I have a friend who had several huge gun safes full of assault rifles, handguns, and always complains about anti gun politicians.
Yet when I asked him why he never talks about the latest issue of the American Rifleman he had nothing to say.
I doubt he is a member which amazes me.
I have been a Life Member since 1978.
whelennut

And memberships for your kids and lowlife non-nra hunting friends.

I am not a life member because I don't agree with giving my unwavering lifetime support to any cause as they can easily stray from doing right by me. I have been a member since I was 18 years old, never missed a renewal.

Every gun owner should be a member of the NRA. Some here will disagree. I stand by my statement.

I am a member but their unsolicited phone calls annoy the crap out of me.

It does boggle ones mind.

The club I belong to requires NRA membership to be a member.

The club I belong to requires NRA membership to be a member. [/quote]

As does mine.
I don't always agree with everything the NRA does or says but they are the only game in town and are on the front lines defending the right to keep and bear arms. That's enough.

For those that thinks that the NRA is not aggressive enough, that is just a good reason to also join GOA or JPFO not a good reason to not join the NRA.

There are those that do and work at the task. THen there are those that loudly complain and posture in public and public forums about things. They like to complain about what OTHERS are doing or not doing. But they have nothing to offer when its what do YOU do?

They are almost never the same.

Besides you have to pay dues and in addition to them being lazy, they are also cheap.

Also don't forget to "round up" on those orders for components, scopes and other stuff. Every little bit helps.

SAF.

SAF and Calguns Foundation � 9th Circuit Victory in California Carry Case
By Legal on March 10, 2014

The Second Amendment Foundation, Calguns Foundation and three California residents filed a lawsuit seeking to vindicate the right to bear arms against arbitrary state infringement in the granting of permits to carry. The Second Amendment Foundation � (read more�)

SAF Challenge to New Jersey Carry Law Climbs Through Appellate Courts
By Legal on February 25, 2014

Drake, et. al. v. Jerejian, et. al. (formely Muller v. Maenza & Piszczatoski v. Maenza)

The Second Amendment Foundation filed suit in U.S. District Court for the � (read more�)

SAF WINS PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST NEW MEXICO�S CITIZEN-ONLY CCW LAW
By Thomas on March 31, 2014

BELLEVUE, WA � The chief U.S. District Court judge in New Mexico today granted a permanent injunction against the State of New Mexico�s �citizens only� concealed carry law that unfairly discriminated against permanent legal resident aliens in � (read more�)

SAF Case Asks Whether Cities Can Ban Gun Stores
By admin on January 17, 2014

The Second Amendment Foundation has hired Attorney David Sigale to pursue this action on behalf of an individual and his business against the Village of Norridge, Illinois. The Village initially issued a license to sell firearms to Mr. Kole, but � (read more�)

SAF Case Considers Additional Chicago Gun Restrictions After McDonald
By admin on January 17, 2014

The Second Amendment Foundation has hired Attorney David Sigale to take over this action originally filed by Attorney Walter Maksym. This action was originally quite broad, but now focuses on challenging the City of Chicago�s extreme zoning, � (read more�)

SAF Sues California Attorney General Over Waiting Period Statute
By admin on January 17, 2014

The Second Amendment Foundation, Calguns Foundation and three California citizens have filed a federal lawsuit against the California Department of Justice and Attorney General Kamala Harris, challenging the state�s requirement that current gun � (read more�)

SAF, CALGUNS SCORE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTORY IN RICHARDS CARRY CASE
By Thomas on March 5, 2014

BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation and The Calguns Foundation earned a significant victory today when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case of Richards v. Prieto, challenging the handgun carry license issuing � (read more�)

SAF Sues New York Over �Safe Act� Magazine Limits
By admin on September 27, 2013

The Second Amendment Foundation filed suit in federal court seeking to enjoin the State of New York from enforcing provisions of the so-called �SAFE Act� that limit the use of gun magazines containing more than seven cartridges.

Read � (read more�)
Comments Off | Filed under: Legal | Tags: Caron, Cuomo, Magazine, Magazine Size, Magazine Size Restriction, New York, SAF, SAFE, SAFE Act

SAF Sues Seattle Over Illegally Withheld Gun Buyback Documents
By admin on July 18, 2013

In SAF v. Seattle, The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court alleging that the City of Seattle violated the Public Records Act by withholding documents sought by SAF under a public records request � (read more�)

Comments Off | Filed under: Legal | Tags: Gun Buyback, King County, PRA, Public Records, Public Records Act, SAF, Seattle

SAF PETITIONS SUPREME COURT FOR REVIEW OF NEW YORK CCW FEE CASE
By Thomas on February 21, 2014

BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for review of its challenge to the exorbitant gun permit fees charged by the City of New York. The case is Kwong v. de Blasio.

SAF is joined in � (read more�)

Comments Off | Filed under: News & Releases | Tags: No Tags

SAF EXPRESSES GRATITUDE FOR STRONG AMICUS BRIEFS IN SCOTUS CERT PETITION
By Thomas on February 15, 2014

BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation today extended its heartfelt gratitude to five groups, including two fellow gun rights organizations, for their strong amicus curiae briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, supporting SAF�s petition for � (read more�)

I agree



Never get one myself.

Eyeball I joined several as they all work for our rights

I am a Life Member of NRA and NYSRPA and support the SAF. I don't always agree with everything they do or don't do, but don't find that call to not support the only orgs that do anything for us. I feel like those who weedle around and make excuses not to join are on a version of welfare.

I've never found an organization or a church [or a woman] that I agreed with 100% but we need to get behind the organization that best defends our gun rights; whichever organization that may be.

This.


kwg

I have a friend who has a $22,000 trap gun, cheap bastard won't join the NRA. I don't understand it, he's worth about 2 mil.

I completely disagree with Wayne LaPierre's $800,000+ annual salary.

Me too, but he is high class.

Been a member since 1976. The application came with my Remington Fieldmaster .22 rifle.

SBH,
I hear you. Certainly would be nice to be able to get that same quality of leader for less money. Unfortunately, when you must compete for such a person against private industry offers, you have to pay the going rate. The CEO of GM is making considerably more and still can't get the defective ignition switches fixed, for instance. I for one am very glad Wayne is steering the ship at the NRA. There is no time for do-overs or recalls.

I do tire of the constant hyperbole and the almost weekly mailings but that's what it takes to get many gun owners off their butts. Human nature, I guess.

Ron

I posted this on another forum, but it is worth reapeating:

Had it not been for the NRA, we would have gotten the Toomey/Manchin "Universal background checks" bill - read "Universal gun registration" bill.
The NRA almost single-handedly got this bill defeated by heavily lobbying members of Congress to get them to vote against it. There were some other organizations involved in that fight, but the NRA was the "elephant in the room".

Myron

The force that drives NRA policy is the Board of Directors. If you don't want them to stray from doing right by you, you have to be able to vote for whomever you think will steer organization policy in that direction.

Only Life members and above get to vote on BoD candidates. As it is now, you are just funding the operation without any input as to the direction they go.

Unless policy has changed, a regular member who has been a member for a continuous 5 years or more is also eligible to vote for the BOD.

Myron

Every one who owns a gun or who believes in gun ownership, should be an NRA member.
The NRA is the only truly effective advocate for gun rights.

All CEO'S of major organizations earn huge salaries, why, cause they are worth it---

Nope
I've voted, but I've never been a Life member

They're on it 24-7

Not that much on it.

...u can stop them ....tell them u are poor and u call/dog out YOUR congressman at EVERY turn ..... I do .....and I do .

can anybody add>>>>? ...where are all the gun shops on this ?? gander mtn ...cabalas ...it would seem a self imposed funding program needs to be in place

Nah. I support gun control opponents like SAF and JPFO and CCRKBA and GOA, not moderate gun control advocates like NRA.

I almost joined NRA back when Wayne LaPierre made that "certain level of killing" remark back during the Clinton presidency, but before I could lay hands on an application, he apologized for it.

Since then, I haven't been tempted. The NRA is about as opposed to gun control as the Republican Party is opposed to big government.

They've made about as much progress as the libertarians.

Unfortunately true.

I'm a life member of the NRA , I don't agree with everything they do but most of it.
I bought a life membership to SAF a few years ago, I don't remember the exact $ amount but it wasn't much.

The NRA is still the most effective lobbying entity we have.
The more members they have, the more effective they can be.
I'm an endowment member - and made sure my kids are life members - son-in-law has been an annual member for years.

Mark

The large numbers of members gives gutless Dimocrap politicians nightmares.

What do you think of NAGR.org National Association og Gun Rights headed by Dudley Brown?
I understand it is a bottom up group, more in tune with the grassroots than the NRA is. Though I have nothing against the NRA and belong.
Thanks!

Holy Smokes, that's a lot of membership dues !
At what level do NRA lawyers get involved?
Did they do anything about illegal search and seisure in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana? Did they go after NOPD?
Are they doing anything in Connecticut or New York state?
Anybody know?

This is how you stay informed. It arrives daily

https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/secure/stay-informed.aspx

I don't know enough about NAGR.org to have an opinion, Sorry.

NRA staffers & attorneys are constantly traveling & make less than private firms. Wayne's salary is a pittance compared to private corporations like GE & Boeing. The president of Boeing makes over $22 million plus lots of perks. Are CEO's worth this? Probably not, but its what the market pays. I'm frequently in NRA Headquarters & see first hand how many hours they work. NRA is much more than even the lobbying efforts. I teach the Eddie Eagle children's gun safety program that the NRA developed. When I have taught children's shooting programs the NRA loans me .22 rifles & shotguns. I also teach a turkey hunting seminar co-sponsored by National Capital Chapter of Safari Club International at NRA Headquarters that is well attended. The NRA has developed courses on turkey hunting, deer hunting, & Western hunting that instructors can use to increase hunters knowledge. I'm chair of the Wounded Warrior/Disabled Veteran Committee for SCI in the DC area. When sending comfort items to deployed troops the NRA donated lots of items & provides free memberships.

So those were NRA lawyers in the Heller, McDonald cases in front of the Supreme Court?

I am a NRA Life Member. I don't agree with everything they do. But I support them 110%. What I can't believe is how much people bitch about the NRA. And yet they are not members, because they send them mail or call. Funny how the non members are the loudest bitches.

I am always amazed at the chicken chit excuses non- NRA member gun owners give for not joining. A lot of dem gun owners do not join.
The simple truth is ....if it were not for the NRA...... civilian gun ownership would not exist today.
I have bought several lifetime memberships for my goofy relatives that I hunt and fish with, but discuss politics infrequently.

One can opt-out of the NRA mailing and phone solicitations, with a phone call.

Those who bitch about the NRA, and are not members, sure want the NRA to fight for their gun rights, don't they?

When I upgraded my membership to life, I made sure not to put my phone number down on any form and to check every box to opt out on the mailings.
It worked. I never get any phone calls and hardly any mailings.
I did put my e-mail address down and I get 3 or 4 e-mail a day from them but some is because I have a RSO cert. not just because I'm a member.

I think the SAF was the thrust behind one if not both those cases and I do know the NRA advised against the one and joined the SAF reluctantly. They did, however claim the victory illicitly after the case was won and earned much disgust and antipathy from many in the know.

In one of those cases the NRA advised SAF against bringing the suit as they felt they would lose.

In another similar case SAF instigated in New York, the NRA also felt it would lose and did not join SAF in the suit but did join against the SAF as a friend of the court. IIRC, that caused the SAF to drop the suit.

Why not support the SAF as they are the ones bringing the lawsuits against those passing illegal gun laws?

It's pretty easy to google SAF and look at the lawsuits they have filed and financed on our behalf.

The northwest quad of New Mexico has some pretty strong shooting groups and even have weekly radio programs dealing with this. Most those people pretty much aren't big fans of the NRA.

In 2008, the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association successfully sued Washington, forcing the state to restart issuing and renewing Alien Firearms Licenses to legal resident aliens.[10]

On June 26, 2008, following the ruling in District of Columbia vs. Heller affirming an individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms by the Supreme Court of the United States, the Second Amendment Foundation filed a suit, known as McDonald v. Chicago, against the City of Chicago to overturn its handgun ban.[11] Alan Gura, who successfully argued Heller before the Supreme Court, was lead counsel in this case. On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court held in McDonald that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states.[12] In a noteworthy concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas held that the application of the Second Amendment to the states was through the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause.

Following the Heller decision in 2008 in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use, the Second Amendment Foundation partnered with Smith & Wesson to create a commemorative revolver. On the right side plate of the revolver, the scale of justice is depicted with the case name across the scale. The balance is in favor of the "Heller" name with the court date of "June 26, 2008" positioned across the top. Underneath the scale, the side plate reads "Second Amendment" and "The right to keep and bear arms" in white lettering. The revolver was presented to the six plaintiffs of the case and will be available for customer purchase in Fall 2008.[13]

On June 29, 2010, following the McDonald ruling by the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states, the Second Amendment Foundation, along with Grass Roots North Carolina and three North Carolina citizens, filed a federal suit[14] in North Carolina. The suit, known as Bateman vs. Perdue, seeks to prevent local officials and local governments from declaring states of emergency under which private citizens are prohibited from exercising their right to bear arms.[15] Alan Gura, who successfully argued Heller and McDonald before the Supreme Court, is lead counsel in this case.

BELLEVUE, WA � New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and State Police Superintendent Joseph D�Amico have agreed, in a stipulated order, to not enforce a section of the state�s controversial SAFE (Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement) Act while an appeal is underway in one of the legal challenges to that statute, amounting to a small but important victory for the Second Amendment Foundation in a challenge to the constitutionality of a provision in the law.

At issue is the arbitrary seven-round limit on magazine capacity that was included in the SAFE Act under Section 265.37 of that law. At trial in the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Assn, Inc. v. Cuomo, Judge William M. Skretny ruled that the section dealing with the magazine limit is unconstitutional. He upheld other provisions in the Act.

SAF is joined in its separate action by SCOPE, Inc., Long Island Firearms LLC and seven individual citizens, Matthew Caron, Matthew Gudger, Jeffrey Murray, MD., Gary Wehner, John Amidon, Nunzio Calce and James Middleton.

SAF, CALGUNS SCORE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTORY IN RICHARDS CARRY CASE
5 Mar 2014 | News & Releases
BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation and The Calguns Foundation earned a significant victory today when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case of Richards v. Prieto, challenging the handgun carry license issuing policy of Yolo County, California, Sheriff Ed Prieto.

�Today�s ruling reinforces the Second Amendment�s application to state and local governments, and will help clear the way for more California citizens to exercise their right to bear arms,� said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. �California officials have been put on notice that they can no longer treat the Second Amendment as a heavily-regulated government privilege.�

The case was originally filed in 2009 as Sykes v. McGinness, and challenged not only Yolo County�s policies, but Sacramento County�s then-restrictive practices as well. SAF, Calguns and two private citizens, Adam Richards and Brett Stewart, continued pursuing the case against Yolo County after Sacramento County agreed to relax its policy. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Alan Gura and Don Kilmer.

�We are confident that the win today will stand the test of time,� said Calguns Foundation Chairman Gene Hoffman.

The Richards case was argued at the same time, and to the same panel, that earlier decided Peruta v. County of San Diego, a similar case challenging overly-restrictive carry license policies. Yolo County and Sheriff Prieto argued that their policies were distinguishable from those struck down in Peruta, but apparently the three-judge panel unanimously disagreed.

�The Ninth Circuit�s decision moves our Carry License Compliance Initiative forward,� explained CGF Executive Director Brandon Combs. �We�re already preparing the next phase of litigation to ensure that all law-abiding Californians can exercise their right to bear arms.�

Gottlieb noted that the battle over right-to-carry laws is far from over, but today�s Ninth Circuit decision reaffirms that court�s earlier ruling in the Peruta case and �moves the ball another step forward.�

�We will pursue Second Amendment affirmation wherever and whenever such cases are possible as SAF fights to win back gun rights one lawsuit at a time,� Gottlieb stated.

(California carry license applicants can download state-standard application forms, legal information, and report unconstitutional policies or process issues at https://www.calgunsfoundation.org/carry)

SAF Sues California Attorney General Over Waiting Period Statute
The Second Amendment Foundation, Calguns Foundation and three California citizens have filed a federal lawsuit against the California Department of Justice and Attorney General Kamala Harris, challenging the state�s requirement that current gun owners wait at least ten days before taking possession of any additional firearm.

Read the release here
District Court case docket: Silvester v. Harris

SAF CONGRATULATES FIRST 5,000 ILLINOIS CCW PERMIT RECIPIENTS
28 Feb 2014 | News & Releases
BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation today offered congratulations to the first 5,000 recipients of Illinois concealed carry licenses, which were mailed out by the State Police.

It was a SAF case � Moore v. Madigan � that forced the Illinois Legislature to adopt a concealed carry law last year over the objections of anti-gun Gov. Pat Quinn and others including Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

�While politicians had to be dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with the Second Amendment,� said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, �the good citizens are rushing to enjoy their newly-restored firearms freedom. State officials said today they have received more than 50,000 permit applications. Last month, Fox News reported that concealed carry applications had outpaced the number of applications for Obamacare.

�We�re proud that our case brought about this opportunity for Illinois citizens to join millions of other Americans in the exercise of their fundamental right to keep and especially bear arms,� he continued. �If the Illinois experience has taught us anything, it is that the die-hard anti-gun politicians who opposed this new law are horribly out of touch with their constituents.�

Gottlieb said SAF will be monitoring the progress of this new law, with an eye on the number of permit applications being opposed by law enforcement that wind up being reviewed.

�At the rate of applications so far,� Gottlieb predicted, �we�re expecting to see up to 300,000 to 400,000 citizens apply for permits this year, which would be on par with the estimate offered a few weeks ago by the State Police. By the time that happens, we anticipate the law-abiding armed citizens of Illinois will prove that they are responsible and reliable with this most precious of civil rights.�

�At the rate of applications so far (IN ILLINOIS) Gottlieb predicted, �we�re expecting to see up to 300,000 to 400,000 citizens apply for permits this year, which would be on par with the estimate offered a few weeks ago by the State Police. By the time that happens, we anticipate the law-abiding armed citizens of Illinois will prove that they are responsible and reliable with this most precious of civil rights.�

BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for review of its challenge to the exorbitant gun permit fees charged by the City of New York. The case is Kwong v. de Blasio.

SAF is joined in the lawsuit � which was filed in 2011 against former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has been replaced by current Mayor Bill de Blasio � by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and seven private citizens. They are represented by New York attorney David Jensen.

The lawsuit challenges New York City�s $340 fee for a three-year handgun license, which is the highest such fee imposed for a gun possession license anywhere in the United States. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb noted that the fee anywhere else in the entire state of New York is $10, but the city is exempted from that law, The city�s higher fee, he said, �discourages city residents from exercising their civil rights while violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.�

�The fee structure discriminates against all but the wealthy and well-connected elites,� Gottlieb said. �This prohibitively high fee leaves average citizens defenseless due to their financial situation, but the right of self-defense and exercise of the Second Amendment should not be limited solely to those with deep pockets and fat wallets.�

The federal district court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals both sided with the city�s argument that the higher fee is allowable to recover costs and promote public safety.

�This recurring fee constitutes a substantial burden on the exercise of a fundamental civil right,� Gottlieb stated. �Nowhere in the Constitution does it condition the exercise of a civil right on the amount of money one has in the bank.�

BELLEVUE, WA � The Second Amendment Foundation today extended its heartfelt gratitude to five groups, including two fellow gun rights organizations, for their strong amicus curiae briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, supporting SAF�s petition for review of the New Jersey carry challenge, Drake v. Jerejian.

�In addition to briefs filed by 19 state attorneys general and 34 members of Congress,� SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb noted, �our case has now gotten support from our friends at the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners Foundation, the Cato Institute and Madison Society Foundation, plus the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and the Judicial Education Project.

�We�re encouraged by the additional boost last week of an opinion on carry outside the home by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case funded by the NRA, in which SAF submitted an amicus brief, that clearly defines the issues raised by our New Jersey lawsuit,� he added. �This was a great ruling and well written legal opinion that relied heavily on the decisions in Heller as well as SAF court victories in McDonald, Ezell and Moore. This ruling should help get the Second Amendment Foundation�s cert petition in our New Jersey Drake case on the right to carry heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. I am very excited.�

BELLEVUE, WA � Thirty-four members of Congress including Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran have signed onto an amicus curiae brief in the Second Amendment Foundation�s case of Drake v. Jerejian, which asks the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether the Second Amendment secures the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense.

The case, which is joined by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, also asks the high court to clarify the standard of review governing Second Amendment claims involving restrictions on the right of law-abiding adults to carry handguns outside the home. This case challenges New Jersey�s arbitrary requirement that carry permit applicants demonstrate a �justifiable need� to carry a handgun outside the home.

In addition to Sen. Cochran, 33 members of the U.S. House of Representatives including Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, signed the brief.

�We�re gratified that so many elected officials on Capitol Hill took time to study this issue and add their names to our brief,� said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. �The Supreme Court has already affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms applies to individual citizens, so it simply makes sense that this right extends beyond someone�s doorstep. A right limited to someone�s home unless a citizen can demonstrate some nebulous �justifiable need� is not a right at all, but a heavily-regulated privilege.�

Representatives from several other states including Alaska, Arizona, California, Ohio, Texas, Louisiana, North and South Carolina, Missouri, Oklahoma, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Florida, Georgia, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Wyoming also signed.

SAF CASE ASKS WHETHER IT'S LEGAL FOR CITIES TO BAN GUN STORES


he Second Amendment Foundation has hired Attorney David Sigale to pursue this action on behalf of an individual and his business against the Village of Norridge, Illinois. The Village initially issued a license to sell firearms to Mr. Kole, but then rescinded its decision and banned all gun dealers from the city.

District Court case docket: Kole v. Village of Norridge, et al.

SAF CASE CONSIDERS ADDITIONAL CHICAGO GUN RESTRICTIONS AFTER MCDONALD

The Second Amendment Foundation has hired Attorney David Sigale to take over this action originally filed by Attorney Walter Maksym. This action was originally quite broad, but now focuses on challenging the City of Chicago�s extreme zoning, licensing and transportation requirements for gun-related businesses and their customers seeking to operate in the City. District Court �read more

SAF SUES ALAMEDA COUNTY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION IN GUN SHOP CASE

The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a federal lawsuit against Alameda County, California and the county�s Board of Supervisors for violating the constitutional rights of three businessmen by wrongfully denying them permits to open a gun shop. District Court case docket: Teixeira v. County of Alameda

SAF, CALGUNS FOUNDATION SUE OAKLAND, SAN FRANCISCO POLICE

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit against the police departments in San Francisco and Oakland, California for refusing to return firearms to people who had been charged with crimes, but subsequently cleared of any wrongdoing. District Court case docket: Churchill v. Harris

CALIFORNIA �ASSAULT WEAPONS� ARREST LAWSUIT

SAF and Calguns Foundation have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in California, seeking damages for an unlawful arrest and to have the state�s definition of so-called �assault weapons� declared unconstitutionally vague. Case docket: Richards v. Harris

GOTTLIEB, GUN COMPANIES ON �GUN TALK� SUNDAY TO DISCUSS CAL. HANDGUN ROSTER FIASCO

BELLEVUE, WA � Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and founder of the Second Amendment Foundation will appear this Sunday, Jan. 26 on the nationally-syndicated �Gun Talk� with Tom Gresham to discuss the controversy surrounding California�s microstamping law that now has major gun companies essentially dropping �read more

I agree with you eyeball, SAF has done ALOT for gun owners.

Living in this grossly mismanaged anti gun state (Illinausea) is a never-ending source of irritation to me. As my signature line notes, I am a LIFETIME member of the NRA. I have been since Billy Boy Klinton signed that abortion of a crime bill in his first term. While we a certainly free to leave, one of us needs to be gainfully employed when we land after we leave. Thus far jobs have been fleeting. My wife is a tenured full professor at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, IL. I have almost completed my PhD. It's been a long time coming. She has been on many job interviews outside the state. As it stands for me, I'm a retired LEO working on a terminal degree. IF I manage to finish my degree I'll begin to cast about me, anywhere and everywhere to get out of this Pfukked up state. In the meantime, the NRA scares the sschitt out of anti-gun politicians who are not in "safe" districts. That's why barry hasn't had any new crime/gun bills cross his desk...and the House, for the moment, is held by ball-less republicans. At least they keep any laws that would further punish law-abiding gun owners off of that half-breed's desk.

For us the mid-term elections mean everything. Though I don't think it will be possible, I can dream that the Senate passes into Republican hands. Just force barry to veto bill after bill until the DIMocratic Presidential Candidate is done before he/she even starts.

These guys (SAF), with only 675,000 members, pay the best 2A lawyers in the USA to defend our gun rights.

I have belonged to a number of hunt clubs in Virginia & North Carolina in the last 25 years with memberships from 15 to 75. Typically about 10% belong to the NRA. Excuses range from once being a member & receiving too much mail to rejoin, to not reading the magazines or liking them so why pay for a membership, & not agreeing with everything the NRA does. About 75% of the same group does not vote, but bitches about the liberals & gun control. Almost none have ever written or called an elected official to express an opinion. The standard statement is that their vote accomplishes nothing or contacting elected officials does no good since THEY do what they want anyway.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it." Thomas Paine

Show them this and tell them the signers of the Constitution only gave up their families, fortunes, farms and lives so they could live free and hunt and if they can't support the SAF and NRA they don't deserve the right to hunt.

Father and I went down to camp,
along with Captain Gooding,
And there we see the men and boys
as thick as hasty pudding.
And there was Captain Washington,
And gentlefolks about him,
They say he's grown so tarnal proud,
He will not ride without �em.

and some bitch about calls asking for money to fight the fight?
think of the money if each patriot gave super bowl Sunday's beer money? money hurts so much less then blood

I jump down the throat of every non member I run across. And I have a response for every excuse.
My favorite is: "Listen, I have been a Life Member for years. For YOU I have pulled the wagon, throwing money I'd rather spend on something else into the defense of YOUR rights, not just mine. Have you ever considered the reason the country is going to he!! is because people like you won't put the wagon when it matters?"

Whelen, you should see just what a "friend" you have. Ask him if he actually thinks he could own all those toys without the NRA and other groups standing up for him? I mean, raise the topic and don't let it slide. He should be ashamed of himself.
Get a commitment from him that he'll either join NRA, or any of the other good groups, and stay a member, pulling whatever wagon in the convoy he wants.

As for all you other freeloading weasels, I don't care what gun rights group you support, but by golly, you dang well better help haul the freight.

For sure.

eyeball,

Thanks for the info. Make it 675,001 members.

Most of the clubs around here require proof of NRA membership as a condition of joining the club. This may be illegal if the club is on private land.

What, you don't think a professional firefighter should part time as an arsonist?

Watch this video of Joaquin Jackson as an NRA board member talking about "assault weapons" and magazine capacities. He states outright that "personally, I think assault weapons have basically, need to be to be in the hands of the military and in the hands of police. As far as assault weapons to a civilian, it's alright as long as you have that magazine capacity down to five".

Then of course there is the NRA "explanation", along with Joaquin's "explanation". He of course crawfishes big time, saying that he was talking about "true assault" weapons, i.e., full autos, and didn't get a chance to explain before he was cut short, which is an outright lie since the then current discussion had only to do with semi-autos and high cap magazines and nothing whatsoever to do with full autos, of which there was no discussion at the time.

Yet NRA members continue to vote Joaquin on the BOD, relying on a candidates �qualifications� based on the profile supplied by those who nominated said candidate instead of checking the candidates qualifications themselves. One would think that the NRA would take it upon themselves to disqualify a nominee based on the nominees track record. Does anyone really believe that the likes of Joaquin wouldn't compromise at the drop of a hat?

The NRA may on occasion do some good in some places, but from my experience, the NRA quivers in the background while others stand at the forefront of the battles, and when the battles are won, they push, shove, or otherwise elbow their way to the front to take the credit.

I've been an NRA member in some capacity for nearly 40 years, starting in the mid '70's with continued annual membership until life membership in the early '80's, then endowment membership in the mid '90's. During the first Clinton gun ban, I signed up 20-30 folks on my own in a matter of a few weeks, browbeating as necessary to try and get them to understand why they �needed� to join the NRA. Even prior to that ban I had signed up countless others and had also paid for a half dozen or more life memberships for still others.

I thought I was doing all the good, to the point that I'd strained or sprained one or the other of my arms over the years patting myself on the back for all I had done pushing the NRA by signing up all those members. Then I began noticing that bad bills were still getting passed in the legislature while good bills failed. So I started asking why. What I found is that while the NRA may do some good in some places some of the time, they are just like any other huge corporation that has good managers and bad managers.

The NRA hires off the street to do some of the work such as state liaisons. Wyoming was blessed with an NRA liaison who happened to have previously worked as finance coordinator for the Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee. I'm fairly certain most here know Rudy's stance on gun control. In fairness, that liaison also worked in the same capacity for Jim Gilmore, who is (as far as I know) pro gun. The problem with folks who hire on to the highest bidder is that they may not have their heart in the cause and may be more interested in keeping their job than putting forth the effort required to insure bad gun bills don't become law, especially if their ideals differ from those they work for. Sort of like Wayne keeping the fires burning so he always has something to do, much like the hyperbole the anti-gunners/media uses to paint the NRA as the bad guy so they have someone to blame for not getting their way.

As others have pointed out, there are other organizations (NAGR, SAF, CCRKBA, et al) who do as much or more to defend our gun rights without all the fanfare and all too often compromises that have led us to where we are today, still fighting for our rights. Many of the non-NRA organizations are no compromise, and that doesn't sit well with a lot of NRA members.

It takes more than simply being a member of an organization by virtue of annual dues or life memberships. It takes grassroots efforts of contacting reps and voicing your opinion (often akin to beating your head against the wall or repeatedly striking your head with a hammer, depending on your reps), continuous monetary contributions to the organizations at the forefront, and encouraging others of like mind to do the same, among other things.

Things like knowing who your NRA liaison is, what their qualifications are, exactly where they stand, what they are doing on your behalf, watching to see what legislation the NRA is supporting or not supporting, who the NRA is supporting or not, and asking why there are anti gun Board Members (voted in by NRA members as previously noted - if you can get an answer). You may be surprise to find you will be stonewalled just like the current regime has stonewalled on Benghazi, Fast & Furious, the IRS, etc. It's a grand way to not answer valid questions.

Too many folks seem to think that if they are a member of some organization they are �doing something� for the cause and to some degree they are. I understand that not everyone can or is able to contribute money on a regular basis, or that they aren't comfortable writing letters to or calling their legislators and for them, that's OK. I was the same way for many years and it took me way too long to realize that.

The bottom line is that we all need to support as many pro gun groups as we can and not just the NRA. It isn't always the Goliaths that win the battles. Sometimes it's the Davids. YMMV

Meaney.

This is but one of many cases where the NRA is involved. Court battles take a ton of cash. Bloomberg has added 50 million dollars more to the battle of taking our guns.

Nothing pizzes me off more than someone whining over a 35 dollar membership fee and getting to many money solicitations.

Franklin said "They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

I would say those who allow others the bear the full weight of the battle against the gun grabbers deserve no such gun rights themselves.

http://www.wcpo.com/news/national/nra-takes-request-to-expand-gun-rights-to-court

I'm betting we could get someone t do Wayne LaPierres job for $400,000.

Dave,
My cheapskate friend did take a day off work to go to the state capitol to protest some anti-gun legislation.