Jump to content
buell508

NRA life membership $495

Recommended Posts

The NRA is giving out participation trophies?

 

Maybe they have always done this - since as a Life Member I never really pay attention to requests to upgrade my Membership - but is it the goal of the NRA:

a) to raise money for the cause

or

b) to simply add more members - and cheapen the status (and donation dollars) of the 'levels' that they themselves established.

 

Seems like they are leaving $500(+) on the table just to add people at the "Life Member" level. 

Sends a bad message. So they must not really need the additional money that they always come begging me for (and which I occasionally provide because I believe in the cause). 

 

I don't know why this rubs me the wrong way, but it does. But I'm still grateful for the existence of the NRA, so I'll just have to get over it.

 

 

Btw, I also hear that the Marine Corps is giving away Expert Rifle badges and Sergeant stripes to the first 200 people who sign up for boot camp. Limited-time offer. Quantities limited. Join today!

 

: /

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, swelling the membership numbers gives NRA more clout.  Converting annual memberships to lifetime memberships is in their best interest as it gives them more bargaining power.  Instead of we have 1 million members, half of which are life members, it boosts that.

 

Yeah, I get what you are saying, IMO it's partly a gimmick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

respectfully, wtf are you talking about?  The goal is to raise funds and add members and programs like this do exactly that.  I would not join at 1k but I'd join at $500 (and did so earlier this month as this special has been going for a while) so you can imagine there are others out there who are of a similar view.  Right now, the most important thing is the breadth of reach for the NRA and especially so in this political climate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall an NRA member DID show up at both of NJs latest votes and spoke rationally and convincgly to oppose the bills.

 

But of course in this state that's impossible. I'd rather get angry at our own voting population than get angry at the NRA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know what the NRA specifically does for NJ. We would be so fortunate to have to abide by the federal standard.

 

Darren Goens was on GFH radio about 6 wks ago, Scott Bach is often on, both provided updates of what is going on.  In addition, I have been getting very timely emails from ANJRPC (despite the fact that I am no longer a member) informing me of not only the things they are doing but what stuff is coming down the pipe.  ANJRPC is the state NRA organization by the way.

 

I'm not going to tell you that they are wonderful, or fantastic in what they do, but I can tell you that are not crazy and do not devolve immediately into personal attacks.  Furthermore, in the last 8 years they went from a "F social media" attitude to an embrace of new media.  Their reaction time has decreased dramatically.  I truly believe that if OGAM had been proposed today, ANJRPC would have the resources to mobilize and kill it despite the 11th hour rush through that Corzine managed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

respectfully, wtf are you talking about?  The goal is to raise funds and add members and programs like this do exactly that.  I would not join at 1k but I'd join at $500 (and did so earlier this month as this special has been going for a while) so you can imagine there are others out there who are of a similar view.  Right now, the most important thing is the breadth of reach for the NRA and especially so in this political climate. 

 

The incongruity of your first sentence aside, I'll further explain "wtf I'm talking about", and I'll type a lot slower this time so that maybe you can follow along ; )

 

The NRA has established different membership levels, and they did so for reasons that many people probably understand, although I'll add a bit of detail for those that may not.

 

However, first lets take you (RUTGERS95) as an example.

You say that you wouldn't join for $1k, but you'd join for $500.

Well... that option has ALWAYS been available to you, as there are multiple levels (many of them dirt-cheap) that you could choose from. Therefore if you are a supporter... support!

So... just pick the level that you can afford, and get your money working for the cause. That not only increases the membership numbers, but it gets the money into the system to do what we need it to do for us. 

Waiting for "sales" on memberships isn't exactly a noble means of supporting what you believe in.

(I say that 'respectfully', of course)

 

Anyway...

The NRA itself established all of these different membership levels - and each of these levels have (or had) a certain 'standing' that was associated with it. And the Life Member level that they established carried a $1k commitment that was required to obtain that level. 

And as we all know (although maybe some don't), there is a segment of the donor population that is willing to give more if there is a certain prestige that goes along with a particular level of giving. (those who have worked for Foundations and/or not-for-profits already know this). That is why there are names on Medical buildings, hospital wings, etc.

In the case of the NRA, it was a sticker and a patch.

"LIFE MEMBER"

Big woop, right? Exactly. (mine are in a drawer somewhere).

But for some, it matters. A lot! And for those people, donating $1k carried a certain prestige for them.

 

So now lets fast-forward to the 50% off discount rate of Life Member memberships:

Ok, so now where does the NRA go for adding a level of prestige (and benefit) for their high-end membership levels? Do they create a new Super-Duper Luster level for targeting the newest high-end donors?

But what about the previous high-end level donors? The NRA did a bait and switch on them. They were promised LIFE MEMBER prestige in exchange for $1k. Now it can be had for half that price.

"But hey," says the $1k Life Member donor, "You told me....."

And the NRA says, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's how we got your $1k. It's different now. So why don't you go buy yourself an NRA hat at the NRA store. It'll make you feel better".

Is that any way to treat your donors??

 

So now what?

A Life Membership is worth half of what it once did; in cost and in value (to a certain segment of donors - specifically high-end donors). 

The NRA has essentially taken a shiny object (Life Member) and tarnished it's prestige and value.

So where is the next $1k donor coming from?

The bottom-line is that the NRA has cheapened the Life Member title, AND left $500 on the table as a result of doing so.

"Oh, but we'll sell more of them!"

Uh.... maybe. But supporters support what they believe in, so why weren't they already members?

 

Ok, I once worked for a Foundation, so maybe I see this much differently than many (or most) of you do. But for a donor-centric organization like the NRA, this is ultimately a very short-sighted campaign. IMO, of course. If others disagree, that's fine. I'm not looking for an argument. I'm just adding my 2 cents about the donor/donor-centric organization relationship. And I think that they've done more damage than good to that relationship with this campaign.

(then again, maybe they do this all the time. But it's the first time I've become aware of it, and it just rubs me the wrong way)

 

Carry on.

 

(btw, I love some of the shirts that they have at the NRA store. I buy 'em 2 at a time, every time!. But just avoid that chocolate lab colored all-weather NRA hat. It's tiny!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to also take into account the fact that there has been a big spike in membership over that last year and a half (since Sandy Hook).

That represents an opportunity for the NRA to convert those people into life members, which actually increases revenue.

 

Just to use round numbers, you get 1m new members at an average of $30. That's $30m this year.

If 20% of those joined because they got freaked out by the gun control push, but subsequently don't renew, you lose $6m.

 

But if you can convert 10% of them to the $25 every 3 months life membership, you'll add $10m for a net gain of $1m the first year and $10m/year for the next 4 years.

 

There's also the chance that you'll keep some of the non-renewers onboard as life members (you know, the ones who want to support but are too busy/lazy/forgetful to actively renew every year).

 

FWIW, there are still benefactor, patron, etc levels, all the way up to people who give $100,000+ for those who want the prestige.

 

I'm not sure that joining at the lowest life member level was ever that prestigious.

 

Plus, like you said, if you believe in the cause, you'll support it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to also take into account the fact that there has been a big spike in membership over that last year and a half (since Sandy Hook).

That represents an opportunity for the NRA to convert those people into life members, which actually increases revenue.

 

Just to use round numbers, you get 1m new members at an average of $30. That's $30m this year.

If 20% of those joined because they got freaked out by the gun control push, but subsequently don't renew, you lose $6m.

 

But if you can convert 10% of them to the $25 every 3 months life membership, you'll add $10m for a net gain of $1m the first year and $10m/year for the next 4 years.

 

There's also the chance that you'll keep some of the non-renewers onboard as life members (you know, the ones who want to support but are too busy/lazy/forgetful to actively renew every year).

 

FWIW, there are still benefactor, patron, etc levels, all the way up to people who give $100,000+ for those who want the prestige.

 

I'm not sure that joining at the lowest life member level was ever that prestigious.

 

Plus, like you said, if you believe in the cause, you'll support it anyway.

 

Actually..... NO.

 

To become a Life Member, it costs $1,000 period.

Whether that $1,000 is paid in one lump sum, or on a payment plan, it's still only MAXES-OUT at $1,000 FOR LIFE!!!!

After that....

No more payments.

No more renewals.

That's it. $1,000. Period. For life.

 

It's not $1,000 annually. Payments/dues END.

 

Therefore...

A 50% discount on a Life Membership reduces revenue on those memberships by 50%. 

 

And aside from that lost revenue (which ticks me off), the "WTF" lightbulb goes on inside of the heads of the actual Life Members who did actually pay $1,000 for their Life Membership.

(that light says, "SUCKER!!!!")

 

But ok... so lets say that now the NRA has all of these Life Members (some actual, some discounted). What exactly compels any of them to continue financially supporting the NRA after they now have their Life Membership? 

The answer to that is.... NOTHING.

And I would argue (although I don't want to argue about any of this. I adore the NRA. I'm just disappointed with their misguided 'discount' campaign) that those who actually need an incentive to support the NRA (via discounted memberships) are less likely than full-price Life Members to continue supporting the NRA.

So.....

How many of those members - the actual full-price members - will now feel that they've overpaid for their memberships... and then perhaps decide to not provide the same level of ancillary financial support (via the NRA store, the raffles, the outreach emails) that they may have contributed to in the past?

After all, if it takes a 50% discount to even get members, then it also stands to reason that some of the 'real' Life Members will feel like they are financially carrying the 'discount' members... and then perhaps adopt an "ok, so let these 'discount babies' pay their dues for a while" (so to speak).

 

I don't know. I just think that this is no way for a donor-centric organization to treat it's most up-front committed members. 

Plus, I don't believe in moving the goal-posts in the middle of the game, and therefore losing revenue.

I'm just not ok with it. I feel that it's misguided and it will produce a smaller revenue stream over the long term, while potentially alienating it's most dedicated donors.

 

Last thing (an analogy):

Lets say a hospital needs to expand. So it sends out appeals to the hospital's big-time donors. They tell those donors, "For $X we will build a wing in the hospital, and we'll let you name it".

Years later, another appeal goes out for another new wing. This time they'll offer the naming of the wing at a discounted price. 

Both donors have their heart in the right place, but guess which donor feels taken advantage of?

THAT is how a hospital commits donor-centric FAIL.

And the NRA is practicing that right now. Not good. And it also feels desperate - which worries me on an entirely different level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The incongruity of your first sentence aside, I'll further explain "wtf I'm talking about", and I'll type a lot slower this time so that maybe you can follow along ; )

 

The NRA has established different membership levels, and they did so for reasons that many people probably understand, although I'll add a bit of detail for those that may not.

 

However, first lets take you (RUTGERS95) as an example.

You say that you wouldn't join for $1k, but you'd join for $500.

Well... that option has ALWAYS been available to you, as there are multiple levels (many of them dirt-cheap) that you could choose from. Therefore if you are a supporter... support!

So... just pick the level that you can afford, and get your money working for the cause. That not only increases the membership numbers, but it gets the money into the system to do what we need it to do for us. 

Waiting for "sales" on memberships isn't exactly a noble means of supporting what you believe in.

(I say that 'respectfully', of course)

 

Anyway...

The NRA itself established all of these different membership levels - and each of these levels have (or had) a certain 'standing' that was associated with it. And the Life Member level that they established carried a $1k commitment that was required to obtain that level. 

And as we all know (although maybe some don't), there is a segment of the donor population that is willing to give more if there is a certain prestige that goes along with a particular level of giving. (those who have worked for Foundations and/or not-for-profits already know this). That is why there are names on Medical buildings, hospital wings, etc.

In the case of the NRA, it was a sticker and a patch.

"LIFE MEMBER"

Big woop, right? Exactly. (mine are in a drawer somewhere).

But for some, it matters. A lot! And for those people, donating $1k carried a certain prestige for them.

 

So now lets fast-forward to the 50% off discount rate of Life Member memberships:

Ok, so now where does the NRA go for adding a level of prestige (and benefit) for their high-end membership levels? Do they create a new Super-Duper Luster level for targeting the newest high-end donors?

But what about the previous high-end level donors? The NRA did a bait and switch on them. They were promised LIFE MEMBER prestige in exchange for $1k. Now it can be had for half that price.

"But hey," says the $1k Life Member donor, "You told me....."

And the NRA says, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's how we got your $1k. It's different now. So why don't you go buy yourself an NRA hat at the NRA store. It'll make you feel better".

Is that any way to treat your donors??

 

So now what?

A Life Membership is worth half of what it once did; in cost and in value (to a certain segment of donors - specifically high-end donors). 

The NRA has essentially taken a shiny object (Life Member) and tarnished it's prestige and value.

So where is the next $1k donor coming from?

The bottom-line is that the NRA has cheapened the Life Member title, AND left $500 on the table as a result of doing so.

"Oh, but we'll sell more of them!"

Uh.... maybe. But supporters support what they believe in, so why weren't they already members?

 

Ok, I once worked for a Foundation, so maybe I see this much differently than many (or most) of you do. But for a donor-centric organization like the NRA, this is ultimately a very short-sighted campaign. IMO, of course. If others disagree, that's fine. I'm not looking for an argument. I'm just adding my 2 cents about the donor/donor-centric organization relationship. And I think that they've done more damage than good to that relationship with this campaign.

(then again, maybe they do this all the time. But it's the first time I've become aware of it, and it just rubs me the wrong way)

 

Carry on.

 

(btw, I love some of the shirts that they have at the NRA store. I buy 'em 2 at a time, every time!. But just avoid that chocolate lab colored all-weather NRA hat. It's tiny!)

oh now we are going to lament grammar on a message board...lol

 

you miss the point of the promotion, it's about numbers right now and rightfully so.  The NRA has money, don't let them lead anyone to believe they don't but what we need is numbers right now as numbers speak to lawmakers.  I fully appreciate having spent more on a life membership and seeing it cheaper rubs people the wrong way but at the end of the day, they ought to reduce it to $300 and get another million members as fast as they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to also take into account the fact that there has been a big spike in membership over that last year and a half (since Sandy Hook).

That represents an opportunity for the NRA to convert those people into life members, which actually increases revenue.

 

Just to use round numbers, you get 1m new members at an average of $30. That's $30m this year.

If 20% of those joined because they got freaked out by the gun control push, but subsequently don't renew, you lose $6m.

 

But if you can convert 10% of them to the $25 every 3 months life membership, you'll add $10m for a net gain of $1m the first year and $10m/year for the next 4 years.

 

There's also the chance that you'll keep some of the non-renewers onboard as life members (you know, the ones who want to support but are too busy/lazy/forgetful to actively renew every year).

 

FWIW, there are still benefactor, patron, etc levels, all the way up to people who give $100,000+ for those who want the prestige.

 

I'm not sure that joining at the lowest life member level was ever that prestigious.

 

Plus, like you said, if you believe in the cause, you'll support it anyway.

the initial premise is correct as expressed to me in a cigar bar with several nra reps in indy during the show.  Right now it's about numbers for them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh now we are going to lament grammar on a message board...lol

 

No. Not at all. I'm referring to your backhanded insult. 

(I knew that I should have typed that even slower for you)

 

Anyway, regardless of the alleged premise, I still disagree with it. I offered my own (detailed) reasons as to why. 

 

(btw, I don't think that "lament" is used properly in your sentence :p )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure the NRA knows exactly what it's doing.

 

With 5 million people who have purchased different types of memberships, they have enough data to analyze. You got an offer for a discount life membership because your buying habits indicate that you're more likely to purchase the lifetime membership at a discount. Others who purchase differently, have been members for different amounts of time, and renew with different patterns get different offers. And I'm sure it's all adjusted for net present value. They know that a $500 lifetime membership now is worth 10 years of regular memberships in today's dollars and they know that you're more likely to do one than the other.

 

I appreciate what the NRA does for gun owners but I know they're a huge, corporate, money making machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will only consider paying for a life membership if Anthony from GFH promises to try to get on the board every time till he succeeds.

 

Other than that, still don't believe the NRA truly believes in helping the plight of NJ gun owners. I don't want to hear about this rep or that rep coming to meetings. I want to see a picture of our State on the cover of their monthly mag stating "Enough is Enough!" with a firm declaration to help us till we get our proper 2A rights back. That entails a continuous assault of campaigns, advertisements, lobbyists, etc... I want to see some real money spent on us, our State!

 

Until then, I feel as though my hard earned money goes into their beautiful office building and staff...... Ever see that office building?

 

NRA sends a rep..... HA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will only consider paying for a life membership if Anthony from GFH promises to try to get on the board every time till he succeeds.

 

Other than that, still don't believe the NRA truly believes in helping the plight of NJ gun owners. I don't want to hear about this rep or that rep coming to meetings. I want to see a picture of our State on the cover of their monthly mag stating "Enough is Enough!" with a firm declaration to help us till we get our proper 2A rights back. That entails a continuous assault of campaigns, advertisements, lobbyists, etc... I want to see some real money spent on us, our State!

 

Until then, I feel as though my hard earned money goes into their beautiful office building and staff...... Ever see that office building?

 

NRA sends a rep..... HA!

 

The NRA can't work miracles. NJ is HOPELESS. 

(that said, Christie fears the 2A crowd, so that's got to be worth something to you)

 

What the NRA does well, is keep other states from slipping into the same abyss.

 

You're anger/frustration is directed at the wrong entity. NJ is 100% at fault for NJ's problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRA can't work miracles. NJ is HOPELESS. 

(that said, Christie fears the 2A crowd, so that's got to be worth something to you)

 

What the NRA does well, is keep other states from slipping into the same abyss.

 

You're anger/frustration is directed at the wrong entity. NJ is 100% at fault for NJ's problems.

So the NRA turns its back on NJ and writes it off as a lost cause, we did it to ourselves? That's plain rubbish.

 

NJ needs help and as long as the NRA shrugs us off and our media outlets pummel us into the ground with editorials, NJ gun owners will continue to scrape by and whine at meetings. All I hear about is "donations" to help NJ2A. Tired of it, I want the big bad 2A Gun Bank aka NRA to start throwing pallets of cash money our way.

 

If NJ is a lost cause, ok, fine. Then the gun clubs I belong to shouldn't make it mandatory for me to be a NRA member and use my NRA money instead to help support local politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NJ needs help and as long as the NRA shrugs us off and our media outlets pummel us into the ground with editorials, NJ gun owners will continue to scrape by and whine at meetings. All I hear about is "donations" to help NJ2A. Tired of it, I want the big bad 2A Gun Bank aka NRA to start throwing pallets of cash money our way.

 

Sounds like a Democrat solution to fixing the failing education system. Just throw more money at it, as opposed to fixing the broken institution.

 

If NJ is a lost cause, ok, fine. Then the gun clubs I belong to shouldn't make it mandatory for me to be a NRA member and use my NRA money instead to help support local politicians.

 

If they are holding your family hostage, you should alert the authorities. Otherwise.... maybe exercise some free-will and.... leave the gun clubs that don't represent your beliefs?? 

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to consider. Life membership and above in the NRA confers voting power otherwise you need to be a member at regular level for 5 years.

 

Did the NRA Life member get shorted when s/he paid $300 for a life member instead of $25 for 5 years of membership?

 

More members is good. Keeping money flowing to any charitable organization is never easy.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS. Ok people pull your heads out of your nether regions.

 

The NRA does lobby here. It doesn't do much good because there aren't a lot of gun owners, and nj is gerrymandered to hell and back.

 

Clubs require membership because it gives them access to NRA grant money, insurance, best practices advice, etc.

 

They ask for money because member dues can't be used for political purposes. That's why the NRA-ila was formed, to lobby, but they have to get there money from other than the mothership.

 

They may not be effective for you at the state level, but they do also lobby at the federal level on your behalf. They are much more effective there.

 

Discounting life membership gets them more members, and those member counts won't fall off the roles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to consider. Life membership and above in the NRA confers voting power otherwise you need to be a member at regular level for 5 years.

 

Did the NRA Life member get shorted when s/he paid $300 for a life member instead of $25 for 5 years of membership?

 

More members is good. Keeping money flowing to any charitable organization is never easy.

 

 

I don't understand why everyone thinks that a Life Membership is some sort of a right. There is also such a thing as a Regular Membership, and it still makes you a member. Plus, absolutely NOTHING is stopping ANYONE from contributing the the NRA... even non-members. 

 

I may be alone in my thinking on this, but I believe in my position, so ok, whatever. It is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5th 4x4, you seem to just want purists, purists who are willing and able to pay $1000 to pony up for the lifetime membership.

 

How about we consider the following:

Annual NRA membership = $35, amount of years it would take to equal the $1000 life = 28.57, amount of years it would take to equal the "discounted" life = 14.14

 

Do you understand the "net present value" of money? 

 

 

 

NPV can be described as the “difference amount” between the sums of discounted: cash inflows and cash outflows. It compares the present value of money today to the present value of money in the future, taking inflation and returns into account.

 

Basically, todays dollar is worth more than next years dollar.  The NRA has done a financial calculation which makes perfect sense.  They have opened up the life membership to people who were unable (or perhaps unwilling) to pony up the large cash nut for life, and have made it "more accessible". 

 

There are benefits to the NRA for doing this - first they increase their membership, second, they boost their immediate income and therefore the amount of money that they can invest and receive interest on, third, they increase their political clout due to their swelled memberships and use it to point out "people are moving away from being anti-gun.

 

So, you're pissed off, ok, and you're going to do what now?  You ALREADY gave your money in!  Will you ask for formal withdrawal from the NRA? (unlikely).  As far as the organization is concerned, it's a win-win situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you're pissed off, ok, and you're going to do what now?  You ALREADY gave your money in!  Will you ask for formal withdrawal from the NRA? (unlikely).  As far as the organization is concerned, it's a win-win situation.

 

No. I never said I was "pissed off". 

"Rubbed the wrong way", "Disappointed". 

But no, I'm not pissed off. 

 

And yeah, there is probably an element of being a "purist" in my thinking. Maybe that is a residual of my military background. You earn what you earn, no shortcuts. 

I'll cop to that.

 

But I'm a huge NRA supporter. I've easily paid for multiples of Life Memberships (the legit kind) since I became a member. And I advocate for the NRA all of the time. Including here in this thread.

 

I'd probably be happier if they created a new system - or revert to no system - than to 'discount' memberships. Because seriously, that's what desperate organizations succumb to. 

 

All said, my NRA cred can never be called into question. I care enough about this organization to worry about it. And this worries me for some reason. That's been my position from the beginning here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pissed off was a euphemism. I understand your point. It seems like someone cut in line...

 

I did actually say "ticked off" at one point. But that was in reference to the lost revenue of half-priced memberships, and not the campaign itself - which is my major gripe. 

I truly believe that there is no reason to discount a quality product. So that's what worries me.

But I apologize for beating the point into the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a Democrat solution to fixing the failing education system. Just throw more money at it, as opposed to fixing the broken institution.

 

 

 

If they are holding your family hostage, you should alert the authorities. Otherwise.... maybe exercise some free-will and.... leave the gun clubs that don't represent your beliefs?? 

Just a thought.

I'm really trying hard to understand your comments, really.

 

I know plenty of people at gun clubs that question the NRA's involvement with NJ. I'm trying to help fix a broken institution but what is the NRA doing to help myself and so many more in this State? The clubs and so many members of each share in the same beliefs, but shame on us for questioning what the NRA does for us? I don't see many workers in that big beautiful office building losing sleep, but too many of NJ gun owners do because there's a real chance we will wake up and be criminals.

 

You don't see me aggravated about price for this or that, but where my money is going and how it's being allocated, absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did actually say "ticked off" at one point. But that was in reference to the lost revenue of half-priced memberships, and not the campaign itself - which is my major gripe. 

I truly believe that there is no reason to discount a quality product. So that's what worries me.

But I apologize for beating the point into the ground.

 

.... Because they are in the business to make money and will continue to do what's best for them as a business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.... Because they are in the business to make money and will continue to do what's best for them as a business.

 

It sounds like you have a bit of a grudge against big-business. Fair enough, they aren't warm and fuzzy.

But the NRA is not your enemy simply because it can't turn the anti-gun legislature of NJ into a bastion of 2A utopia. 

 

I have ONE state legislator in my county that is NOT a Democrat; Garret. That's it. ONE.

How about you down in Central Jersey. Got ANY at all??

 

And the NRA is expected to fix that??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or think about it this way..   really really think about it..   the NRA can make its influence felt at the NATIONAL level much more than at the local level.   Just think about how we almost had another assault weapon ban at the FEDERAL level after Sandy Hook.   I'm fully believing that the NRA was entrenched behind the scenes and making their muscle felt in Washington..

 

HOWEVER, at the NJ local level, our arcane NJ laws, at the local level, are controlled by one thing and one thing only.  The VOTEs.  the votes.  the votes.  the votes.   The NRA can't throw hundreds of thousands of dollar at NJ LOCAL laws if we can't even vote the right people in.   Its that simple.   NRA would never put NJ on the cover of its magazine because we can't even help ourselves.

 

So I think about my NRA money making a difference in WASHINGTON.   But NJ?  we have to help ourselves.

 

(and if anybody reading this post didn't vote in past elections.. or doesn't have November's elections circled on your calendar already..  shame shame on you..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...