Compulsory NRA Membership

[dbroncos78087]

But if they are monolithic then they can require people to join an organization that has nothing to do with that gun club? That sounds like awfully flawed reasoning. Why can't unions compel people to pay dues then? All employees want the protection that being in the union provides. Tell me an employee that doesn't want a lawyer free of charge, better wages, less risk of termination, and all the other benefits that come with unionization and collective bargaining.

That is my point. Regardless of whether the individual will want the benefits or not, the precedent has been set that an individual cannot be compelled to join a group (regardless of whether they want to or not) and that the group must compete for their membership.

I can't take someone who defends this seriously if they speak out in defense of right-to-work laws. The government can invalidate a privately-agreed to contract that requires unionization but a privately-agreed to contract which requires joining a group that proudly supports conservative causes is A-OK...the hypocrisy is ripe on that one.

Corral, you're a good man from all I can tell but I can't see how you can defend this one. In order to join a gun range you are required to join a separate organization entirely regardless of your agreement with the political views that they engage in. There are plenty of Democrats and liberals who enjoy shooting and want to use firearms for protecting themselves and those who are important to them but are enraged by the activities of the NRA. Now in order to join that gun range they are required to support the NRA both by their membership and/or financially.

[flips333]

I think that when our education system is dropping in standing the last thing we need is to be spending our limited funds on someone who can do nothing to help educate our children. And yes sooner or later a kid is going to get ahold of the gun in the school and hurt self or someone else. It is an assinine idea plain and simple.

And I have already explained how it is not a monolithic group. I know folks who own a rifle for hunting and thing other guns should be tightly controlled. And that gun control is far less important an issue than other liberal issues. They should not be forced
Into membership.

[dbroncos78087]

The monolithic-news of the group should be irrelevant. It certainly is for the unions. You can't tell me one union member who doesn't want that protection such as a paid for lawyer or extra wage/salary. They may disagree with the candidates the union supports but the incentives the union provides are not political.

If the political agreement matters then I'm afraid you become a hypocrite.

[Hawkize31]

I support stricter gun control, and I am about a week away from being a handgun owner. I figure if other people out there have them, I can too.

But there is not a snowball's chance in hell I would join the NRA. I would be very upset if I tried to join a local gun club and couldn't because I refused to join the NRA.

[dbroncos78087]

I support stricter gun control, and I am about a week away from being a handgun owner. I figure if other people out there have them, I can too.

But there is not a snowball's chance in hell I would join the NRA. I would be very upset if I tried to join a local gun club and couldn't because I refused to join the NRA.

Well most people in the NRA are sensible, its their leadership that appears to have distanced themselves so far from reality.

But even if everyone wants to give to the NRA, compulsory membership shouldn't be allowed. Unless you intend to give that authority back to the unions. It is hypocritical at this point for anyone who opposes the unions ability to collect dues from paychecks but defend the NRA's ability to force people to join the NRA.

[corralski]

Well most people in the NRA are sensible, its their leadership that appears to have distanced themselves so far from reality.

But even if everyone wants to give to the NRA, compulsory membership shouldn't be allowed. Unless you intend to give that authority back to the unions. It is hypocritical at this point for anyone who opposes the unions ability to collect dues from paychecks but defend the NRA's ability to force people to join the NRA.

I think that you have that a little twisted, was it not the local gun club that was making NRA membership mandatory? The answer seems simple to me, find another gun club, I imagine that they all don't require NRA membership.

I still can't make the connection that makes it hypocritical because the NRA doesn't take membership dues to push other social issues as the unions do.

The first sentence holds water pretty good though, most organizations I believe are true to their cause at the membership level. They only become corrupt to their cause at the management level....

[corralski]

I think that when our education system is dropping in standing the last thing we need is to be spending our limited funds on someone who can do nothing to help educate our children. And yes sooner or later a kid is going to get ahold of the gun in the school and hurt self or someone else. It is an assinine idea plain and simple.

And I have already explained how it is not a monolithic group. I know folks who own a rifle for hunting and thing other guns should be tightly controlled. And that gun control is far less important an issue than other liberal issues. They should not be forced
Into membership.

I can respect that opinion after I thought it through. I don't think it would do anything but protect the children though. These are some weak fuks that prey on situations where the victims are young and defenseless, truly some dispicable bastards.

But back to common sense, these are some hard fiscal times......

[dbroncos78087]

So if the gun club wants to make membership to another group compulsory it's ok but if a union wants to make employees join their membership it's not ok? Why not tell the workers to "find another job"? It just seems hypocritical to me.

I just can't see how someone can do those mental gymnastics without breaking their back.

[corralski]

So if the gun club wants to make membership to another group compulsory it's ok but if a union wants to make employees join their membership it's not ok? Why not tell the workers to "find another job"? It just seems hypocritical to me.

I just can't see how someone can do those mental gymnastics without breaking their back.

The NRA supports one agenda that runs concurrent to those that seek it's membership.

The unions support social agendas on many levels that do not run concurrent with a majority of it's members.

If both groups pursue agendas of equal breadth, I would cede to your statement. Finding another outlet to ply my professional trade is a much more profound undertaking than finding a group that I spend my leisure time with.....

[dbroncos78087]

So compulsory membership is ok if the group supports one cause? If the unions created a campaign fund that went solely to defeated right-to-work then it's ok? I'm sorry but it sounds like your making some gymastics because you support the NRA's goals.

But all of this ignores the fact that he NRA isn't a one-issue donation group.

[corralski]

So compulsory membership is ok if the group supports one cause? If the unions created a campaign fund that went solely to defeated right-to-work then it's ok? I'm sorry but it sounds like your making some gymastics because you support the NRA's goals.

But all of this ignores the fact that he NRA isn't a one-issue donation group.

And you aren't because you don't support those goals? That blade cuts both ways brother.

I put my own beliefs aside in my opinion on this, it really is just as simple as I've stated......

[dbroncos78087]

I don't think unions should be able to force membership nor should the NRA. It seems odd to support one and not he other. Forcing membership to a non-related group seems anti-thetical to the ideas this country was founded on.

[corralski]

I don't think unions should be able to force membership nor should the NRA. It seems odd to support one and not he other. Forcing membership to a non-related group seems anti-thetical to the ideas this country was founded on.

On it's face I support that statement, I just didn't agree with the parallel you were trying to make between the two.

I didn't think I was supporting one over the other, I was just stating why I thought the situations were different.

Leave out "non-related" from your last sentence and I'm with you.....

[subroc]

...This requires people who are liberal in nature but favor gun ownership rights to join a group that is an affront to almost all of their other political sensibilities...

You make the claim that these "theoretical liberals" you speak of favor gun ownership rights, So, in what way, other than advocating for gun ownership rights do you believe the NRA is "an affront to almost all of their other political sensibilities?"

BTW, No hypocrisy at all. The gun club wants committed members. They could have a charter that says they support the NRA and all it is about. The NRA is the only national group fighting for their rights. They support that mission 100%. They want a membership that believes in gun ownership and is willing to support the national effort that is the NRA and all it's legislative efforts 100%. No wishy-washy membership, but a real "stand up and be counted" membership that shows that support for gun ownership rights with their hard earned dollars.

In good gun clubs the mission is clear and all groups are treated the same. The various disciplines are never at each other’s throats and they always work together and have respect for one another. That is something liberals fail consistently on is the respect thing, because they only respect themselves. The trap/skeet/clays guys have respect for the practical/action guys have respect for the cowboy action guys have respect for the DCM guys have respect for the hunters have respect for the membership focused on personal protection and on and on and on.

I know you left wingers questions are only used as a method to attempt to divide and conquer.

A true gun enthusiast joins the NRA gladly and without hesitation

Phony’s, well they are the ones that question membership in the NRA.

[flips333]

You make the claim that these "theoretical liberals" you speak of favor gun ownership rights, So, in what way, other than advocating for gun ownership rights do you believe the NRA is "an affront to almost all of their other political sensibilities?"

BTW, No hypocrisy at all. The gun club wants committed members. They could have a charter that says they support the NRA and all it is about. The NRA is the only national group fighting for their rights. They support that mission 100%. They want a membership that believes in gun ownership and is willing to support the national effort that is the NRA and all it's legislative efforts 100%. No wishy-washy membership, but a real "stand up and be counted" membership that shows that support for gun ownership rights with their hard earned dollars.

In good gun clubs the mission is clear and all groups are treated the same. The various disciplines are never at each other’s throats and they always work together and have respect for one another. That is something liberals fail consistently on is the respect thing, because they only respect themselves. The trap/skeet/clays guys have respect for the practical/action guys have respect for the cowboy action guys have respect for the DCM guys have respect for the hunters have respect for the membership focused on personal protection and on and on and on.

I know you left wingers questions are only used as a method to attempt to divide and conquer.

A true gun enthusiast joins the NRA gladly and without hesitation

Phony’s, well they are the ones that question membership in the NRA.

Ha haha