Credit
I said before most NRA hate is unfounded. But one thing they do that annoys me is not giving credit when it is due. None of their releases regarding McDonald mention either Alan Gura or the Second Amendment Foundation. Those two were, you know, sort of the big players in the landmark case. NRA did it’s part but credit is due, folks.
Giving proper credit is a recurring problem. And not all of that comes from NRA.
June 30th, 2010 at 10:37 am
What I don’t get is the blasting John McCain for McCain-Feingold (A First-Amendment issue and not a Second Amendment issue) and then they turn around and wiggle out of DISCLOSE saying they’re just a Second Amendment organization.
Can’t have it both ways. If you’re going to use your clout to blast McCain-Feingold, you’ve got to use your clout to blast DISCLOSE.
June 30th, 2010 at 10:55 am
unfounded, nope. I found plenty of reasons, all supplied by NRA
June 30th, 2010 at 10:55 am
“Can’t we all just get along?” 😉
And I’d like to take this opportunity to give a shout out the incredible prognosticating powers of commenter Pete in one of the previous NRA threads. On January 26, 2010, he wrote:
“Not enough votes for P&I. Otherwise the SCOTUS would have granted cert in NRA v Chicago which didn’t address P&I, only due process. Why put cert on hold in your due process open and shut case and instead grant the P&I case but then suddenly say “whoops, P&I isn’t popular up here in the court and maybe we want to look at due process again so we don’t botch this easy incorporation case.”
Ain’t looking good for Gura’s case. We will get the W but it will be on due process with some concurring opinion by Thomas on why P&I is awesome and due process sucks.
Although I’m holding out hope for P&I and the court is doing this to win over the liberals.”
Impressive. Very impressive.
June 30th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Honestly, while I can see their logic, I think NRA’s stance on DISCLOSE was short-sighted. Just because it no longer effects NRA doesn’t mean it’s no longer a 2nd Amendment issue – it still effects other 2A organizations, and therefore effects the issue.
June 30th, 2010 at 11:45 am
I noticed that during the case about Katrina confiscations. The SAF press releases said SAF and NRA, the NRA press releases said NRA. I think eventually one or 2 NRA releases might have mentioned SAF.
June 30th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
I’m just glad that the NRA didn’t try to torpedo McDonald the way they torpedoed Parker… Ooops! I mean “Heller”.
June 30th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Unc, is there some website driving all this NRA hate?
June 30th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
two press releases from 2007, full text of each. Shameless self-promotion.
June 30th, 2010 at 8:13 pm
The disclose thing really gave me a bad taste in my mouth for the NRA. I have been a member for decades, with short separations therein, but am starting to think they are very one issue and short sighted.
Cut out a niche for you, and the others be damned? BS!! Sounds like a Senators carve out in a bill.
We are in this together, and they better get on board before more people like me re-think re-upping.
I like my guns, all of them, but I also like my free speech. Who cares if I belong to a group with 3 members? I have the right to free speech!!
And when someone contributes more than you did, at least acknowledge their effort.