# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/121 "2013-04-25T16:05:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > To the contrary. If you think the NRA’s actions are over zealous, don’t join. But as guaranteed by the First Amendment, I can associate with others to promote my viewpoint. And it is possible for that viewpoint to be overzealous. And in the NRA’s case, it is. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/122 "2013-04-25T17:11:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > One notes with amusement you demand citation for “liar” but “batshit crazy” passes without comment. Batshit crazy is subjective. I’m sure that someone as anti-gun as **BrainGlutton** thinks anyone who is pro-gun is some degree of crazy. But liar isn’t. That is something he should be able to prove. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/123 "2013-04-25T18:26:50Z")
And “anti-gun” is a crisply defined parameter, with clear objective standards? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/124 "2013-04-25T19:06:08Z")
It’s not quite as clear as “liar” but, yes, if I accused a public figure of being “anti-gun” I would like to think I would be able to produce a cite backing up my claim if asked. **BrainGlutton** is calling Wayne LaPierre a liar. Let’s see a cite that backs up this claim. Do you have some kind of a point? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/125 "2013-04-25T19:36:30Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Did you ask them just like that? If so, I don’t doubt that they would agree with you. > > But as has been pointed out the NRA is in favor of background checks, and supported the current system. > > Try asking your three NRA members again, but specifying that you mean background checks on all transactions, even between private individuals that aren’t gun dealers. > > I bet their opinion might change if they start considering that your dad could go to prison for years for buying a shotgun from your uncle. Nope, you are right…but my point was, in a poll where they aren’t looking for a nuanced answer, you might very well see the numbers Measure for Measure was trying to use to make his point. MY point was simply that the conclusions he was drawing were ridiculous, not to mention his hyperbolic language. I’m militantly unsurprised that BobLibDem’s comments didn’t even draw a mod caution on this subject. ---
**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 25, 2013, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/126 "2013-04-25T20:00:02Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > The evidence is incontrovertible: the NRA is an industry lobby that poses as a human rights organization. Its membership is composed of loons, gulls, paranoids and those of weak disposition. You have it a little backwards. The NRA is an issue based civil rights organization. Their memebrship joins them because they support the NRA’s views, the NRA doesn’t test the winds and try to represent their membership. They don’t ask gun manufacturers what positions they should take, gun manufacturers try to walk the line with the NRA positions. > [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > I was once an NRA member. I run in circles with loads of NRA members. Which of us are overzealous? I falsify your assertion all by myself, and to reinstate my membership I need only pay minimum dues, around $20. I am a current NRA member and IMHO, NRA members are about as over zealous in their support of the second amendment as anti-gun folks are in their opposition to the second amendment. > [@RTFirefly](#): > > That’s nice, but if M&T isn’t politically possible, then neither are those suggestions. For instance, a training requirement to own a gun - how is that going to work without registration or a close equivalent? There has to be a database either of gun owners or of people who’ve had the training to be gun owners for it to work. Yeah, I can see that passing Congress. In the year 2525. And the California law on gun sales - sure, great idea, but it didn’t have a chance, which was why the M-T compromise was reached in the first place. > > You’re saying the pro-gun-control folks spooked the pro-gun people, and what they should have done instead was to propose a _different_ set of laws that the pro-gun people would have liked even less, because they would have magically passed. I think he is saying that what is possible changes with the passage of time and events. What was possible in January after Newtown and the stupid response by the NRA is different than what was possible after Obama handed the reins to Feinstein and she pushed for an AWB. When gun owners realized that the anti-gun folks were fighting stupid with even MORE stupid, they dug in their heels. If Obama had started by talking about Newtown in the context of gun violence generally and the need to reduce gun violence. I think there was at least some chance of a grand bargain on licensing, registration, federal pre-emption of gun laws, a national CCW and relaxation of the NFA restrictions. > [@Bricker](#): > > The context of this thesis is that the NRA is acting contrary to the wishes of its members. The NRA isn’t a representative body. They are an issue organization. if after some horrible news event, the current and former membership of the ACLU supported the suspension of some civil rights (perhaps only with mild levels of fervor) and the ACLU continued to support those civil rights, are the ACLU members gull and tools? The NRA isn’t like a union that you join so that they can represent you and your interests. They are a civil rights organization that you join because you support that civil right. > [@](#): > > Every year, we get to elect board members. As a membership, we’re far from powerless. The “voter turnout” among NRA members is pretty low. > [@Debaser](#): > > The vilification of the NRA by some people is mind-boggling. Why? They hate guns and the NRA protects the rights of gun owners. Whats not to hate? A lot of anti-gun nuts also can’t fathom that anyone could possibly reach the conclusion that guns AREN’T evil so it must be because the NRA is mind controlling them. > [@Gray\_Ghost](#): > > As an aside, why does all of the information from the 4473 have to be entered into NICS, in order to be able to use NICS to vet a buyer? Why can’t the buyer’s name, SSN, and address suffice to give a seller a clear Yes or No on the sale? Why do the feds need to know the serial number, make and model, etc… in order to answer the question of whether the buyer is a bad guy? AFAICT, its not to figure out if you’re a bad guy, its an informal registry. If the cops find a gun at the scene of a crime, they trace the gun to the FFL that sold the gun. The FFL dealer looks up who they sold the gun to and they go ask THAT guy what happened to the gun. We kinda sorta have a gun registry already, its just porous, inefficient and decentralized. > [@](#): > > As it is, many classified ads listing firearms in TX require that the buyer have a CHL, but that doesn’t tell me the seller that the buyer is in compliance at the moment of sale. A lot of places exempt CCW holders from the background check. So, we kinda sorta have a gun license program in palce already, except its voluntary and not always current. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > When you have liars and psychos in leadership positions in the NRA, do you really have to wonder why it is despised? [http://www.american.com/archive/datapoint-entries/nra-popularity](http://www.american.com/archive/datapoint-entries/nra-popularity) I’m not so sure that everyone agrees with you. Perhaps you have lost your objectivity in this debate. > [@Debaser](#): > > But liar isn’t. That is something he should be able to prove. I am no fan of Wayne LaPierre but I think he believes every word he says. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/127 "2013-04-25T22:49:07Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/128 "2013-04-25T22:53:46Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > People that are anti-gun seem to be unable to grasp the fact that the NRA members actually agree with the NRA and like what the NRA is doing. You just can’t accept it, and the result is all these silly claims of the NRA representing gun manufacturers and not gun owners and the membership being pawns of the evil NRA. You are confused. You are making two claims, one that you find it absurd that people don’t think NRA members like what it is doing, and two you find it silly they think the NRA represents someone other than gun owners. You may make the claim that people who choose to join the NRA agree with it’s position, fine, that is but a tiny fraction of Americans. However, that seems fool hardy considering polls indicate the vast majority of gun owners favor background checks. It seems foolish because joining the NRA is a requirement for many gun clubs which provide the only outlet to use said weapons. It seems foolish because even then membership is but a tiny fraction of the actual gun owning Americans who they proclaim to speak for. So, you can say it. But it’s foolish. ---
**Author:** ![the\_diego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@the\_diego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_diego)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/129 "2013-04-25T23:49:20Z")
I don’t have the stats but military/law enforcement contracts will always be the most lucrative aspect of firearms manufacture. And that segment of the business is largely removed from the current debate. As to manufacturers who focus on the civilian market, they would be anxious but gun manufacturers can always scale down, depending on changes in demand and regulation. ---
**Author:** ![ChickenLegs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@ChickenLegs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChickenLegs)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/130 "2013-04-26T00:11:12Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > It seems foolish because joining the NRA is a requirement for many gun clubs which provide the only outlet to use said weapons. It seems foolish because even then membership is but a tiny fraction of the actual gun owning Americans who they proclaim to speak for. > > So, you can say it. But it’s foolish. What? I’ve been shooting for over 35 years and never once have been asked for to show proof of NRA memebership to shoot. Not once. This includes indoor and outdoor private ranges, outdoor state-run ranges, and miles and miles of public land. I rejoined the NRA in December 2012 after an absence of 10 years or so. This pretty much sums up how I feel about the new proposed background checks: > **[Account Suspended](http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html)** I’m done with it. No more. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/131 "2013-04-26T01:50:05Z")
During the Temperance movement of the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Drys constantly accused the opponents of Prohibition of being shills for the saloon owners and the distilleries. Same old. And for the record, many of the other gun-rights organizations like Gun Owners of America accuse the NRA of being _too timid_ in defending gun ownership! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/132 "2013-04-26T02:32:27Z")
> [@ChickenLegs](#): > > What? I’ve been shooting for over 35 years and never once have been asked for to show proof of NRA memebership to shoot. Not once. This includes indoor and outdoor private ranges, outdoor state-run ranges, and miles and miles of public land. > > I rejoined the NRA in December 2012 after an absence of 10 years or so. This pretty much sums up how I feel about the new proposed background checks: > > [http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html](http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html) > > I’m done with it. No more. The analogy fails. The people trying to “take” don’t want to keep it, they aren’t taking so that you can’t have it but they can. And also, the cake is a lie. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/133 "2013-04-26T02:51:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The analogy fails. The people trying to “take” don’t want to keep it, they aren’t taking so that you can’t have it but they can. Sure they are. The “cake” is not firearms. It’s control of firearms law. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/134 "2013-04-26T02:59:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure they are. > > The “cake” is not firearms. It’s control of firearms law. I don’t think that hair you split is as compelling as you think. ---
**Author:** ![JLRogers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@JLRogers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JLRogers)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/135 "2013-04-26T10:47:59Z")
> [@XT](#): > > When did this thread get moved to the Pit? It is a thread about gun control. They often, if not always, are packed chock full of illogical claims, emotional outbursts, and invective. Laws designed to quash or make more burdensome legal firearm ownership originate in part from a fear of efective weapons in the hands of the common person. It should be no surprise that the dialogue degenerates so quickly to mudslinging and emotional appeals. For example, consider the family members of the Newtown victims without whom Obama seemed unable to appear before the media during his push for gun control. This was clear exploitation of a tragedy for political ends, yet when anyone points it out they are accused of not caring about dead children. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/136 "2013-04-26T12:14:40Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > So, you can say it. But it’s foolish. Yes, it is foolish… All those words that you put in my mouth that I didn’t say. I’m sure glad I didn’t say all that foolish stuff. I’ve posted more than enough actual content to the thread for you to analyze and attack. Why don’t you try responding to that rather than things you’ve made up? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/137 "2013-04-26T12:18:55Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The analogy fails. The people trying to “take” don’t want to keep it, they aren’t taking so that you can’t have it but they can. > > And also, the cake is a lie. It’s a great analogy. It’s quite surprising that you don’t get it. Really. ---
**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 26, 2013, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/138 "2013-04-26T12:48:10Z")
No, it’s not a good analogy. The laws were passed as part of the democratic process, and as long as the SCOTUS deems them constitutional, nothing was “taken” that wasn’t yours in the first place. The 2nd amendment creates boundaries which can’t be crossed, and inside those boundaries like your rights. What boundaries have been crossed? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2013, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/139 "2013-04-26T13:29:51Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No, it’s not a good analogy. The laws were passed as part of the democratic process, and as long as the SCOTUS deems them constitutional, nothing was “taken” that wasn’t yours in the first place. Huh? First of all the analogy accepts that the cake is being taken away by the democratic process. Secondly, just because SCOTUS says something is constitutional doesn’t mean that it can’t be said to be “taken” away from people. If SCOTUS decided that abortion was illegal tomorrow, then pro-choice people would be correct to say that their rights to abortion were “taken”, for instance. > [@](#): > > The 2nd amendment creates boundaries which can’t be crossed, and inside those boundaries like your rights. What boundaries have been crossed? Can you elaborate on this? I don’t know what your point is here. Right now I can own an 18 round magazine. If a law is passed saying I no longer can, than the right to own this magazine was “taken”. How is this in any way debateable? ---
**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 26, 2013, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510/140 "2013-04-26T13:35:43Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Huh? > > First of all the analogy accepts that the cake is being taken away by the democratic process. Secondly, just because SCOTUS says something is constitutional doesn’t mean that it can’t be said to be “taken” away from people. If SCOTUS decided that abortion was illegal tomorrow, then pro-choice people would be correct to say that their rights to abortion were “taken”, for instance. > > Can you elaborate on this? I don’t know what your point is here. > > Right now I can own an 18 round magazine. If a law is passed saying I no longer can, than the right to own this magazine was “taken”. How is this in any way debateable? The constitution outlines what the government can do, and how much of your natural, unfettered freedom it can curtail. That’s what you own and what can’t be taken from you. The rest of the stuff is up to the democratic process, and you don’t “own” in the sense that you “own” rights guaranteed by the constitution. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-does-the-nra-really-represent-overzealous-gun-owners-or-gun-manufacturers/656510.md?page=8)