National Association for Gun Rights

[Maximumbob54]

Does anyone know much about the NAGR? Are they worth joining? As in do they have much of a voice and do they really do much for your rights if you send them money? The last thing I want to do right now is send money for no reason other than for someone to send out pamphlets and emails. I want to know if they have a real voice that is listened to like the NRA is in Washington. I'm not usually a fan of lobbyists in Washington but if they are 2nd amendment lobbyists for gun rights then I can get behind that. I'm sure they are on the right side, but do they make a difference?

[oldman45]

Never heard of them until I read this post.

They may be huge and great but I have been a gun fanatic for longer than most here are old and never heard of them. From what I just found on the internet, they are a scam but google their name and add scam.

That said, every group had to start somewhere. Ten yrs from now they may be a powerful force, assuming we still have guns then. With the reputation they have now, I would not give them a dime.

[oldman45]

OK, I did some deep water checking on this outfit. It appears to be nothing more than a way to raise money for the two people that run it. They use outdated info to entice people to donate. Their fed tax returns are so vague that they are lucky they are in audited. Donations are running about $150,000 per yr and their expenses are way more than that. Of course, the head of it gets a nice salary as does his partner.

Many places on the internet refers to it as a scam and I see nothing that would cause me to disagree. I found many gun sites where it was discussed and then some new member with his first post defends the operation and never posts again.

What I could not find is any legislation they sponsored but plenty of trips the head honchos made to gun shows and such at the expense of the association.

Again, they may have some positive things going for them but I have not found it. The President seems to enjoy having his photo made with people of importance at NRA functions.

I am now wondering if maybe I and the CajunLawyer could form a Louisiana Pro Gun Group. We could sell memberships and get us some travelling and gun money. Anyone here want to join in on the ground floor?

[ace22]

i've been a shooter/collector for over 30yrs and i never heard of them either and was going to check up on them but i'll take oldman's word for it.

[OKFC05]

Unfortunately there are several of these llittle groups whose net real effect is zero.

There the NRA and the state organizations and the individuals in their districts, as far as Congress is concerned.

If you want to add more effect than supporting the NRA and your state organization, write a letter to your members of Congress concerning a bill now on the docket, and tell them what you think as a voter from their district.

[jlrhiner]

The first I heard of them was a recent Rand Paul email that my sister recieved. In it they were calling attention to the UN effort to ban guns. That seemed a little odd as I haven't heard anything on that in a couple of years. I too did some checking on them and came to the same conclusion as posted before. If money has to go somewhere, It's the NRA or a local org. dealing with regional issues.

[T.Webb]

The NAGR is not a registered lobbyist. It's just Dudley Brown, and his attorney Luke Odell.

Dudley Brown used to run the Colorado Association of Gun Rights.

The NAGR claims to have been instrumental in both the McDonald and Heller cases, but I couldn't find a single mention of them in either case. Not even a supporting brief.

I work too hard for my money, so I'll just stick with supporting the NRA and the SAF.

[Dranix]

I got this in an email. tryin to be slick.


The Obama Administration's IRS and FEC won't let the National Association for Gun Rights PAC inform non-members of NAGR who they should -- and shouldn’t -- support in the upcoming election.

As the head of the mail room here at NAGR, my staff has been staying busy processing thousands of new members coming on board in recent weeks.

Since you aren't a "legal member" of NAGR, Dudley asked me to encourage you to chip in at least $5 right now to become a "legal member" of NAGR.

Once you become a "legal member," when the elections start cranking up next year, the NAGR PAC will be able to "legally" tell you which candidates for elected office are "good guys" on guns, and which ones are the gun-grabbers.

Please click on the picture below and chip in at least $5 so the NAGR PAC can "legally" tell you which candidates are good and which ones are bad.

-- Ashley



From: Dudley Brown [mailto[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2011 1:05 PM
Subject: Silenced by Obama



Dear Jessica,

I’m in a bind.

It’s illegal for me to tell you which candidates the National Association for Gun Rights PAC supports. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) expressly forbid me from telling you which candidates are so solid on gun rights that I want you to help us help them.

It sounds crazy, I know.

But the anti-gun Obamacrats who run the federal government don’t want gun owners and activists like you and me to be organized going into the 2012 election.

That’s why the IRS/FEC will only let me tell “a restricted class” of “legal members” of the National Association for Gun Rights who they should -- and shouldn’t -- support in the election.

The good news is, I’ve found a loophole around their legal gag, and frankly it’s pretty easy.

All you need to do is chip in at least $5 (or more), and take a positive pro-gun action, and you can then be counted as part of our “legal membership.”

So I've set up a page for you to do just that when you click here.



It’s that easy. Once you’re considered what the bureaucrats call a “legal member of the Organization’s restricted class” I can tell you which candidates to support, and which anti-gunners to oppose.

Are you upset with our government’s attempts to take away your rights?

Are you angry at the way politicians are trashing our God-given liberties and the Constitution?

Do you get tired of hearing the election season lies politicians tell about their supposed “support” of your Constitutional right to keep and bear arms?

And it is very important you act today because election season is the best time to hold politicians accountable. Nothing is more important to a politician than getting elected or re-elected.

That’s why the politicians and their bureaucratic allies put up as many road blocks as possible to make it hard for individuals and groups of like-minded gun activists to influence elections.



Due to the onerous, free speech-violating elections laws, the National Association for Gun Rights and our members are severely limited in what we can and can’t do during the election season.

I formed a Political Action Committee (PAC) for the National Association for Gun Rights to do exactly what needs to be done to hold politicians accountable without worrying about getting hauled into an IRS audit or a federal courtroom.

Through the National Association for Gun Rights PAC, we can now expressly advocate for the election -- or defeat -- of politicians across the country.

That’s why I’m asking you to do me a personal favor -- and a favor for the cause we share by taking the simple step of clicking HERE and taking the simple actions.



I know I don’t have to tell you that the coming election is pivotal for our gun rights. The Obama administration is desperate to pay off the anti-gunners, and I need to be able to mobilize as many gun owners as possible in the coming election.

That’s why I started the National Association for Gun Rights PAC in the first place, so gun owners like you and me can have a direct impact on the elections that are so vital to our gun rights.

With the specter of the United Nations’ “Small Arms Treaty” gun ban looming on the horizon, and President Obama’s pledge to pursue gun control “under the radar,” now is NOT the time for gun owners to sit on the sidelines.

I need gun owners and activists just like you to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with me against the anti-gunners in both parties.

To do that, I need to be able to communicate directly with you through our Political Action Committee. I can’t do that unless you’re a “legal member of the restricted class” of National Association for Gun Rights membership.

The National Association for Gun Rights PAC is already involved in important Federal races, but I simply can’t tell you which ones.

I can’t risk the legal battle that would surely follow.

The good news is, I’ve found an easy loophole that will keep you connected with the National Association for Gun Rights PAC, and keep you on the frontlines of the most important battles in the coming election.

All you need to do is chip in at least $5, right now, so you can be counted as part of our “legal membership.”



It’s that easy. Once you’re considered a “legal member of the Organization’s restricted class” I can tell you which candidates to support, and which anti-gunners to oppose.

It will only take a few moments. I hope I can count on you to become a “legal member of the Organization’s restricted class” so I can speak directly to you about which candidates gun owners should support, and which ones we need to fight.

For Freedom,


Dudley Brown
Executive Director

P.S. The IRS/FEC expressly forbids me to tell you which candidates have my endorsement.

That’s why the IRS/FEC will only let me tell “a restricted class” of “legal members” of the National Association for Gun Rights who they should -- and shouldn’t -- support in the election.

The good news is, I’ve found a loophole around their legal gag, and frankly it’s pretty easy.

All you need to do is chip in at least $5, right now, so you can be counted as part of our “legal membership.”

It’s that easy. Once you’re considered a “legal member of the Organization’s restricted class” I can tell you which candidates to support, and which anti-gunners to oppose.


The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens' organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights' mailing address is P.O. 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570.

[thndrchiken]

I agree my money goes to the NRA, ANJRPC and the NJ2AF. Mr. Brown's emails that come out two to three times a day are more obnoxious with the money requests than anything the NRA has ever done.

[smitholdtimer]

I get E mail from Dudley and always notice at the bottom they want money, my opinion is that you will receive much better representation from the NRA than any other so-called "rights protectors". I have been represented by them since 1963 or 1964 when I joined as a young military member who had to have his commanding officer sign for him to become a life member.

[thndrchiken]

Originally Posted by smitholdtimer

I get E mail from Dudley and always notice at the bottom they want money, my opinion is that you will receive much better representation from the NRA than any other so-called "rights protectors". I have been represented by them since 1963 or 1964 when I joined as a young military member who had to have his commanding officer sign for him to become a life member.

What'd that run back then about $40? Life Member now is $1k.

[Brock_Manson]

Originally Posted by T.Webb

The NAGR is not a registered lobbyist. It's just Dudley Brown, and his attorney Luke Odell.

Dudley Brown used to run the Colorado Association of Gun Rights.

The NAGR claims to have been instrumental in both the McDonald and Heller cases, but I couldn't find a single mention of them in either case. Not even a supporting brief.

I work too hard for my money, so I'll just stick with supporting the NRA and the SAF.

Wow. What passes for "research" on here is simply stunning.

1) Luke O'Dell is not an attorney.

2) There are currently about 15 or so people that work, full time, for NAGR.

4) Dudley Brown never ran an organization by the name of "Colorado Association of Gun Rights." He has -- and continues to -- run for a number of years an organization called Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.

5) NAGR's amicus brief was, in fact, quoted in the McDonald case.

There's 5 points on which you are completely incorrect and can be figured out in about 10 minutes of Googling and, get this, picking up the phone and calling the organization.

For the rest of you -- and especially the guy who claims to be a shooting fanatic yet never hearing of NAGR -- being into "shooting" and into "politics" is two entirely separate things. You could be Rob Leatham or Jerry Miculek and not know the first frackin' thing about how to get people elected to office or how to push a bill through a legislature.

Guess what? Finding other forums like this one where six guys sit around and spout the same thing does not constitute "research." Did any of you think about contacting the source and asking them?

If you had, you might know that NAGR was instrumental in getting Constitutional Carry passed in Wyoming -- only the fourth state in the country to have that law. In my book, that's a pretty big win, but most didn't hear about it simply because the supposedly-great NRA was nowhere near it. NAGR is also closely aligned with several state-level groups like Georgia Gun Owners, Iowa Gun Owners, Wyoming Gun Owners, a gun group in Virgina and one in New Hampshire, in addition to major political forces such as Campaign for Liberty and the National Right to Work Organization.

Now, with all of that, who still thinks they are a two-man organization that isn't doing anything? And, if so, please do share your sources.

Brock Manson
A Voice

[PALADIN85020]

The NAGR (Dudley Brown) came out AGAINST the concealed carry reciprocity bill now moving through Congress, claiming it could be modified to become a trojan horse.

Also, they are using scare tactics about the U.N. arms treaty, knowing full well the Senate will not approve it even if Obama tries to ram it through - this in an effort to increase donations.

The more I learn about them, the more I'd have to say they are not worth the effort. Stick with the NRA and GOA.

John

[Brock_Manson]

Originally Posted by PALADIN85020

The NAGR (Dudley Brown) came out AGAINST the concealed carry reciprocity bill now moving through Congress, claiming it could be modified to become a trojan horse.

Also, they are using scare tactics about the U.N. arms treaty, knowing full well the Senate will not approve it even if Obama tries to ram it through - this in an effort to increase donations.

The more I learn about them, the more I'd have to say they are not worth the effort. Stick with the NRA and GOA.

John

John,

They were right to speak against HR 822 for numerous reasons. Maybe you should call them and ask them why they did that? It *has* be amended. Point of fact, their claims have -- despite what the NRA says -- already proven true. The bill has already been amended and it isn't even out of committee in a Republican-controlled House. Imagine what happens when it gets to Harry Reid's Senate.

Do I know the Senate won't approve the UN's proposed Treaty? How do I know that? Remember who controls the Senate (referenced above).

And by "stick with the NRA and GOA" do you mean the same NRA and GOA that are fundraising off of, you guessed it, the UN Small Arms Treaty? I know for a fact that Wayne Lapierre has spoken about that subject on the world's stage more than once and they are cranking out emails regarding the subject. So if you claim that NAGR is using "scare tactics" regarding the UN, then you better point that criticism at the other two groups instead of advocating for them.

Or do you mean the NRA that compromised on the 1934 Act? Or the 1968 GCA? Or the "Assault Weapons" ban in 1994? Or the NRA that has rated politicians with "A's" who have consistently voted against the Second Amendment? Do I hear Harry Reid's name, anyone? No? How about the current governor of Montana, who just vetoed Constitutional Carry there despite his "A" rating from the NRA? Or, better yet, how about endorsing 13 of Nancy Pelosi's "most protected" Congressman in the 2010 elections? Is that the NRA you're talking about?

I'm guessing that, after reading that paragraph, most of you are either completely unaware of those facts or are mad because you think I'm lying or being arrogant. If the latter is the case, do your research. If it's the former, don't listen to the people who tell you that the NRA is looking out for your best interest.

Brock Manson
A Voice

[PALADIN85020]

Originally Posted by Brock_Manson

John,

They were right to speak against HR 822 for numerous reasons. Maybe you should call them and ask them why they did that? It *has* be amended. Point of fact, their claims have -- despite what the NRA says -- already proven true. The bill has already been amended and it isn't even out of committee in a Republican-controlled House. Imagine what happens when it gets to Harry Reid's Senate.

Do I know the Senate won't approve the UN's proposed Treaty? How do I know that? Remember who controls the Senate (referenced above).

And by "stick with the NRA and GOA" do you mean the same NRA and GOA that are fundraising off of, you guessed it, the UN Small Arms Treaty? I know for a fact that Wayne Lapierre has spoken about that subject on the world's stage more than once and they are cranking out emails regarding the subject. So if you claim that NAGR is using "scare tactics" regarding the UN, then you better point that criticism at the other two groups instead of advocating for them.

Or do you mean the NRA that compromised on the 1934 Act? Or the 1968 GCA? Or the "Assault Weapons" ban in 1994? Or the NRA that has rated politicians with "A's" who have consistently voted against the Second Amendment? Do I hear Harry Reid's name, anyone? No? How about the current governor of Montana, who just vetoed Constitutional Carry there despite his "A" rating from the NRA? Or, better yet, how about endorsing 13 of Nancy Pelosi's "most protected" Congressman in the 2010 elections? Is that the NRA you're talking about?

I'm guessing that, after reading that paragraph, most of you are either completely unaware of those facts or are mad because you think I'm lying or being arrogant. If the latter is the case, do your research. If it's the former, don't listen to the people who tell you that the NRA is looking out for your best interest.

Brock Manson
A Voice

Hi, Brock -

For the record, I'm neither unaware nor mad. I have no illusions about the omnipotence of the NRA, but this discussion is more about the NAGR, which is a newcomer on the stage.

My understanding is that 60 Senators (some of both parties) have already written to Obama indicating they would never vote for the U.N. Arms Treaty if contains anything abrogating 2nd Amendment rights. In other words, it will be dead on arrival. I believe this to be true, and building up hysteria over the treaty, whether by the NAGR or the NRA, simply to get more funding, is not warranted at this time. It bears watching, of course. But I doubt that the treaty will be accepted by our legislators. NAGR is also bleating about Carolyn McCarthy's gun-ban proposals, which will never see the light of day outside of committee.

So far, amendments to the CC reciprocity bill have been positive (pro-gun) ones. The NRA is cautioning about any other amendments, and the co-sponsors are vehement about not modifying it further. There are enough pro-gun people in Congress to vote down any anti-gun amendments. There are a number of issues to be worked out; hopefully this will be done with a view towards reasonableness that makes sense to all of us who carry concealed. The main problem that I see is that such a bill will never be signed into law until after the next national election, if you get my drift.

You are right - the NRA, GOA or any of the other gun lobbyists are not perfect. I've often taken the NRA to task on a number of issues. However, it's the thousand-pound gorilla in Congress, and I've never regretted sending them money from time to time when I think they are making sense. My only point is that NAGR seems to be only a money-making scheme for its founders, and so far I am not impressed with them.

Hope this explains my thinking more thoroughly - we're on the same side, and infighting among pro-gun people strikes me as very counterproductive. I'd like to think that also applies to pro-gun groups. Huddling and strategizing together in a spirit of cooperation would make more sense. We have a common enemy in the hoplophobic gun-grabbers, and we need to concentrate on defeating their agendas.

John

[oldman45]

I bet we have a member that is with the aforementioned group. As another said, someone joined a site just to defend them and never posted again. Now there is a new member here with two postings and both about the group after joining one day and ten days later has not returned.

Still, there is so much scam about the group and the background, along with nothing to confim any of their claims, I will not be giving them any money.

And for the record, I am very political, both in State and Federal politics and I still have never heard of them.

[smitholdtimer]

For the record the cost was $100, not a huge sum but for a young person on military pay it was enough, money well spent too!

[crsides]

That was a month or two's pay back then, right Sam.

$1000 sounds like a deal now.



Charlie

[hatt]

Originally Posted by PALADIN85020

The NAGR (Dudley Brown) came out AGAINST the concealed carry reciprocity bill now moving through Congress, claiming it could be modified to become a trojan horse.

John

Sounds like they have some sense. I'm going to have to check into them.

[Fishslayer]

By chance is NAGR based in Nigeria?

[plbrgene]

NAGR & Dudley Brown.
I'm not fully convinced this is or isn't a scam. but when an organization is always asking for donations, by using scare tactics I do have a red flag pop up.
Don't think they will be getting my dollars. If I donate it will be to a long established organization like the NRA of which I am a life member.

[hatt]

Originally Posted by plbrgene

NAGR & Dudley Brown.
I'm not fully convinced this is or isn't a scam. but when an organization is always asking for donations, by using scare tactics I do have a red flag pop up.
Don't think they will be getting my dollars. If I donate it will be to a long established organization like the NRA of which I am a life member.

What happened to your red flag?

[jlrhiner]

Originally Posted by hatt

Sounds like they have some sense. I'm going to have to check into them.

More importantly, what did your research turn up?

[hatt]

Originally Posted by jlrhiner

More importantly, what did your research turn up?

Didn't do any research.

[jlrhiner]

Really? (Do you have any names?)

[Pennyh31]

I saw something similar several months ago about this organization. I got an email today asking for volunteers to man their booth at the local gun show here in Vegas. I am a taxidermist, and one of my customers died in a plane crash in November. I had just delivered his safari to him and his sister has contacted me to help them sell the animals for the family. I thought manning a booth at the gun show may help me in that endeavor, although if this organization is a scam I really would not want for anyone to associate myself with them so may re-think my offer to volunteer. The man with the booth offer named Zack isn't supposed to call me back until tomorrow with details. I've only been in Vegas 1 year and the exposure might be good, but if this organization is a scam... well, that's not the kind of exposure I want. I would love to hear your thoughts.Ethics has always been first and formost in my business.

[jlrhiner]

My only involvement with them was the before mentioned email. I, personally, question the ethics of ANYONE using scare tactics to raise money. About the individuals involved in the organization, I have no knowledge except what I've read. I am continually amazed that people are worried about the UN coming to take away their guns, (refer to email alert). What are they going to do, send in the Bangladeshi army? Give me a break.

As far as you being involved with them, you'll have to decide that for your self. I would have nothing to do with them, but that's just me. YMMV.

[jlrhiner]

I agree with you. How do we check them out?

[colkid]

I live in Colorado and went to nafgr headquarters here in Colorado to stuff ballots once. There were many good quality people helping also.
Dudley years ago was a NRA rep., then he switched to GOA and now still runs the Colorado GOA.
He did a decent job (I think) helping to stop Colorado State University
in the Peoples Republic of Fort Collins from doing a gun ban on Campus.
He also has been active in trying to get good Concealed carry laws in
Colorado. Also getting good gun people elected to offices in Colorado.
I had the same question, Is he just double dipping with the NAFGR,
or is the NAFGR doing national things he can't do with the state GOA? The NAFGR and GOA emails were the
same.
I am a member of the National GOA and a NRA Endowment member.

[Martya]

I hope they are a genuine organization that supports efforts to keep gun possession a right. The 'fight' is heavily weighted towards the anti's. But if this is the intro letter I got I think I might consider directing my extremely limited resources somewhere else - both time and money.

It’s illegal for me to tell you which candidates the National Association for Gun Rights PAC supports. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) expressly forbid me from telling you which candidates are so solid on gun rights that I want you to help us help them.
It sounds crazy, I know.

Once you’re considered a “legal member of the Organization’s restricted class” I can tell you which candidates to support, and which anti-gunners to oppose.

I am not aware of the laws about this, but perhaps a better sales pitch would get more support. If they want my support, I don't need anyone to "tell" me who to vote for, I need someone to "tell" me which candidate THEY support and why. I'll make my own decisions.

[Recoil Rob]

Thay have been sending me emails every day. i have opted out using their "Unsubscribe" button at least a dozen times. I finally called and spoke to a young lady who told me she would remove me from the list manually. They still send emails daily.

Today I called back and gave them one last chance to take me off their list. I warned them that if I receive another email I will contact the FCC or whoever I need to. Maybe the NY Times, that ought to get their attention...


And I'm a new NRA Life Member...

[solid_celt]

Anything against the UN I'm all for.
I say:
Let's get the US out of the UN and get the UN out of the US !!!!!
SAVE our RIGHTS

[Lightning69]

NRA is the best investment. Why duplicate? Concentrate.

[emayfiel]

Wikipedia has a pretty long description of the NAGR, and a lengthy list of sources for the info. If the Wiki article is right, NAGR has some merit.

NAGR does solicit donations in every correspondence, and too many times in each one. On the other hand, so does every other special-interest group I belong to. It's annoying, but money talks. NRA is the 2000-pound canary, but it supports some compromises in legislation that aren't in sync with the Second Amendment or rational considerations.

We belong to these special-interest groups so they can represent our interests and do the research, letter-writing, and lobbying that we aren't willing or able to do. There's no easy way to tell if any of them are cost-effective(except for the NRA which the media follow closely), unless someone or some government agency accuses them of fraud.

Each of these groups has a different focus. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, for example, is a pedal-to-the-metal Second Amendment promoter, but its focus is strictly education. That doesn't mean it's not worth joining and supporting.

The best way to check out a group is to join, see what it does, ignore the constant money requests, and, then, quit if your focus is different.

[Moonman]

Shills and Touts keep coming to mind for some reason.

[mountaingun629]

Never heard of this outfit until this thread.
The NRA, GOA, Second Amendment Foundation, and The Citizens Committee For the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are established friends of gun owners.
Put your money on what works, not some fundraiser that seems intended more to make someone an income than a campaign for gun rights.
Look at the post count of the major shill for this outfit in this thread.
Nuff said,

Myron

[Alnamvet68]

Why do I get the feeling there's a scam going on here?

[etc1006]

I got tired of every email and petition asking for money. Unsubscribed from them.

[JenniferG]

If the organization is legit then contribute if you want. I belong to the NRA and have contributed to the SAF. I see those two as MY best choices to contribute to. Sure they all send out too much donation literature but now it's all email and I can "blip" and delete it if I'm not feeling it that day. Used to be my mailbox would be stuffed fulled of letters postcards and surveys. Email is easy to filter too if someone gets your address that keeps bothering you. Be careful though the FBI and the UN scan emails for key words like treaty, UN troops, Global bankers etc...

I can laugh now, I used to let all the conspiracy stuff eat me up. I didn't have to go to a 12 step program but I had to cut away from all that and take a different approach or let that stuff kill me. NRA and a SAF and my local gun club, it's enough for me. They do the work that's needed along with me bugging my reps with emails and phone calls. Gosh, no more black helicopters and UN takeovers of our National Parks they'll suck you right in. Screw that!!! Take that from a long time recovering helicopter watcher.

[Shootist1954]

I received an email today from the NAGR with the subject: "Why does the NRA want Obama to get your name?"

Then this Dudley Brown slams the NRA for selling out. Give me a break! I believe when organizations such as the NAGR start slamming any group such as the NRA, that is reason enough to be more than suspicious.

Roger

[swampersand]

I found this thread tonight after receving my umpteenth email from Dudly Brown. I was curious with respect to what forum members might know about hte subject group.

The most recent email says that a well placed government worker informed them that the ATF is making wholesale copies of gun dealers background check paperwork. This seems like a statement that should be presented with some very specific evidentiary backup, but none is presented and I visit quite a few LGS and have never heard of this happening. I know they view the records and may question multiple purchases by good customers, but I have never heard a dealer remark that the records were copied. Anyone have any hint of this happening?

Incidently, the donation request is now "chip in $35."

[tlay]

The NRA has a special going on now. For $300 you can become a life member. I am now a new life member!

[usm1rifle]

Originally Posted by Alnamvet68

Why do I get the feeling there's a scam going on here?

Maybe because almost everyone who is for them has a post count less than 5?

[champehg]

The NRA is just as guilty of using scare tactics to get donations and ask for just as many as does the NAGR.
Also I can't find out the salary for Dudley Brown but I discovered the Wayne Lapiere is paid $920,000. That seems a little excessive for an organization that sends out letters a few times a month asking for donations.
I don't think he should work for nothing but come on.

[champehg]

I am a life member of the NRA and the last letter I received from them was asking me to pay the remaining $350 dollars of my membership fee in full, cause they need the money.
So I don't know how they can offer Life Time membership for $300

[jlrhiner]

Originally Posted by champehg

I am a life member of the NRA and the last letter I received from them was asking me to pay the remaining $350 dollars of my membership fee in full, cause they need the money.
So I don't know how they can offer Life Time membership for $300

Maybe your just lucky. I haven't received that letter. Or maybe something else is going on.............?

[T.Webb]

Originally Posted by champehg

The NRA is just as guilty of using scare tactics to get donations and ask for just as many as does the NAGR.
Also I can't find out the salary for Dudley Brown but I discovered the Wayne Lapiere is paid $920,000. That seems a little excessive for an organization that sends out letters a few times a month asking for donations.
I don't think he should work for nothing but come on.

Yes, Wayne LaPierre makes a ****-load of money each year. He's also the recipient of multiple death threats. So, what's a fair salary for putting up with that? Secondly, look at every other CEO in the big corporate world. Nobody begrudges the CEO of Apple his big salary, so why the salaries of Big Guns and Big Oil ??

On the other hand, NAGR appears to do nothing for 2A rights at all and it seems their sole purpose is to separate you from your hard earned money under the guise of fighting for the 2A.

[champehg]

I just feel that anyone working for a cause that they believe in shouldn't betaking exorbitant salaries, when the organization relies on donations to operate. Regardless of the organization.

[bluegrassarms]

Originally Posted by champehg

The NRA is just as guilty of using scare tactics to get donations and ask for just as many as does the NAGR.
Also I can't find out the salary for Dudley Brown but I discovered the Wayne Lapiere is paid $920,000. That seems a little excessive for an organization that sends out letters a few times a month asking for donations.
I don't think he should work for nothing but come on.

I certainly understand that feeling, seems a big gap when I'm being hit up for money as well, but I encourage everyone (myself included) to look at it as a hiring decision and in that light the $920K isn't excessive at all. The NRA is one of the largest lobbying organizations and membership organizations in the nation along with being a massive entity involved in non-profit shooting sports promotions and support of all kinds from college rifle teams to gun range development.

That entity is on par with a major Fortune 50/100 company at least, with far more public involvement and leadership required. those are the companies you're competing with when you go out to hire a CEO, and the CEOs at those companies make a lot more than $920K. A person with his qualifications can get a job for a great deal more money than he's taking at NRA, and anyone else we'd want in the job could easily command a larger salary as well.

The free market determines the price, and that's the price men of his experience and ability command. I look at it just the opposite, I don't want the NRA underpaying and getting less than the best leading the organization.

Yes that takes up my NRA money and a whole lot of other folks', but you get what you pay for and we're up against politically capable, well financed enemies. Spend the money, get the people you need and don't fight with one hand behind your back.

[blebs]

Hello everyone. Found you by searching for "IRS and FEC won't let the National Association for Gun Rights PAC inform non-members of NAGR who they should -- and shouldn’t -- support in the upcoming election."

I just got the same email that has been circulating for at least 2 years now. I too, am leary of any organization that uses these tactics to gain membership. I don't have the extra money to "give." While they may well be legit in some respects, I think I can make up my own mind who to vote for or against. I don't need to pay to find out.

Just wanted to let you know that the organization and the same email is still out there and also, since I've found this forum, I'm an S&W Model 19 owner and a defender of the 2nd amendment, so I hope to participate more.