NRA Warns Hunters to Prepare for War

[Randy Newberg]

Glad you chimed in Randy. So you are a devout NRA supporter...you have put your money where your mouth is.....and your comments are to inform/direct the higher ups in the NRA. Thats a 10 out of 10 score.

We agree on most everything except you might be underestimating the antis. They have some incredibly rich supporters...are playing the long game...and have many psychotic members willing to do crazy things for "The Cause" I live in an area where we see some of the "psychotic"

I would like to hear your comments on the elephant in the room, which of course is what the NRA is trying to address, "Hunter apathy"

I might be underestimating the anti-hunter movement. I'm more focused on hunters, especially those of us with media platforms, to stop giving the anti-hunting movement plenty of ammunition and allow society to see how far out in the weeds the anti-hunting groups are. As a guy who has received thousands of death wishes for airing a wolf episode, I fully appreciate your comments about the "psychotic" screwballs and wingnuts among them.

As far as hunter apathy, I'm not sure how to address it. Our society as a whole is apathetic, so I don't expect the hunting community to be much different. As I stated, the NRA has been very successful raising action from the apathetic gun own by using fear and other "calls to action" that have sparked some to action. How sustainable that manner of raising action will be over decades in this newer "social communication" world is yet to be seen. I wish I had an answer. Maybe the NRA will show the path. I know I spend a lot of time working to create hunter advocacy, with my opinion being that advocacy is the antithesis to apathy. Not sure how much success my efforts have.

I have been a Life Member of the NRA for a long time. So long as they continue good work on behalf of the 2A, I will continue to support them. Doesn't mean I agree with them on everything. And it doesn't mean I won't question their commitment to hunters/hunting, when they have don't take advantage of this chance to make a huge statement when it comes to public lands.

I was at the NRA Annual Meeting last week. Had a good time. I gave the NRA some more money. I got to visit with some of their policy folks. I was assured that the NRA will be there when the rubber meets the road on public land issues. It is no secret I feel the rubber has been skidding down the public land road for a while now. That said, no group understands DC insider games as well as the NRA, so I hope their assurances that public lands are safe, will be the case. Those lands are too important to me to take such assurances for granted.

On a side note, it is the potential liability of engaging with media folks that makes many in the hunting/shooting world hit the delete button when they get emails from national media. I don't deleted their message, I engage with them all. When I think they are off base, I push back, as I did when questioning this writer about the supposed "politicizing." I don't try to be apologetic for my views and I don't try to defend everything I see in the hunting/shooting community. I give my thoughts, based on someone whose daily life is involved in the hunting issues. An article from a source such as TheTrace.org has the potential to cause me some headaches. I accept that risk, feeling it is important that we engaged with those of differing opinions. I might be wrong on that belief, also, but that is what I'm going with.

 

[tipsntails7]

Glad you chimed in Randy. So you are a devout NRA supporter...you have put your money where your mouth is.....and your comments are to inform/direct the higher ups in the NRA. Thats a 10 out of 10 score.

We agree on most everything except you might be underestimating the antis. They have some incredibly rich supporters...are playing the long game...and have many psychotic members willing to do crazy things for "The Cause" I live in an area where we see some of the "psychotic"

I would like to hear your comments on the elephant in the room, which of course is what the NRA is trying to address, "Hunter apathy"

Been, while I agree with you that that hunter apathy is a problem, I dont think the NRA is going to incite a movement among Joe Hunter with their new website, or their ridiculously sensationalized promo videos. They may nod their heads in agreement, just like they do with the 2A stuff, hand over 20 bucks and forget about the entire thing. To me, that is not going to help our cause.

We as hunters need to expose to non hunters what our culture really is, not the culture anti's portray us in. like it or not we NEED support outside of people that hunt or own guns. We don't need snippets of beautiful scenery laced with insults and finger pointing. This was one of the biggest reasons Oregon lost bear baiting. Anti's absolutely beat our ass in the media and lazy slob "Hunters" made it easy for them. if you look at the numbers, every single hunter who bought a license in the state of Oregon voted to keep baiting, and yet we still lost. I see the same thing happen on these forums and on social media, people say and do stupid shit and put it on the internet, an anti group gets a hold of it and it lights up like a match, and hunting gets yet another black eye, from a person who really doesn't represent hunting at all.

It sucks, but we need to start caring how people who do not hunt perceive us. Not Anti's as they are way to far gone and we need to expose people to that fact. Running smear campaigns in my eyes doesn't do anything for us in that regard. For people that do not feel this way or say "F em I will do what i want" are just pissing in the wind, and its blowing back and hitting the rest of us.

When the NRA defends the 2A they have the luxury of having the Constitution of the United States on their side, like it or not, that is one big ass bat to swing around, couple that with ENOURMOUS amounts of lobby money and their are doing an amazing job. Unfortunately, no such luxuries are to be found in the fight for hunting rights.

It also doesn't look great when numerous outspoken NRA people have committed numerous game violations, again more tinder to the match box.

I am all for the NRA taking a stand for hunters, but i want to know where my money is going to go, and what their real agenda is.

Finally stop comparing everything to war or a battle, its ridiculous.

 

[wind gypsy]

I haven't read all the responses but that article throws immediate red flags of being in sympathetic to animal rights orgs. Taking the line of hunting the poor bears in their dens and quoting Randy to paint him as anti NRA gives them away.

 

[WV Mountaineer]

Life member of the NRA. Have been for a long time. Donated every year for a long time. I can't rationalize why every gun owner is not a member.


Hunting and the 2A is deeply linked together. The 2A and all our Amendments are deeply intertwined. I agree with Randy that the NRA is trying to appeal to the hunter by means of the Anti scare due to the lack of a more pronounced threat to the 2A currently. I also agree with Beendare that the Anti's are a HUGE threat. And. dismissing it not only incorrect but, extremely naive and careless. You can call me a redneck, uneducated, whatever you choose. I'll call you ignorant of reality for not realizing the threat we face with them. Everything we hunters and outdoors men have had to hurdle in the last 50 years, from access to hunting rounds. has been spurred by Anti hunting causes. I'll go even farther by saying much of this collaborating public land is spurred by anti hunting causes. It is a real threat. And, needs to be addressed by hunters. Until there is a bigger and better group to do so, we have the NRA. Since Randy says they give him their word of support on the Public lands issue, I'll take it happily.


I see some real anger with the NRA here. All I'll ask is pay attention to what Randy said about the nature of our society. With no real scare in front of us from DC cast at the 2A, this organization needs to get the attention of should be members some way.


God Bless men

 

[16Bore]

NRA has been selling the boogie man for years. I don't believe Wayne LaPierre owned so much as a staple gun before he came on board. They're loosing money because Trump's in office, racks are full of guns, and shelves are full of ammo.

Had an ILA fellow come to a board meeting my shooting club.

Dumb, meet Dumber...

 

[ChrisC]

The Trace - A new source of reporting and insight about guns in America. - The Trace

Oh and FYI "ChrisC", since you've never heard of anyone wanting an outright ban on firearms....apparently you don't listen to a Democrat from Kalifornia very often because she's been at it for a couple of decades....

Feinstein Ban them all - YouTube

I didn't say i never heard of anyone wanting or trying to eliminate all guns. I meant I havent seen any legitimate legislation that has even come close. My problem is with politicians who claim, falsely, that certain people, like Obama, was trying to take away all of our guns.

 

[ChrisC]

For good reason........."shall not be infringed". I have no idea how that could have been written any clearer, but many still seem to be confused by it. But their confusion doesn't override our rights.

While it may have been written as clear as can be to you, the supreme court's interpretation outlined that there can be restrictions (per wiki...im no constitutional expert). ultimately, regardless of what you or I believe, their interpretation is what matters.

 

[5MilesBack]

While it may have been written as clear as can be to you, the supreme court's interpretation outlined that there can be restrictions (per wiki...im no constitutional expert). ultimately, regardless of what you or I believe, their interpretation is what matters.

Unfortunately this is true, which is exactly why an activist judge should NEVER be allowed to sit on that bench. But I don't think "shall not be infringed" can ever be interpreted in any other way that the exact way it was written. This wording is used in no other place in the Constitution or BOR's. It's pretty specific to the 2nd, and extremely clear and straight forward.....even for a kid to understand.

I meant I havent seen any legitimate legislation that has even come close.

Start looking around at all the different state's legislation. Residents of different states apparently have different 2nd Amendment rights than their counterparts, as every state has different restrictions and infringements on those rights. But that's how these type of things progress......one inch at a time until it's too late.

 

[Brendan]

Massachusetts: no new sales of AR's or other "Assault Rifles". Many semi auto pistols not legal. Right to own or carry any firearm is at the discretion of your local police chief. Very strict rules regarding storage, limitations on the amount of ammo, powder or primers you can own/store at one time, and the list goes on...

 

[mtnwrunner]

Life member of the NRA. Have been for a long time. Donated every year for a long time. I can't rationalize why every gun owner is not a member.


Hunting and the 2A is deeply linked together. The 2A and all our Amendments are deeply intertwined. I agree with Randy that the NRA is trying to appeal to the hunter by means of the Anti scare due to the lack of a more pronounced threat to the 2A currently. I also agree with Beendare that the Anti's are a HUGE threat. And. dismissing it not only incorrect but, extremely naive and careless. You can call me a redneck, uneducated, whatever you choose. I'll call you ignorant of reality for not realizing the threat we face with them. Everything we hunters and outdoors men have had to hurdle in the last 50 years, from access to hunting rounds. has been spurred by Anti hunting causes. I'll go even farther by saying much of this collaborating public land is spurred by anti hunting causes. It is a real threat. And, needs to be addressed by hunters. Until there is a bigger and better group to do so, we have the NRA. Since Randy says they give him their word of support on the Public lands issue, I'll take it happily.


I see some real anger with the NRA here. All I'll ask is pay attention to what Randy said about the nature of our society. With no real scare in front of us from DC cast at the 2A, this organization needs to get the attention of should be members some way.


God Bless men

Nice post. The NRA is just like every other group out there.......some bad and some good. However, if it were not for them and GOA, this country and your gun rights would surely be different. And I'll echo what Mountaineer said, I cannot understand why someone who owns guns is not a member.

Randy

 

[Beendare]

....
I know I spend a lot of time working to create hunter advocacy, with my opinion being that advocacy is the antithesis to apathy. Not sure how much success my efforts have.
....

I didn't want to quote the whole comment...but i agree with you. The hunting community is lucky to have you...not just for the excellent entertainment you provide but also for having our backs.

I was a fan before...even more so now!

 

[Felix1776]

exactly... I'm a life member of the NRA and a member (considering life) of BHA but I belong to both for different reasons. I don't expect BHA to go to bat for my gun rights and I don't expect the NRA to do the same for PLT.

There's a lot of truth here. The NRA knows how to play the game and they play it well. However, it seems incredibly short sighted for them to ignore the PLT issue. Within the PLT issue, there is a lot of ground to be gained regarding 2A rights. How many western gun owners, shooting enthusiasts, and hunters will be largely out of business so to speak if public land starts disappearing?

The biggest problem I see is the potential conflict of some big money donors to the NRA could also be the same guys who want our public lands. Sad but probably true....

This right here. When analyzing any political issue...Cui Bono. Where is the money coming from? That's what it all boils down to. The same politicians that are backed by the NRA and receive those super important passing grades are largely going to be the same ones pushing PLT, publicly or privately. I think as the PLT issue evolves, this will become more clear. The same guys fighting for 2A rights will likely wind up being the same guys advocating PLT.

I'll assume me needing to elaborate and the fella supporting the NRA not asked to elaborate is a confirmation that I am in the minority. Without getting too involved, I believe they are fighting for something and using the 2nd amendment out of context for justification. They always claim people want to take everyone's guns away, when I have yet to see anything close to an outright ban and confiscation. nobody is looking to take my bolt action, shotgun, and handgun, then again, i dont break the law and still expect to have them. as someone said...fear mongering. I think it's crazy that we dont have universal background checks, allow 30 round magazines, etc. It seems like any attempt to pass such restrictions the NRA yells "unconstitutional." You have freedom of speech, but you cant scream fire in a crowded movie theater. why is it unreasonable to put restrictions on the second amendment.

And the worst part is that anti-gun folks group hunters with these pro-gun with no limits people because we use them. so we as hunters get a bad rep even when we dont necessarily support what they push.

Im rambling and fear I'm not putting enough time into typing this out. Without getting anyone worked up, im happy to have someone tell me why I should support them.

I wasn't trying to pile on you and, as I stated, I respect your opinion. If you had simply said, "I don't support the NRA." I'd have been fine with that. But saying that it's "foolish" on a forum dominated (I assume) by NRA supporters, That's a position that going to need to be expounded upon. You have since done that and I agree with a lot of the things you said. I've been an NRA supporter for a long time but Man does that organization piss me off a lot. I don't agree with a lot (most?) of things they do. I don't like their propaganda (or anybody's for that matter) and the constant fear mongering is exhausting. Don't get me started on the junk mail and spam emails. But I learned long ago that if you're going to bet on a fight, you bet on the big dog with the proven record. In the fight for 2A, that IS the NRA like it or not. All a guy has to do is look at the fiery pure hatred any gun control advocate has for the NRA and you'll know about their efficacy as an organization. As long as the fight for 2A rights continues, I can't see myself not supporting them.

Not to wade into this thing too deep...but with the NRAs primary cash cow (Obama) out of office and a GOP majority in Congress, it's a tough sell to keep folks sending checks to protect gun rights.

Enter...anti-hunters.

I won't debate whether the NRA has protected gun rights. They certainly have, but their fundraising mechanism depends more than a bit on fear and outrage and on the gun rights front- there isn't any for the first time in a long time.

While we can endlessly argue about gun rights, hunting, anti hunting, PLT et al..... the NRA's first priority is to get members to fund its operations and that largely requires the presence of an identifiable threat.

This hit the nail on the head in a big way. This new campaign is nothing more than fund raising. Nearly ever gun owner I know including myself to a degree I guess, took a major sigh of relief when Hilary lost. The NRA spent the last 8+ years working to convince everyone who would listen that Obama was public enemy #1 to 2A rights which I don't particularly disagree with. And then moved to do the same when Hilary became the front runner. That's fine and it was the smart thing to do. Those people aren't pro 2A but now that's all over. They needed a new war cry to stir people up and get funds rolling again. Enter the new anti-hunting campaign. I always expect people to wise up and get fatigued from all the NRA doom and gloom talk but it seems to work just fine.

Been, while I agree with you that that hunter apathy is a problem, I dont think the NRA is going to incite a movement among Joe Hunter with their new website, or their ridiculously sensationalized promo videos. They may nod their heads in agreement, just like they do with the 2A stuff, hand over 20 bucks and forget about the entire thing. To me, that is not going to help our cause.

We as hunters need to expose to non hunters what our culture really is, not the culture anti's portray us in. like it or not we NEED support outside of people that hunt or own guns. We don't need snippets of beautiful scenery laced with insults and finger pointing. This was one of the biggest reasons Oregon lost bear baiting. Anti's absolutely beat our ass in the media and lazy slob "Hunters" made it easy for them. if you look at the numbers, every single hunter who bought a license in the state of Oregon voted to keep baiting, and yet we still lost. I see the same thing happen on these forums and on social media, people say and do stupid shit and put it on the internet, an anti group gets a hold of it and it lights up like a match, and hunting gets yet another black eye, from a person who really doesn't represent hunting at all.

It sucks, but we need to start caring how people who do not hunt perceive us. Not Anti's as they are way to far gone and we need to expose people to that fact. Running smear campaigns in my eyes doesn't do anything for us in that regard. For people that do not feel this way or say "F em I will do what i want" are just pissing in the wind, and its blowing back and hitting the rest of us.

When the NRA defends the 2A they have the luxury of having the Constitution of the United States on their side, like it or not, that is one big ass bat to swing around, couple that with ENOURMOUS amounts of lobby money and their are doing an amazing job. Unfortunately, no such luxuries are to be found in the fight for hunting rights.

It also doesn't look great when numerous outspoken NRA people have committed numerous game violations, again more tinder to the match box.

I am all for the NRA taking a stand for hunters, but i want to know where my money is going to go, and what their real agenda is.

Finally stop comparing everything to war or a battle, its ridiculous.

Hunting has a major image problem. If the NRA wants to help hunters, they'd be working to improve the image issue. Hunters have the science, the facts, and the logic behind us. Anti Hunters can be defeated with the facts we have on our side but if the image isn't there it doesn't carry the same weight. We need more people like Rinella, Newburg and even Cam Hanes. The image of the slovely, beer drinking road hunter needs to be quashed. I'm constantly amazed at how many people still believe in that stereotype because none of the hunters I associate with meet that description. But then I'll randomly meet someone like that and then I'll realize they're still out there. You can call me a candyass hippie if you want, but I don't buy into this us vs them, let's go to war rhetoric. It's cheap and played out. EVERYTHING is becoming a culture war in this country and divisiveness is as rampant as I've seen in my life. I think a more nuanced approach is the way to go. Find common ground with people and find a way to bring them to your side. Maybe you don't change their minds but at least educate them. I don't see how taking up arms is the way to go. There's a whole mass of people in the middle that are ready to have their minds changed. Instead of focusing so much on fighting the extremist fringes, focus on swaying people from the middle and build your base.

What do I know? I'm just a guy from the internet.

 

[Beendare]

I didn't say i never heard of anyone wanting or trying to eliminate all guns. I meant I havent seen any legitimate legislation that has even come close. My problem is with politicians who claim, falsely, that certain people, like Obama, was trying to take away all of our guns.

Chris, you need to see what is happening in areas like Ca...Mass, etc.

Here in Ca they passed a law that new pistol models cannot be sold unless they can microstamp a serial number on each cartridge. In case you are not aware, that technology is not available. They have tried to pass legislation here to take away semi autos, black rifles, etc but the NRA stepped in and quashed it.

So essentially the gov realized they cannot come in and take away our guns...so they do the next best thing...attack the mnfrs. We have a roster of handguns that we can purchase and as models change, the list gets smaller every year...until eventually you won't be able to buy anything. For example, a couple years back SW changed their M&P line of handguns....NOPE, not acceptable and now you can't buy a new M&P in CA [except the Shield] Then don't get me started on addl ammo fees....

You gotta get your head out of the sand bro.

 

[flyinsquirel]

..... you need to see what is happening in areas like Ca...Mass, etc. You gotta get your head out of the sand bro.

I encourage everyone in a gun/hunter friendly state to take notice of the words above. If you take a couple minutes to do some searching and read about what's already going on in the coastal states you'll see what's heading your way. When it does you won't be able to say we didn't warn you.

CA was once as rough and tumble as any State, look at us now. You think it can't happen to your State? I urge you to reconsider.

 

[jpuckett]

Glad you chimed in Randy!! You're the man. Glad to hear you are speaking with the NRA about our lands I think personally that losing public lands is a wayyyy bigger threat than losing my guns, not just for my lifetime but over the next 100 years. I want my kids children to get to hike the same hills that I do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ChrisC]

I encourage everyone in a gun/hunter friendly state to take notice of the words above. If you take a couple minutes to do some searching and read about what's already going on in the coastal states you'll see what's heading your way. When it does you won't be able to say we didn't warn you.

CA was once as rough and tumble as any State, look at us now. You think it can't happen to your State? I urge you to reconsider.

I'm not too sure my head is in the sand...i live in Massachusetts so using that state as an example of me being uninformed isnt going to get you far. I have no problem with their gun laws. I have all the guns I need to hunt, and for protection. While I dont necessarily agree with all of their laws, I believe it is a far better way than other states out there.

 

[mtnwrunner]

Glad you chimed in Randy!! You're the man. Glad to hear you are speaking with the NRA about our lands I think personally that losing public lands is a wayyyy bigger threat than losing my guns, not just for my lifetime but over the next 100 years. I want my kids children to get to hike the same hills that I do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are more than welcome. Seems to me that if don't have any guns, it really doesn't matter how much land you have access to.
Looks like you and I have different priorities. And if it ever came down to having land or having the right to protect and defend, I would choose the latter.......I would hope it would never come to that.

Randy

 

[tipsntails7]

You are more than welcome. Seems to me that if don't have any guns, it really doesn't matter how much land you have access to.
Looks like you and I have different priorities. And if it ever came down to having land or having the right to protect and defend, I would choose the latter.......I would hope it would never come to that.

Randy

I think he was talking to Randy newberg.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[5MilesBack]

i live in Massachusetts

I have no problem with their gun laws.

That's worse than having your head in the sand. It's pretty sad when people have no problem with giving up their own rights, and also having no problem with the govt taking away other's rights.

Too many people in this country that have no problems with rights taken away, "as long as it doesn't affect them". The problem is.....it does affect them and they don't even recognize that. It affects them, their kids, their grand kids, and on down the line.

 

[Brendan]

I'm not too sure my head is in the sand...i live in Massachusetts

I have no problem with their gun laws.

I agree with 5MB - I live in Massachusetts and if you as a gun owner don't have issues with their gun laws - then I think your head is in the sand...

First it is a "may issue" state, not a "shall issue" state. Your right to own a gun is up to your police chief, regardless of whether or not you are a suitable applicant. I know people who have had applications denied or restricted because their chief doesn't like gun owners. That is bull shit, no two ways about it. Only thing you can do? Move to a more understanding town or state.

Then, I don't own an AR or anything similar myself, but having an AG spontaneously outlaw sales of new "Assault Weapons" without any legislative process or review through her "interpretation" of a law on the books for years that allowed them - again, complete BS, because what's to say all semi auto pistols aren't somewhere else down the line?

Not even going to get into the two different rosters for pistols.

Do the specific firearms I can't get right now really make my life that different? No, but that sure as hell isn't the point.