Parenthood is vilified these days among a certain fairly sizable segment of the body politic, and whatever they’re saying about Planned Parenthood, they’re saying much worse about NARAL if they still regard NARAL as a threat. > [@](#): > > but the NRA gets creamed for it when it comes to guns. Again, among a certain (though different) fairly sizable segment of the body politic. And, oddly enough, for the same underlying reason in both cases. What was your point again? ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/55 "2013-04-24T01:41:25Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Oh really? Yes, really. “Overzealous” gun owners? Please. Totally unnecessary. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/56 "2013-04-24T01:46:47Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Wow, you poisoned the well with the title. Well done. > > The NRA actually represents the gun owners, though their interests surely coincide with those of the manufacturer. If they didn’t represent the gun owner, he/she wouldn’t pay to be a member of the NRA. I paid to see “Toy Story,” which does not mean Pixar is representing me. Not for an instant do I believe the NRA is, as you put it, “all about their membership.” Not when the manufacturers are such a big cash cow for them and so well represented on the NRA’s board. Like most large organizations of its sort, the NRA exists for the purposes of the NRA. It’s a self-sustaining thing now that seeks to make itself bigger. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/57 "2013-04-24T01:58:29Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Yes, really. “Overzealous” gun owners? Please. Totally unnecessary. **RTF** : That is exactly correct. If you don’t know the difference between “gun owners” and “overzealous gun owners”, and that “overzealous” poisons the well, then I don’t know what to say. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/58 "2013-04-24T02:02:44Z")
I’d like to get to a deeper point, though, and that’s a theme I’ve been running with lately about the difference between the two parties coming down to the different sets of things they regard as problems. Time (not so long ago) was that the parties had very different beliefs about how to solve the problems of the day, but for the most part they concurred about what the problems were. (Imagine a Venn diagram with the circles mostly overlapping.) Sometimes - not always, but sometimes - you could find common ground as a result. Nowadays, in the Venn diagram of what Dems and the GOP regard as problems, the circles barely touch, and that’s why our politics is so screwed up. You may be able to compromise between liberal and conservative approaches to an agreed-on problem, but it’s hard to compromise if neither side sees the other side’s problems as problems. Why negotiate if it’s not something that needs to be negotiated to begin with? On abortion, of course, it’s easy to see why one side’s problem is the other side’s nonproblem. NARAL regards restrictions on a woman’s right to choose an abortion as a problem; the pro-lifers see abortion itself as the problem. But one would hope that either side could step back and see why the other side has the inverse attitude towards what constitutes a problem. With guns, it’s a bit different. We gun control folks regard innocent people getting killed with guns as a problem. We can’t understand why anyone **wouldn’t** consider that a problem. But for all practical purposes, the pro-gun side _doesn’t_ consider it a problem, because no discussion of solutions is acceptable to them. (Other than more guns in a society already awash in them.) This is why we have a problem with the pro-gun lobby being the way it is. We should recognize a common problem here, and be trying to find some sort of common ground to solve it. The abomination, in our eyes, is the unimportance/nonexistence of this problem from the perspective of our political opponents. I can understand why the pro-lifers don’t see abortion restrictions as the problem. But I can’t say the same about the pro-gun folks. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/59 "2013-04-24T02:05:06Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Yes, really. “Overzealous” gun owners? Please. Totally unnecessary. Unnecessary? Maybe. But the ‘oh really’ was about having poisoned the well. If so, where are the tummyaches? If that word in the thread title has poisoned the well of this discussion, show evidence, please. This is GD. ---
**Author:** ![drpepper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8baadc/32.png) [@drpepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drpepper)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/60 "2013-04-24T02:43:28Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Unnecessary? Maybe. But the ‘oh really’ was about having poisoned the well. If so, where are the tummyaches? If that word in the thread title has poisoned the well of this discussion, show evidence, please. This is GD. Christ. If this is what passes for rhetoric these days in GD it’s pathetic. I’m not sure what the fuck you mean by “where are the tummyaches” but I can tell you that when I read the thread title I rolled my eyes and feel like I have to hold my nose to respond to such idiotic discourse. “Who does the NAACP really represent, uneducated blacks or guilty white liberals?” “Who does the Democratic party really represent, overzealous urbanites or corporate money?” I could go on and on. How about this to draw a more thoughtful debate: “Do gun manufacturers wield too much influence in the NRA?” See, that’s the sort of neutrally-worded question that makes people from both sides of the aisle come to a thread and offer opinions (Do I really need to explain this to you?) As it stands now I have no interest in answering the loaded question in your OP, because clearly you would think I’m an “overzealous gun owner”. Instead to get things back on track from your stupid wide-eyed cloying question in your last post I have to state what is utterly obvious to anyone, and say, well, _I_ have a fucking tummyache from your thread title and think it’s useless to engage in any kind of cogent debate to address the topic of your thread, since clearly you have no idea how to actually, you know, debate. So, yeah, you poisoned the well for me. And I’ll bet a bunch more. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510.md?page=4)