[GrimJack]

I know all of us are (or certainly should) be members of GCO which is doing great things in Georgia. What about on a national level???? I have been a member on and off of the NRA since I was in the 5th grade (way back in 1976). I know like anything else in politics I (as most) don't agree with everything they say and do but most of the time I feel they have my and other gun enthusiasts best interests at heart. There is also the Gun Owners of America that I am not very familiar with. And there is the 2nd Amendment Foundation. And another one I am familiar with is the US Concealed Carry Association. Who is doing good or trying to do good at a Federal level? It is times like this when we need to support the organizations that are going to get in the faces of the candidates and let them know that we are here and we mean business.

 

[budder]

None. But I will say that while I'm not too pleased with the way the NRA has acted, I will likely join them in the future. But it's not a priority right now.

 

[b8fish]

After getting totally ticked off with the political parties, esp republicans trying to out-Democrat the democrats, I stopped sending them money and joined the organizations which I felt could represent each of my political views. That way their larger presence and contributions to parties/candidates would be more closely associated with my view than $20 from some anonymous joe. So I joined GOA, 2AF and GCO along with NRA and USCCA. Haven't yet joined Pink Pistols.

Different voices in the same market. Can't hurt.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

I am a member of the NRA.

I was going to join GOA until I noticed them misrepresenting national bills, which I believe harms the cause.

 

[wwomack]

I'm currently a supporter of GOA, NRA, USCCA, and JFPO. You left the JFPO off the list and I consider them and GOA to most closely match my viewpoints.

I'm considering not renewing my NRA membership when it comes next year. If I had to just choose one organization it would likely be the GOA.

 

[fallison]

I am a member of the NRA.

I was going to join GOA until I noticed them misrepresenting national bills, which I believe harms the cause.

I think saying they are misrepresenting the bills goes too far. I admit the senarios they talk about go further than a strict reading of the language would lead to, but I have not seen anything that was outside of what may come from bureaucratic or judicial interpretation. If they had claimed the public gathering law would make you a criminal for having a gun within 200 yards, that would be misrepresenting the language of the law, but now that we see the court decisions, it would look pretty prophetic.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

I was going to join GOA until I noticed them misrepresenting national bills, which I believe harms the cause.

I think saying they are misrepresenting the bills goes too far.

http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/vie ... hlight=goa

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/200 ... 0731692471

More worries from the GOA, and more reasoning from Clayton Cramer.

______________________________________________________________
http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/200 ... 2831327551

Clayton takes on the GOA again. Apparently, the mental issues with the guy in Pennsylvania are not federal disqualifiers

 

[fallison]

Are you saying that is completely outside of posibility, especially when you consider the BATF is going to interpret it? Again, I will point to the PG law. If that was being debated today and an organization said it would be interpreted the way it has been, wouldn't that be as equally misrepresenting the language?

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

I am not talking about possibilities, but what it says and what GOA said about it. GOA is not saying "The bill says x, not y, but we are afraid it may be used in the future for y, anyway."

 

[Mafuta54]

The only "gun organization" i belong to is GCO! :lol:

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

The only "gun organization" i belong to is GCO! :lol:

Coming to its fall luncheon on November 17?

 

[Adam5]

I'm currently a member of GCO and the NRA, and I'm looking into what USCCA has to offer. I looked into GOA, but have to agree with MP, that they do tend to misrepresent bills and exagerate them. As far as JFPO is concerned, I disagree with the idea that the BATFE should be totally disbanded and that there should be no regulation of firearms.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

BATFE

"The Congress shall have Power To . . . regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."

Do you think the BATFE was what they had in mind when they wrote that?

 

[Brian618]

"The Congress shall have Power To . . . regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."

Ahhh, the Commerce Clause, the most misused and abused portion of the Constitution. If the Framer's have seen what the Imperial Federal Government and the Courts have contrived to make this clause all pervasive in all aspects of American Life, they would be the first to call for another Revolution.

 

[shamalama]

The order in which I became a dues-paying member, and why:

- USCCA (my first love, concealed carry)
- GCO (my home state)
- NRA (national politics)

Yeah, I may not agree 100% with everything that goes on in the NRA, but they're the 800-pound gorilla that does not go unnoticed in Washington. Say what you will (and sometimes correctly so) but without them we would have far fewer rights today.

 

[fallison]

Well, I will agree with you that GOA's rhetoric is often overheated and hopefully as overblown as Clayton Cramer thinks it is. But, I don't see it as outside the realm of possibility, especially when the BATFE writes the regulations to institute the new law.

 

[Wiley]

....I disagree with the idea that the BATFE should be totally disbanded and that there should be no regulation of firearms.

May I ask why you feel that way? (For the record I disagree and think that certainly on a federal level, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be Infringed.)(Think it should also apply to the States, too.)

 

[Adam5]

BATFE

"The Congress shall have Power To . . . regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."

Do you think the BATFE was what they had in mind when they wrote that?

No. They had nothing like the BATFE in mind.

May I ask why you feel that way? (For the record I disagree and think that certainly on a federal level, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be Infringed.)(Think it should also apply to the States, too.)

Reading JFPO material makes me feel like they want no controls whatsoever over firearm sales. I feel that there needs to be some oversight in place. Do I feel that a law obiding person should be able what ever weapons they want? Of course I do. Do I feel that ANY felony should cause someone to lose their right to keep and bear arms forever? Hell no.

There are those with violent criminal pasts that I feel should not be allowed to own firearms. Should someone who committed premeditated murder and got out of prison yesterday, be allowed to buy a gun today? I don't think so. Do I feel that people who committed crimes and paid their debt to society and have reformed should be allowed to regain their rights after a period of time? Yes, I do.

I feel that the BATFE is out of control and needs to be reigned in and totally revamped, maybe even disbanded and new less powerful, less sweeping agency takes its place, with tight limits on what they can do or not do.

I'm in favor of VERY minimal controls over firearms. I do feel that there should be some kind of controls in place to keep violent felons from possessing them. If you have some kind of control, there needs to be some kind of agency to oversee those controls. If you give that control to the states, I fear that some states like IL, NY, and CA will attempt to ban firearms in their state, which is more wrong than the actions of the BATFE.

 

[merlock]

After following the trouble at Red's in Idaho, I agree with JPFO's stance that BAFTE needs to be eliminated.