Lookn like the NRA gots it all did

[NE Bull]

In Today's email.

  Three NRA-Backed Bills Introduced in Nebraska Legislature
 
Last Thursday, the second day of the 2012 Nebraska regular legislation session, three NRA-sponsored bills were introduced in the Nebraska Senate.  Each of these bills will likely be sent to the Judiciary Committee for further consideration.
 
Legislative Bill 785, introduced by state Senator Mark Christensen (44), would allow transportation and storage of firearms in locked personal vehicles while on publicly-accessible parking lots.
 
State Senator Scott Lautenbaugh (18) introduced two other NRA-backed bills, Legislative Bill 804 and Legislative Bill 807.  LB 804 will strengthen the existing Castle Doctrine statute by extending an individual’s right to personal protection to both their place of business and personal vehicle.  LB 807 will clarify the current concealed carry permit disqualifications and help expedite the application process.
 
With strong support in the Nebraska Legislature, the NRA will be working to improve protection of the rights of gun owners in the Cornhusker state.  No action is needed at this time, but please continue to check your e-mail for upcoming action on this legislation and www.NRAILA.org for further updates on these issues.

[omaharj]

  Wow....Wow.... That's incredible. I didn't get an email from them today. The latest I received from them is the newsletter from a few days ago and I didn't see this article. I don't want to jump to conclusions,so I'll ask the obvious,is the NRA truly the sponser of this bill?  I'm already peeved at their claims on the Omaha action a few months ago.
   Is it my imagination,or does it seem like the NRA's two main activities are; taking credit for everything, and trying to get more money from members? I didn't know they had an ACTIVE rep in the area.
    Thanls, Jeremy, for the link.   RJ

[AAllen]

Well 785 may be the NRA's, 804 is a child of 298 and a bill that was the NRA's the year before, and 807 comes from the NSP (but the NRA supports it).

There are allot of folks who would say it is not a imagination. 

They do have a new lobbyist/rep for Nebraska and I have had several phone conversations with him.  He seems like a good guy that we will be able to work with, but we need to remember they are the NRA and we will not always agree.  Sometimes our disagreement will be more for the show than in reality, the soap opera that is politics.

[armed and humorous]

I guess I can sort of understand the jealousy, or envy, or resentment some apparently feel toward the NRA for trying to take credit for advancements in gun-rights legislation and such.  On the other hand, whining about it simply puts the shoe on the other foot to some degree.  Who cares?  We're all working toward the same end.  On a football team, I don't care if my quarteback, my tailback, or my receiver is the one who actually crosses the goal line.  It's still a TD.  Working together, we're more likely to accomplish our goals than by bickering among ourselves.

[AAllen]

I guess I can sort of understand the jealousy, or envy, or resentment some apparently feel toward the NRA for trying to take credit for advancements in gun-rights legislation and such.  On the other hand, whining about it simply puts the shoe on the other foot to some degree.  Who cares?  We're all working toward the same end.  On a football team, I don't care if my quarteback, my tailback, or my receiver is the one who actually crosses the goal line.  It's still a TD.  Working together, we're more likely to accomplish our goals than by bickering among ourselves.

The issue comes in when they claim and use everything for fundraising.  When another organization expends large amounts of money to get something accomplished they should have the opportunity to claim that and fundraise based upon their successes.  An example McDonald vs Chicago, the SAF spent hundreds of thousands of dollars preparing and taking that through the courts, while the verdict is still being handed down Wayne LP was on the steps of the Supreme Court cliam the victory for the NRA, and almost immediately out came the letters and emails saying look what we did give us money.

[armed and humorous]

As I said, I understand, but of what importance is it?  If people are contributing to a group to further their 2A rights, good for them.  I don't go along with everything the NRA does, but neither do I agree with everything (or everyone) in the NFOA.  Still, I support both of them, and I applaud their efforts that result in furthering our 2A rights.  If "earning" money is the goal, I don't support either group.  The goal should be furthering 2a rights, and I don't care who does it.  Again, I understand wanting credit where credit is due, but we don't have to be petty about it, and in the long run, any progess is good progress, isn't it?

[OnTheFly]

...On a football team, I don't care if my quarteback, my tailback, or my receiver is the one who actually crosses the goal line.  It's still a TD...

A good team member knows that he is nothing without the team.  That is why the athletes who are worth a darn give credit to those who helped them.

As I said, I understand, but of what importance is it?  If people are contributing to a group to further their 2A rights, good for them.  I don't go along with everything the NRA does, but neither do I agree with everything (or everyone) in the NFOA.  Still, I support both of them, and I applaud their efforts that result in furthering our 2A rights.  If "earning" money is the goal, I don't support either group.  The goal should be furthering 2a rights, and I don't care who does it.  Again, I understand wanting credit where credit is due, but we don't have to be petty about it, and in the long run, any progess is good progress, isn't it?

Here is the problem as I see it...

• People donate to organization A to have them represent their collective interests. 
• Organization A expends considerable funds to do just that.  The donator's collective interests are furthered as a direct result of Organization A's efforts.
• Organization B comes out of the shadows to claim the victory for themselves, and beat their drums to collect funds.
• Then Organization A, which is the one who gets the job done, loses funding and struggles in their purpose.
• Meanwhile, Organization B gets bigger, but not any more effective.

Fly

[armed and humorous]

OnTheFly:

I don't disagree with anything you said in your last comment.  And, as I said, credit should go to those who deserve it.  Still, if all the money is going toward the same cause...

I agree with your assessment regarding the football analogy, too.  A little more of that team spirit would help out both the organizations (and others).  I realize, that the more money NFOA can bring in, the more they can do (theoretically anyway), but the same holds true for the NRA.  I know the two don't always see eye to eye, but as I see it, except for the "getting credit" part, both are pretty much on the same team.

My biggest problem with the NRA is that they tend to focus only on national issues, or issues in the more populous states.  Whereas, NFOA is more concerned about Nebraska.  But, keep in mind, that Nebraska can be trumped by the feds under the right circumstances, so we need both groups to stay on top of things.

As an NRA member, and the Election Volunteer Coordinator for Nebraska's first district, I'd like nothing more than to see some of this animosity between the groups to disappear.  I am a born and raised Nebraskan, and when it gets right down to it, I identify as much with Nebraska as I do with the country as a whole.  Even though I'm not always in agreement with some of the NFOA member's stands, I feel the NFOA is doing a great job, especially considering that it is a non-profit, volunteer organization, that doesn't even require membership dues.

The tattoo on my shoulder reads, "Keep on Truckin'", which to me means, keep movin' forward no matter what.

[Ross Berck]

It was my understanding that NRA didn't want to support heller         
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/06/14/yet-again-the-nra-sells-out-to-democrats/
But is OK with using it......and I'm still upset about the 86 fopa

[FarmerRick]

If we could count on the NRA to get things done in Nebraska, there would be NO NEED for the NFOA.  Period.

...and yet, here I am, a NRA life-member, posting on the NFOA forum.  Hmmm.....


They have chosen their course of action(or lack-thereof), we have chosen ours.

[OnTheFly]

...I realize, that the more money NFOA can bring in, the more they can do (theoretically anyway), but the same holds true for the NRA.  I know the two don't always see eye to eye, but as I see it, except for the "getting credit" part, both are pretty much on the same team...

I guess that is where the NRA is rubbing me the wrong way in this situation.  We are all on the same team, but one group is doing the work, and the other is working at taking the credit.  I am happy to have multiple groups working to the same end.  I would just like to see the group taking the credit actually do some of the work.

Fly

[NE Bull]

My hopes are this new NRA rep AND the NFOA can work alongside each other this year.  The last fella, on his way out, pulled some under the table moves.  That's what soured me as far as Nebraska and the NFOA and NRA are concerned.  If we can get the rep and our people in a room and working together, it could only be a win win for everyone involved.  I was impressed with how the 2nd A foundation backed us up in Omaha essentially behind the scenes.  Helped us look better, and they got another win. If the NFOA and NRA in Nebraska could share the work and credit, we would be unstoppable!!  We shall see how this fella rolls.

[Dan W]

NRA did come to the table in the discussions with Omaha over the last ordinance the City council passed to fend off the lawsuit.

Not much was accomplished, but they did participate

[armed and humorous]

My guess is that the NRA wants to use it's power where it gets the most bang for it's buck.  That generally means the less populous states get the hind tittie.  In order to get any real help in Nebraska from the NRA, we need issues or court cases that have national significance.  At least, it seems that's the way it has been for some time.  I hope things are changing for the better in that regard, and some of the comments suggest that they might be.

[OnTheFly]

It does not matter whether we are talking about police force coverage, health care (private or government), special interest group, etc.  Funds are limited and they will be applied to have the greatest overall benefit.  So let's say that the NRA wants to focus on the larger, federal issues and let the local organizations take care of the state issues.  That works for me.  If the NRA had more of the "team" mentality, it would encourage and back the local organizations.  Backing does not necessarily equate to money.  It could be as simple as giving legal advise on how to thrust and parry through the legal battle.  They could still take partial credit as a supporter of the effort.  It would be a win-win for the two organizations, but the real winner would be the members and the ideals that are supposed to be represented.

Fly

[Chris Z]

The NRA can continue to beg for and raise all the money they want. NFOA is more effective because of the PEOPLE of NFOA who DO SOMETHING!!!!

Money want buy what we all want, people making the effort to get involved and help make the change happen will.

NFOA members are passionate and get involved. NRA members are passionate and throw money at the organization hoping for "THEM" to do all the work.