Friday, January 11, 2013

I would not over estimate this ? fact ?

From Politico:

NRA TELLS PLAYBOOK it has gained over 100,000 new paid members in the past 18 days (Newtown shooting was Dec. 14), from 4.1 million to 4.2 million: “Our goal is to get to 5 million before  this debate is over.” Membership is $25, and comes with a choice of three gifts: Rosewood Handle Knife, Black & Gold Duffel Bag or Digital Camo Duffel Bag. Meeting with Vice President Joe Biden at 1:45 p.m. in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building today will be James Jay (Jim) Baker, the NRA’s director of federal affairs, who works for Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA’s chief lobbyist). Baker has dealt with Biden personally many times before, and they both are fixtures at the Delaware beach. Baker was in Cox's post during the ’90's for the Brady Bill and first assault-weapons bill.

This is not necessarily a loyalty issue, the NRA provides a list of participating retailers who offer discounts with membership (click here).

Folks will join the NRA before they purchase. I doubt these are all new members either. Newly renewed, maybe to purchase the ammunition for the gun a person hasn't used in eons because the stuff is so expensive. So, statistically, there has to be at the very least 5% ... actually...more 10% of former members coming back for one reason or another.

There are also people willing to act to reduce extremism by joining and acting against the lousy political agenda put forward as their members wishes. For the most part memberships of large faceless organizations like this are silent partnerships. When people join and seek to effect change within the organization it can actually make it to the leadership to tone down their rhetoric. And that is all the NRA has, is rhetoric in what they consider to be advocacy. So, unless there is a valid opinion poll taken of their membership, which never happens (it is always volunteer reporting to any of their internal polls), there is no way of knowing why or who is actually joining the NRA.

The NRA has irrelevant advocacy. They simply tweak the extremism. That is brainless, rhetorical mind speak. That is not advocacy.

If the NRA leadership had brains rather than air space between their ears, which makes them really boring people to listen to at meetings with a Vice President of the USA, they might realize there is a real dynamic, including statistical analysis, of what is effective gun ownership in the USA that will prevent extremism and prevent marshaling in Martial Law.

Here again, the NRA is a populous organization seeking nothing more than common sense understandings among their members. They don't seek to reach a higher level of understanding. It is completely obvious where there is no significant basis to the NRA rhetoric. It is extremely obvious in other nations where the NRA has introduced their rhetorical fear of one another based on horrific incidents.

Today, the NRA is trying to use the rape issue to bring market penetration to India. The NRA is diabolical. There are very interesting laws in India to prevent escalation of gun ownership in a population of over a billion people. There are inheritance laws that provide for guns to be passed down from generation to generation will being about obsolete weaponry over time anyway, but, it sincerely prevents huge explosions of guns in the society there. 

The NRA is seeking to turn the rape issue into a 'murder the rapist' issue. That is sincerely wrong headed. Women do survive rape in India. They survive it in Pakistan, too, where it is used to 'shame' populous ideation / culture. I am not saying it is correct women should be raped, but, what I am saying is turning rape into a murder is worse than allowing the population to sincerely address oppressive gender issues allowing rape to exist in the way it does. It is far better for women in both India and Pakistan to bring about democratic change in their political systems and government than to seek to become a society of armed women. The guns will ultimately be used against a woman. They will be used against them physically and politically. The guns will provide more of a reason to oppress women and not elevate their arguments and concerns.

That is another thing. Women actually believe a gun is an equalizer. It sincerely is not. Women are not as physically strong as a man. A man will assault a woman with a gun seeking to over power her and commit the crime anyway. Ultimately, a man while succeeding in his crime can then use the woman's personal gun to heighten the crime and possibly bring about her death. But, that is something no one will ever hear from the NRA or will find research on by the NRA.

There are many intelligent approaches to personal gun ownership and use. Many. The NRA is far from taking the high road to being an advocate. Their relationship with their membership is not what I would call valuable in most lives anywhere in the world, yet alone the USA.