Drunkard's Walk Forums

Full Version: New York attorney general sues to dissolve NRA
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Likely to be extremely counterproductive and double donations.
Even if it does work (and the financial shenanigans being used as the pretext are worthy of at least removing the individuals involved and prosecuting them to the extent the law and available evidence may allow) a successor organization would likely be formed to resume defending the second amendment within a few business days at most. That might even be the better result, if it gets rid of the profiteers to focus on the actual agenda as an organization.
At least, let's hope that if a new NRA-like organization rises from this, it'll do what the original one was supposed to do: Teach gun safety and all the proper actions one has to take with firearms.
I can most certainly agree with that. If they instead put the millions in graft toward subsidizing training courses and perhaps helping owners buy proper gun safes to securely store them (especially in states where that isn't already a legal requirement) to prevent theft or unauthorized use that would be ideal.
If the NRA is dissolved they will have to convince people to sign up for the new organization. That may be difficult, just because it's normal and expected one signs up for the NRA doesn't mean you automatically sign up for membership with its successor. Especially if it's well proven that the NRA abused your trust and membership fees.
At best i think they could only legitimately go after the people involved, the organization as an entity is not culpable for the actions of the people in charge.

If the liberals had not forced it out of school in the 60's and 70's the NRA would be doing exactly what they are supposed to, (and do) in teaching firearm safety. but when you make the people have to fight for what their charter tells them to do it gets messy.

Hazard, you did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to own a firearm and the belief that owning one was a right was not a part of your upbringing so you just don't get it. If the NRA is forcibly disbanded, it will be reincorporated somewhere like Texas within a week.
(08-09-2020, 12:14 PM)Rajvik Wrote: [ -> ]At best i think they could only legitimately go after the people involved, the organization as an entity is not culpable for the actions of the people in charge.

 Dunno, the NRA is incorporated as a non-profit organization. If it has actually been working for years as a profit engine for its authorities, then there is a good case for its dissolution.
On the one hand, it's clearly a political stunt. On the other - Hah! Serves 'em right. They've gone so far away from they're stated aim.

You're not free because you can own a gun. You're not free because you own a gun.

You're only free so long as you're able to call the government out on it's bullshit and not get arrested on the street by secret police. Or go vote, and have your neighbours go vote and even have the people you disagree with go vote and get a result that you can all agree on and accept as representative and fair.

I work with gun owners. Some of our company outings have been to shooting ranges. I get it. Shooting shit is fun. I've considered getting a weapon - and know how to do it - but at the end of the day I'm more likely to turn the damn thing on myself than actually shoot anything with it.

I don't know why the 2nd amendment came to be such a hill to die on - when, so many other freedoms are being shat on daily.
(08-09-2020, 05:27 PM)Dartz Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why the 2nd amendment came to be such a hill to die on - when, so many other freedoms are being shat on daily.

Probably because one of the reasons behind that amendment was to guarantee that the southern states could keep their armed slave patrols that they needed to keep their black slaves from revolting.

This streak of racism behind this amendment has never disappeared. It is not coincidence that most of the gun control laws that have managed to get passed were targeted to preventing black people from owning or carrying guns.
(08-09-2020, 12:14 PM)Rajvik Wrote: [ -> ]At best i think they could only legitimately go after the people involved, the organization as an entity is not culpable for the actions of the people in charge.

It is when it doesn't follow the rules it's supposed to follow. Generally speaking officers of a company aren't culpable, or at least not punished, when they do things like break a contract or illegally dispose of waste materials, but the company generally is punished with fines and damages after they're caught.

(08-09-2020, 12:14 PM)Rajvik Wrote: [ -> ]If the liberals had not forced it out of school in the 60's and 70's the NRA would be doing exactly what they are supposed to, (and do) in teaching firearm safety. but when you make the people have to fight for what their charter tells them to do it gets messy.

The NRA could still be doing what its charter tells it to without getting nearly as involved in politics as it has been involved. It's charter is not to do political things, its charter is to improve rifle marksmanship. That does not require fighting to permit people to carry weapons in public under any circumstance, including very reasonable worries somebody may be a danger to themselves or others.

(08-09-2020, 12:14 PM)Rajvik Wrote: [ -> ]Hazard, you did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to own a firearm and the belief that owning one was a right was not a part of your upbringing so you just don't get it. If the NRA is forcibly disbanded, it will be reincorporated somewhere like Texas within a week.

I understand it will get reincorporated, and probably very quickly. I also understand it's likely to remain a fairly powerful factor in US politics.

I do not believe it will be as powerful, and I do not believe they will have the same ease of it. The NRA's name and brand matters, and rebranding often costs influence and market share.
Another thing to remember is that the NRA wasn't a "conservative" organization until 1977. In fact, until the 1970s it was technically bipartisan and very much in favor of gun control legislation, but a small extreme minority membership took offense at the NRA's support of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, hooked up with the Republican party, and engineered a coup of the NRA leadership at their national convention in 1977. The NRA hasn't been about its original purpose since then -- it was hijacked by extremists and gun fetishists (and, as I understand it, the gun manufacturers themselves at one remove).

And just as a reminder, before Raj whips out one of his kneejerk genralizations, I grew up around hunters and hunting, I've done my own share of shooting as I grew up. I remember the parents and (later) friends who quit the NRA in disgust after seeing what the post-1977 leadership was up to.
(08-09-2020, 12:14 PM)Rajvik Wrote: [ -> ]Hazard, you did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to own a firearm and the belief that owning one was a right was not a part of your upbringing so you just don't get it. If the NRA is forcibly disbanded, it will be reincorporated somewhere like Texas within a week.

That's a nonsense "argument".

I did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to same-sex marriage, but I understood the moral and ethical issues involved even before it became legal.

I did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to own a slave, but I understand the moral and ethical issues involved and support it remaining illegal.

I did not grow up with the RIGHT, (yes intentional capital letters there) to life and liberty being enshrined in my country's Constitution, but I'm glad they're there now.

So not growing up with the "right" to own a firearm doesn't mean I can't understand the moral and ethical issues involved in owning a firearm.

And if the NRA gets reincorporated, here's hoping it'll be under the leadership of people who don't have an axe to grind, and are willing to do their jobs as stated in the articles of incorporation instead of wasting money on political matters.
Beau of the Fifth Column talking about the NY AG's suit of the NRA from a couple days ago
(08-10-2020, 07:00 AM)nemonowan Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-09-2020, 05:27 PM)Dartz Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why the 2nd amendment came to be such a hill to die on - when, so many other freedoms are being shat on daily.

Probably because one of the reasons behind that amendment was to guarantee that the southern states could keep their armed slave patrols that they needed to keep their black slaves from revolting.

This streak of racism behind this amendment has never disappeared. It is not coincidence that most of the gun control laws that have managed to get passed were targeted to preventing black people from owning or carrying guns.

Your going to have to be a little more clear about that.

Are you claiming that the reason that the 2nd Amendment exists is for slave owners to maintain power over slaves?  Or are you saying that White Southerners perverted the intent of the 2nd Amendment to "keep Blacks in their place"?

To my knowledge, the Founding Fathers added the 2nd Amendment because they wanted that there as a fail-safe in case The Great Experiment failed - so that The People could have some means of securing their freedom should things come to the worst case scenario.

And before anyone else starts harping about the wording of the 2nd Amendment and how it means private citizens shouldn't own fire arms, let me make two statements - one a verifiable fact and the other an opinion.

FACT: Typically, in a militia, the militia men own their own weapons.  It's literally BYOG - Bring Your Own Gun.  Though most that can afford it will keep a reserve of firearms, just in case.

OPINION: I am perfectly willing for it to be a stipulation that in order to own a firearm in the USA, you must be a card-carrying member of one of your local militia, even if this means you must organize one yourself.
Wrong subject - you called up "Second amendment", not "National Rifle Association"
(08-11-2020, 09:35 PM)Black Aeronaut Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-10-2020, 07:00 AM)nemonowan Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-09-2020, 05:27 PM)Dartz Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why the 2nd amendment came to be such a hill to die on - when, so many other freedoms are being shat on daily.

Probably because one of the reasons behind that amendment was to guarantee that the southern states could keep their armed slave patrols that they needed to keep their black slaves from revolting.

This streak of racism behind this amendment has never disappeared. It is not coincidence that most of the gun control laws that have managed to get passed were targeted to preventing black people from owning or carrying guns.

Your going to have to be a little more clear about that.

Are you claiming that the reason that the 2nd Amendment exists is for slave owners to maintain power over slaves?  Or are you saying that White Southerners perverted the intent of the 2nd Amendment to "keep Blacks in their place"?

To my knowledge, the Founding Fathers added the 2nd Amendment because they wanted that there as a fail-safe in case The Great Experiment failed - so that The People could have some means of securing their freedom should things come to the worst case scenario.

"Founding Fathers" were nowhere near a monolythic bloc, there were as many opinions and points of view as people present in the discussions, and the tortured grammar of the final amendment is proof enough of that.
As I said, ONE of the reasons southern representatives wanted a right in this regard was the need to keep any potential slave rebellion down.
That's why I stated that it began with a racist streak, and it didn't get any better since. Most restrictions of the right to own or carry guns were either targeted or enforced more harshly on black people.You just have to look up the many examples of how differently a white man open carrying an assault rifle is treated than a black man doing the same thing in the same place.
IIRC California was at some point as open and permissive about guns as, well, pretty much every other state west of the Missisipi. Then a decidedly unpopular section of the population (read 'those of African descend') went assembling in peaceful protest about certain rights they rightly had but were denied. While carrying their guns.

Didn't take long for the laws to change to being rather restrictive.
Legal Eagle’s analysis of the NYAG’s case against the NRA
https://youtu.be/Kw1evJgGwtw
Things like this show how corrosive the NRA has been.

Missouri lawmakers pass bill making it legal to give guns to kids without parents' permission hill. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch...7udzX3BEs8

If an adult gave my child a gun without my knowledge, i would consider that a potentially lethal attack on my child & would respond in kind.
And five months later, the NRA files for bankruptcy with plans to reincorporate in Texas -- "to escape corrupt prosecutors in NY" or words to that effect.
Haha good luck with that. In the next 2-6 years Democrats will control the Texas government anyway. But let the Texas GOP enjoy it’s own Pete Wilson era, the last hurrah before demographics bury them.
No. The POINT of the Second Amendment was that the various ARMED private citizens of this nation formed the backbone of the Continental Army. Without their right to own and use weapons, there would have BEEN no successful revolution nor this country as it (sadly) Exists today.

Also, let us not overlook the TRUE point of a corporation. It is a legal entity, who's actions as a whole are separate from those of individual members. So, the incorporated entity as a whole can be called out over its actions, found financially liable, without bankrupting the rank and file members or employees.

By the same token, if individuals misused corporate assets or funds... they can be sued in their own right, but any such liability does not legally taint the corporation as a whole.

Also, just because a corporation is a 'non profit' does not mean they cannot MAKE a profit... but most bank it against future 'lean' years. *IF* these board members and high ranked employees actually can be proven to have done what is claimed...

Whaaaal. There's a tree right thar, and I gotta rope.
(08-27-2020, 04:49 AM)SilverFang01 Wrote: [ -> ]Things like this show how corrosive the NRA has been.

Missouri lawmakers pass bill making it legal to give guns to kids without parents' permission hill.

Uhhhhh...  Yeah, Silver.  That is rather exactly opposite of what I've always thought the NRA's mandate was.  *EEEEEEKKKKKKK*
Pages: 1 2