Because sometimes my fingers get behind my brain ...

... I'll try to expound a little on my thoughts about firearms rights advocacy and the NRA.

I live in rural NW Georgia (Dade County); it's small, it's geographically isolated from the rest of the state (by Lookout Mtn) and it is blessed by a relatively low crime rate. And because it's rural, guns are everywhere.

And I mean everywhere. It's nothing to hear rather mild-mannered folks in Sunday school class speak about the latest government attempts at gun control, advising that they had probably not try it around here. Like my liberal wife, there's not many folks who wouldn't deal justice to jack-booted thugs with not a tear shed.

In short, firearms-wise, I've got it pretty good. Except for the nonsensical restrictions on where I can carry my firearm and the Hughes amendment, things are lemon-squeezey for me.

Perspective - it can have a great influence on your world-view. And I suppose it's one of the reasons I'm so hard on the NRA; Massachusetts is still a firearms-rights quagmire.

I know Sebastian thinks the NRA hung the moon, but I know differently - so do the hundreds of grass-roots firearms advocacy groups around the country. I've read the press releases and the back-patting and chest-thumping, and all it looks like to me is that the NRA goes after the lowest-hanging fruit they can unless someone else (SAF, for example) is engaged in litigation and they think they can muscle in and claim credit.

Take a look at the situation in Los Angeles, CA. LAPD is supposed to provide applications and approval information to those seeking a carry permit. But they don't, even though they are under a court order to do so, and have been for over 15 years. So the NRA valiantly files suit to have LAPD do what it's supposed to be doing already (under a court order), and then trumpets the 'win' to anyone within earshot, claiming they've won a court order to have LAPD do what they're already supposed to be doing (under a court order). I could be enticed

Will it be another 15 years before the NRA does anything about the inevitable refusal of the LAPD to comply with the order? I hope not.

Then there's the kerfluffle over in New Hampshire, where the NRA (in it's omniscience) decided that the law didn't 'do enough' to advance firearms rights and started pushing amendments on the bill. But the chair of the relevant committee fired off a scathing letter about NRA interference in the legislative process regarding a bill that was tailored to do only one thing - allow constitutional carry in NH. Sebastian promised to get NRA's side of the story ...

We're still waiting. Could it be that the NRA's 'story' isn't flattering? Who knows.

I've long held that I could be enticed to join the NRA. If you read that post and think about the membership makeup of the NRA, you'll immediately notice that I'm in very little danger of having to join. I mean, they let an anti-gun organization on the floor of their last convention, unattended, and got some very anti-gun messages from those on the convention floor. About magazine capacity, of all things.

I believe the NRA needs to start educating its' own members before it starts to claim the mantle of the ultimate defender of gun rights.

pm