First of all I'd like to apologize for posting a thread then ghosting, life's been hectic from just about every angle lately.
To each their own.
My take is the NRA is doing a good job overall and you can't satisfy everyone as a large organization. They have a large membership, 5 million, that is very diverse and they have to try and meet the needs of everyone from hunters, youth groups, action shooters, instructors, self defense etc along with members from both ends of the spectrum - liberals and conservatives, antigun and progun, complacent to extreme. Some people say NRA is too aggressive, others say it's not aggressive enough, and most probably don't care. They're usually good at staying out of other politics and they shouldn't have gotten involved in net neutrality. The Charlton Heston "Cold Dead Hands" was a great marketing move. It got people involved and will be a remembered slogan for decades. You're not going to win if you can't get people involved, and you can't get people involved without getting them excited.
Also NRA does way more than SAF and GOA to further the 2nd amendment. SAF and GOA have an advantage being small organizations where they can adapt quickly and are able to target a specific clientele. I believe building the community is as important, or more important, than winning 2a cases and legislation. From what I know, this is comparing the three.
1. Judicial cases - NRA, SAF, GOA
2. Legislative - NRA (National and State), SAF (National and minimal State), GOA (National and minimal State)
3. Elections - NRA
4. Firearms Training - NRA
5. Law Enforcement Training - NRA
6. Military Training - NRA
7. Range Development - NRA
8. Youth Training and Programs- NRA
9. High School and College programs - NRA
10. Hunting and conservation - NRA
11. Community development - NRA
12. Competition programs - NRA
13. Business support - NRA
14. Local club support - NRA
15. Firearm history - NRA
and so on.
The cold dead hands thing made the NRA, and by extension, seem like a heartless organization that doesn't care about people's lives, which is the exact damming image that's hurting us so much.
Of course the NRA does more, but only because its the big name everyone knows. If the other groups got more support, they could grow. And while there may not currently be any other organization that does all of that, there are multiple organizations for any one of those topics. I'd also add that, on a personal note, I never liked NRA training curriculums. I only got my instructor certificate so I'd have a piece of paper to show I know what I'm talking about.
Well since you brought up the LGBTQ community they haven't been so nice either. They've attacked religion, faith, parental rights and private business. Their campaign went from tolerance to in-your-face policy and regulation. Don't want to bake a cake for them? They'll sue and harass you out of existence. You want to raise your kid as a heterosexual? No you can't. So much for free speech and religion.
Granted I respect the LGBTQ people but they need to respect us as well.
I've been around PLENTY of LGBTQ people, from casual associates to MANY of my dearest friends. I have never once actually met a LGBTQ person who cares if your kid is straight or gay, as long as you let the kid be who they are. And the cake thing? How was that any different than diners refusing to serve Dr King and Co. during the civil rights movement. All they want is equality. The ones who try to force kids to be LGTBQ or say straight people are evil are a very vocal minority giving the whole community a bad name, which is exactly my point with the NRA.
The NRA is not a biological organism. As such, saying "it must die" implies a more emotional, visceral feeling toward the NRA as an organization than a logical opinion of its stance on issues.
You're welcome to start your own NRA-like organization, or to give all your money to another group. But, just because YOU don't like the NRA, you want it to "die?" That's a very Extreme Left-Wing, Liberal, Fascist attitude.
If you think anything you "need" is a right that the government must pay for, and anything you don't like should be banned or boycotted out of existence, there's no maybe about it -- YOU ARE A LIBERAL.
You're taking rhetoric far too literal.
And as for me being liberal? Political viewpoints are FAR to varied and complicated to try to apply a binary scale to everyone's view (liberal vs conservative, left vs right, Republican vs Democratic, ect.) Trying to apply these titles to others accomplishes nothing. Many of my views would be considered liberal, many conservative, and many in between. But this isn't about something I just don't like, it's something that is giving our community a bad image and thus actively hurting the very cause they claim to support.
No organization is perfect. There's a bunch of stuff I don't like about the NRA as well. I think they enjoy playing both sides of the fence when it comes to politics and actually welcome the media feeding frenzy after every mass shooting because it boosts their numbers. Most importantly for an organization that is supposed to be about protecting the second amendment they sure don't seem to understand why it was written. In order for the militia to be effective is necessary for private citizens to have access to affordable recently manufactured automatic weapons. FOPA was a huge sell-out that made possible this endless back-and-forth debate on banning models, parts, and accessories that constantly keeps the PAC coffers full and professional lobbyists fat and happy. I won't give the organization a dime until Wayne LaPierre is gone.
NRA is definitely not the only game in town, and the more people support alternative organizations the more they will get the message that it's not okay to keep jerking the fear chain to make the money rain.
It would be a shame if NRA disappeared, though. I'd much prefer if they just grew up a bit.
You were kinda all over the place, but I'll just say that the NRA is far from perfect. Yes, change doesn't happen quickly, or maybe even at all in many cases with respect to the NRA. I have seen some changes here and there. Like any large organization, some good and some :facepalm: worthy. You seem to have many bones to pick with many things and I don't really follow where you're going most of the times. That said, I'd shudder to envision what gun rights would be like without the NRA.
If other organizations gained the support the NRA lost, and thus had the resources to do everything they do but better, what would be lost? Like you said, change isn't quick, there's no way the NRA will disappear over night. As long as we as a community help the other groups grow at the same rate the NRA falls, there shouldn't be much problem.