Snowflakes in Hell has a post regarding The Olofson Thing. To start out with, I agree with Sebastian completely, this was a no win situation for the NRA and other gun rights groups. Having read some of the thread on ar15.com, I would tend to agree there is a good chance that the “missing part” was a DIAS, and the weapon could be converted to FA. Neither side comes out looking good, the BATFE can’t make the gun fire FA, then they can, which sure sounds fishy, but the only reason to have an M-16 FCG is for full auto or a questionable builder.
Now, on to the letter that inspired Sebastian’s life membership:
Posted on the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership site, it is another “NRA is trying to ban guns under the table” type letters. While I don’t agree with everything the NRA does, I think that we are much better off because of their work. CCW, Katrina, etc. are law mainly because of the efforts of the NRA. We need to realize that when you are fighting to restore rights, sometimes you need to take a little less than you would like. A number of organizations have bashed the NRA for compromising, but I don’t think that there is another organization that has done as much for our rights, even if we don’t have everything we want yet. Let’s take a look, shall we?
Americans today are drowning in an ocean of lies. Virtually everything they think they know — about history, about economics, about the Constitution and the law, about a hundred other things — is wrong.
The shameful truth about the National Rifle Association, for example, is that there seems to be some kind of mutually beneficial — symbiotic — relationship between that group, which would like you to believe it was created to protect the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms, and the agency that enforces federal gun laws, the notorious Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.
Speaking of a lack of historical knowledge, the NRA was not formed to protect the Second Amendment, but to “http://www.nra.org/aboutus.aspx.”
Similarly, the NRA needs the BATFE to frighten its membership with (not to mention prospective members), using the violent and corrupt federal agency as a bogey-man, and its well-known illegal depredations and terror tactics to extract more money from those who foolishly believe the NRA can protect them — or even has an interest in doing so.
Remember, this is on the website of JPFO, an organization that exists for the sole purpose of fighting the government for gun rights. While this is an honorable goal, they seem to insinuate that it is a problem in the case of the NRA. Furthermore, while I am sure that the majority of NRA’s funding is from fund raising for lobbying, they are still involved in competitive shooting, such as the matches of Camp Perry, firearms education, and publishing, so they do have other revenue streams.
The latest in the NRA’s seemingly endless catalog of insults and injuries to gun owners and to the Bill of Rights in general occurred when a concerned individual wrote to them about a court case in which an extremely dangerous precedent has recently been set.
Following is a section regarding the case referenced earlier, which was really a no-win for the NRA and gun rights in general. While more probably could have been done to fight this, especially ensuring that a malfunctioning firearm cannot be classified as a machine gun. However, the gun in question was clearly not a simple malfunction. If it was not modified for full auto, it was badly built, having a large number of M-16 parts, which is illegal without a registered machine gun. We may not like these requirements, but they are the current law, and this case has a large number of factors that make it a poor choice to pick as a landmark case for gun rights.
Stop feeding the fraud. If you’re an annual NRA member, or your membership is up for renewal, withhold your money until the vile, corrupt collusion between the NRA and the BATFE, this disgusting mutual love-fest — and the dire consequences it has for every gun owner — comes to an end. Make no more contributions until the NRA stops making excuses and the BATFE is abolished. Work to remove any board member who does not actively strive to abolish the BATFE. Demand that they stop endorsing politicians who are not true Second Amendment supporters.
Sorry, even if the NRA were to want to, they cannot snap their fingers and make BATFE disappear.
Undoubtedly the most effective way, in the long run, to deal with entities like the BATFE is a program we call “Take Your Money Back” which will abolish the federal income tax and federal regulatory agencies would be defunded. The obvious place to start is with those agencies that — like the BATFE — are a violation of the Constitution. Go towww.TakeYourMoneyBack.com and see.
OK, let’s just snap our fingers and make the federal income tax disappear.
Finally, as an NRA Life member for the past 35 years, I find that I have several membership cards that have been practically screaming to be ceremonially burned for the benefit of YouTube. I can only imagine — and savor — the reactions by various segments of the press and public (not to mention the NRA) if I am joined by even a hundred other angry NRA members, let alone perhaps thousands or tens of thousands.
Yeah, great PR. If the media pays any attention, it will be to say that the NRA does not represent mainstream gun owners, and you can bet that they won’t be saying that the NRA is too soft for you!
I agree that BATFE is largely out of control, but the response that is appropriate now is to get BATFE in line, and work to eliminate odious gun laws. As to the point in the letter from the NRA linked to on the JPFO site, many of our rights have some level of control, such as libel, slander, fire in a crowded theater, etc. We will not be able to eliminate all firearms laws anytime soon, and there does need to be some form of enforcement. As much as I want the vast majority of gun laws removed, to call for the elimination of all gun laws and BATFE, and not accept anything less, is not going to get us anywhere. The NRA has been very good at taking an incremental approach to restoring our rights, however, this has opened them up for criticism of compromise.
Update: I softened up the language in the first part a little. The point is not to bash Mr. Olofson, I understand that the facts of his case are in some dispute. However, given the evidence that will likely be presented to a jury, the FA/DIAS assumption is not too far afield. The main point of this post is the bashing of the NRA, which is seen far to often in my opinion. Not that there isn’t room for improvement like any group, but on the whole I believe we are far better off for the work NRA has done.