No NRA Endorsement for Harry Reid

August 30, 2010 06:49

Is the NRA waking up to the unintended consequences of supporting ‘gun rights’ Democrats? I belong to the NRA but considered dropping membership when stories began to appear about the NRA supporting Harry Reid. I do not support the NRA’s PAC, the NRA Institute for Legislative. Editorial

Is the NRA waking up to the unintended consequences of supporting ‘gun rights’ Democrats? I belong to the NRA but considered dropping membership when stories began to appear about the NRA supporting Harry Reid. I do not support the NRA’s PAC, the NRA Institute for Legislative. Here’s why.

The NRA and other single issue groups too often can not see the forest for the trees. While the NRA has done a marvelous job of defending the 2nd amendment rights of all Americans, it has come at the risk of other freedoms, economic collapse and eventually the loss of gun rights. Harry Reid and the overwhelming Democrat support of Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are classic examples.

Look at the bribery and coercion it took to pass Obamacare. Opposition by the NRA could have made difference in the outcome. What does that have to do with gun rights? The vast powers given to the HHS in Obamacare will eventually give teeth to the idea studied by the National Institute Of Health (NIH) that stricter gun control laws will reduce health care costs. It won’t matter whether its true. ‘Studies’ by government or government funded leftist groups will ‘determine’ that owning and using firearms is ‘high risk’ behavior. Maybe they will start with just making gun owners pay more or adding a ‘health tax’ to firearms and ammunition.

Another recent case in which leftist environmental groups petitioned to have the EPA ban lead in ammunition shows how these leftist groups will push Democrat controlled and staffed government agencies to accomplish what cannot be accomplished through open debate and legislation. These type of groups are often funded with tax dollars by the very Democrats that say they support gun rights to get themselves elected.

UN treaties are yet another example of how Democrats who might talk big on supporting gun control can then subvert gun rights by supporting a proposed UN treaty on international gun control. As The Heritage Foundation Pointed out:

‘On October 31, 2008, the U.N. General Assembly voted 145 to 2 with 18 abstentions for a resolution entitled “Towards an arms trade treaty: establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” The two nations voting against the resolution were the United States and Zimbabwe. The October resolution envisions a “legally binding treaty” that creates “common international standards” for “the import, export and transfer of conventional arms,” including small arms and light weapons.’

This sounds fairly innocuous and is being pushed as a way to keep weapons proliferation from causing so much violence but leftist groups around the world and US anti gun groups with their lawyers will use it as a source to further restrict gun rights or the manufacture and sale of weapons and ammunition here in the US.

Heritage Foundation goes on to warn:

‘The “growing global consensus” rhetoric that the treaty’s backers use to characterize its goals makes it unwise for the U.S. to ignore the campaign for the treaty. If the U.S. ignores it, the treaty will be drafted and adopted based on the October resolution. The treaty will then be established as another destructive precedent in multilateral arms control and a “norm” for sympathetic lawyers and judges in the U.S. to draw upon and thereby subvert U.S. sovereignty.’

It is Democrats and particularly the Obama and Hillary Clinton camps that support this internationalization of laws as a way to subvert the will of the American people.

The NRA almost lost my membership when they made a deal with Democrats on the Disclose Act which would have intimidated campaign speech except for large groups like unions, and after the deal, the NRA. In an article titled The NRA’s Deal with the Devil, Mark J. Fitzgibbons at American Thinker pointed out:

‘That initial justification ignored the fact that NRA members, first and foremost, are citizens before they are NRA members. As citizens, they will be hurt by the DISCLOSE Act because it will reduce speech, press, and association rights.

The DISCLOSE Act will weaken the ability of citizens to rid the country of bad, corrupt politicians. The bill will help protect the unconstitutional power-grab by the Barack Obama administration and law-breaking by the government. Additionally, the NRA has no guarantee that a future Congress won’t renege on its current deal.

By exempting the NRA so that it would not oppose the legislation, congressional Democrats knew darn well that they would still be abridging the First Amendment rights of all NRA members — as in, every last one of them. The exemption for the NRA may protect the entity called the NRA, but it nevertheless harms the First Amendment rights of NRA members.’

Remember, the Supreme Court decisons in support of the 2nd amendment have been very narrow decisions. The Democrat supported Sonia Sotomayor voted against the 2nd amendment even after saying it is a right in her confirmation hearing. Will the NRA stop its support of all the Democrats who voted for Sotomayor and Kagan? Will they begin to look at the bigger picture? Or will they continue to be fooled by the supposedly ‘pro gun’ Dems just like the pro-lifers got burned by the supposedly pro-life Democrats. all conservative groups need to start looking past their single issue and focus on the broader picture of the collapse of our economy and the destruction of our freedoms. Without freedom and a sound economy the pet issues don’t stand a chance in the log run.


Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere: