Push for recall of Wayne LaPierre from NRA!

[GreggL]

There is currently interest being generated to recall Wayne LaPierre from leadership of the NRA after his seeming agreement with lefties that bump stocks should be regulated after the shooting in LV.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Any-interest-in-forcing-Wayne-LaPierre-into-an-early-retirement-Member-driven-recall-/5-2039290/

Full disclosure I donate locally and to GOA but have avoided donating to the NRA as they seem to compromise at the expense of 2 rights when not necessary. I may consider buying a life membership if it can help shake things up.
Any NRA voting members here? Thoughts?

[sidearm1]

I see no reason to recall anyone.  Let the ATF decide and go from there. Litigation will show that ATF approved them several times and that nothing really changed.  Mr. LaPierre has done a lot of good.  Just because of one decision we want to change.  Will we get any better or worse.

[Mntnman]

I don't think he is the best leader for the NRA except maybe he is since they don't really agree with the full 2A. They are the reason Reagan gave in on full auto in the first place. The "good" the bill did is completely negated with throwing away a whole category, probably forever. They have sat back in defeat every time the left drives another nail in the coffin.

If they would put half the effort into preserving liberty as they do in spamming, the antis would be but a memory.

[Mntnman]

He is pretty bad in this interview, I think.

https://www.nratv.com/home/video/wayne-lapierre-we-are-fighting-for-reciprocity

[Mntnman]

As National Reciprocity goes, it is not a state's rights issue. It is a Constitutional issue and laws allowing it should not even be required or valid. Unconstitutional laws are not valid, nor have they ever been. That said, many are here and being validated with bad rulings by activist judges.

[StuartJ]

The BATFE is not a legitimate agency. Is sole purpose is to infringe on citizens rights.

I just looked at the link.  Apparently they expected this and raised the number of signatures required to 5% of last vote which is 6500 voting members, which is 5 year members and life members.  So Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox managed to protect themselves .

[Les]

I see no reason to recall anyone.  Let the ATF decide and go from there. Litigation will show that ATF approved them several times and that nothing really changed.  Mr. LaPierre has done a lot of good.  Just because of one decision we want to change.  Will we get any better or worse.

It was a good move throwing it back into ATF's lap, especially since they've already reviewed it twice if memory serves.  Also provides time for the hoopla/emotion to die down, I'd doubt they'd get a vote on any bill.  Should turn out to be a "Nothing Burger"  But time will tell, and Wayne's been there for quite a while so it'd be tough rooting him out and I'm not sure he should be. 

[StuartJ]

I disagree. Treating a bureaucratic agency the purpose of which is to infringe on citizens rights as if it were a legitimate agency  was not a good move. Neither was saying the NRA supports the unconstitutional ban on automatic weapons.

[Les]

I disagree. Treating a bureaucratic agency the purpose of which is to infringe on citizens rights as if it were a legitimate agency  was not a good move. Neither was saying the NRA supports the unconstitutional ban on automatic weapons.

Not sure I understand your vernacular, but the NRA isn't supporting a ban, only allowing ATF to review their previous 2 reviews in which they had no issue with the stocks in question, so probably of little consequence.  But time will tell. 

[hilowe]

Can't remember where I heard this, but I think it was an interview with an NRA underling (it was recorded and played in a podcast I listen to, but don't remember which one).

The reasoning was, ATF has reviewed bump stocks three times already, and found it to be completely legal three different times (and documented by letters each time with letterhead and signautres).

So, throwing it back at ATF requires them to do one of two things. 

Find it illegal now, when it's very well documented that it was legal before, embarrassing them in front of everyone, potentially losing them funding because they show themselves to the world to be inept.  Second option is (and most likely option), find it legal within current laws.  Not sure what the ramifications for the ATF M O U S E is in this second one (potentially gets the lefties in Congress pissed, losing them funding?).  Either way, people on the side of gun rights win.

[depserv]

The NRA should not have given in on this.  It is verifiable fact that the biggest mass murders have all been committed with things other than guns, and this fact shows conclusively that even getting rid of all guns for all people (except government and those who protect rich people) can not possibly deter a person from committing mass murder.  Giving in on this issue makes it easy for liars to convince the ignorant masses that gun control can deter mass murder, since even the NRA seems to agree.  So for this reason alone (and there are others) it was a bad move.  And not just kind of a little bit bad, but a big whopping blunder. 

Bump fire in and of itself isn't a big deal.  The problem is, after the election of what many of us assumed to be a loyal American as President, along with Republican control of Congress, patriots were expecting some of the more egregious gun control edicts to be rolled back, but now instead of that here we are taking a step in the wrong direction again.  It doesn't matter if it's just a little step, it is still showing that we are still going in the wrong direction, and that tells us that we will probably continue doing so.

I don't know how decisions are made in the NRA, but I doubt Wayne LaPierre made this one all on his own.  So I would like the NRA to tell its members who in the leadership supported this blunder, and who opposed it.  This is the information we need in deciding who to vote for.  If the leadership will not give us this information it means they are uniting against the membership, and maybe all of them should be replaced.  For now though the membership should be asking them to give us this information.  I have little doubt that at least some and probably many spoke out against it, and Wayne LaPierre might have even been among them (though I doubt it).  So the critical path to correcting this problem lies in finding out who was on which side of this decision. 

The NRA is fundamentally good, but anything as big and complex as it is has to be adjusted from time to time, and it looks like this might be one of those times.  And for the right adjustments to be made, we need to know exactly where the problem is.  Otherwise we might end up doing more harm than good.  So before we talk about replacing this or that person, let's find out what part of the machine malfunctioned.