« Heavy-weather antelope | Main | Monster Iowa Buck: 270 Inches! »

October 23, 2008

This page has been moved to http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots

If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Shots at its new location: www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots.

Is The NRA Anti-Gun?

An odd question I know, but I had to ask. On the heels of our much-discussed post on gun owners and the Second Amendment, which is a call to unity for all firearms owners, I came across several comments in the far reaches of the Internet that question the NRA’s loyalty to the cause of gun rights.

Mostly, the arguments go something like this: Various people who are or were associated with the NRA hierarchy have made statements at some point that are either critical of certain kinds of guns or have revealed themselves to be hopelessly hunter-centric, as opposed to supporters of shooters in general. Therefore, the NRA is a hunter (or “Fudd” as some of these player-haters like to call it) organization that’s not worthy of support by true gun owners.

In particular, a lot of attention is given to some quotes by Charlton Heston from a 1997 interview where he said that, “AK-47's are inappropriate for private ownership, of course.” Heston was First Vice-President of the NRA at the time.

When this happened the poop hit the fan and many folks were outraged. The NRA spun it to say that Chuck was talking about fully-automatic Soviet battle rifles, but a lot of people didn’t buy it then. And it seems that more than a decade later they still aren’t buying it now.

But I can’t help but make a couple observations. First, Heston has gone on to his final reward and what he has to say about guns doesn’t matter much since none of us have ears sharp enough to hear him.

And second, what exactly are the anti-gun positions that the NRA holds? Which gun-control laws has it been seeking to push through Congress or the various state legislatures?

The last time I checked, the NRA seemed to be on the pro-gun side of every issue that has come to light. This includes the sunset of the assault weapons ban, fighting the push to close the so-called “gun show loophole,” urging states to adopt “shall issue” laws for concealed carry and so on.

But for some folks words from beyond the grave that never affected the NRA’s actual stance on any legislation of significance are more important than years of good deeds.

—John Snow



I think it's telling that these people b*tch and moan about NRA board members when they aren't members and so they don't vote, or even worse, they admit they are members, and they still don't bother voting. I've also never met one who has made any effort at all to reach out to board members in their area to better understand the organization and make sure their voices are heard.

Unfortunately, I think you're just trying to reach a portion of our movement that wants to sit around the proverbial coffee shop and complain rather than actually participate in any constructive way.

James K

I believe the NRA Should stand on the pro-gun side of every movement. We should stand for nothing less them the second amendment... period! Keep in mind the anti-gun do not wavier on their stance. NRA should not as well.

bitter 2

The NRA isnt Pro-gun or Anti-gun.. its selective Gun. If the NRA shut down the Anti-gun movement, they would go out of business. They need the ever lasting struggle to stay employed.