NRA Might Be Going Bust

[Washington Resistance Army]

If you look at their 503(c) forms, you'll see the NRA as a controlling body has less cash than they usually do, but no serious loss.

People forget that the reason the NRA qualifies for the nonprofit brackets they are in is because their central organization doesn't do the lobbying. Local chapters do it. This means that the NRA, defined broadly, can lobby well over the amount that other, centralized nonprofit organizations can. And those local chapters are getting more money than ever.

The NRA isn't going bust, and no """reasonable""" measures to disarm citizens are on the horizon because of this.

The scarequotes and loaded emotive language have been noted.

I mean, there isn't really any reasonable measures coming from the other side and given near every Dem signed onto a bill that would ban pretty much all modern guns...

[Kernen]

If you look at their 503(c) forms, you'll see the NRA as a controlling body has less cash than they usually do, but no serious loss.

People forget that the reason the NRA qualifies for the nonprofit brackets they are in is because their central organization doesn't do the lobbying. Local chapters do it. This means that the NRA, defined broadly, can lobby well over the amount that other, centralized nonprofit organizations can. And those local chapters are getting more money than ever.

The NRA isn't going bust, and no """reasonable""" measures to disarm citizens are on the horizon because of this.

The scarequotes and loaded emotive language have been noted.

The scarequotes and loaded emotive language have been noted.

I mean, there isn't really any reasonable measures coming from the other side and given near every Dem signed onto a bill that would ban pretty much all modern guns...

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

[Shofercia]

NRA Claims 'Deep Financial Trouble' May Soon Put It Out of Business

The National Rifle Association says that it’s in “deep financial trouble” — so deep in fact that it may be “unable to exist.”

The group says it is under such financial distress because New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has convinced a number of financial service providers, banks, and insurance providers against doing business with the gun-advocacy group. As a result, the NRA claims that it will be forced to end its magazine publishing and television services, and will be forced to curtail rallies and potentially shutter some of its offices.

In April, Gov. Cuomo encouraged New York-based businesses to cut ties with the NRA. “New York may have the strongest gun laws in the country, but we must push further to ensure that gun safety is a top priority for every individual, company, and organization that does business across the state,” he said in a statement. “I am directing the Department of Financial Services to urge insurers and bankers statewide to determine whether any relationship they may have with the NRA or similar organizations sends the wrong message to their clients and their communities who often look to them for guidance and support. This is not just a matter of reputation, it is a matter of public safety, and working together, we can put an end to gun violence in New York once and for all.”

In response, the NRA sued, claiming that the governor was attempting to deny the group the ability to speak freely about gun-related issues. This week, it filed an additional claim, obtained by Rolling Stone, suggesting that the move has impacted its cash flow to the point that it may soon be forced out of existence.

Some optimistic news for once. They helped clamped down on even the smallest regulations when they weren't scared of minorities arming up and then we learned they served as a Russian campaign finance pipeline. Not to mention making a convicted criminal their new President.

Good riddance.

What impact will this have on the gun debate? I think it will make it possible for reasonable measures to be passed if the NRA does go belly up.

This is perfect. Two idiots, or rather an idiot governor and a dumb organization, duking it out for my amusement. I am entertained. The NRA lost its credibility in my eyes when it favored corporations over gun owners, so I can't say that I feel bad for them. I don't. And Cuomo is a special kind of stupid. Remember all of the complaints about the nuclear option used to get Trump's nominees onto the Supreme Court? Well, turns it out that the Democrats who came up with that one, and the Republicans used it.

But it's not like that would ever happen again, at least not with the Latino Victory Fund's ad, followed by the GOP's the Left Unhinged ad, right? But why would the DNC learn from its mistakes? Their symbol is the donkey, representing a stubbornness to learn. What kind of precedent might be set by Cuomo? Let's quote him:

“I am directing the Department of Financial Services to urge insurers and bankers statewide to determine whether any relationship they may have with the NRA or similar organizations sends the wrong message to their clients and their communities who often look to them for guidance and support. This is not just a matter of reputation, it is a matter of public safety, and working together, we can put an end to gun violence in New York once and for all.”

So if the Governor of Texas was to say something like this:

“I am directing the Department of Financial Services to urge insurers and bankers statewide to determine whether any relationship they may have with Planned Parenthood or similar organizations sends the wrong message to their clients and their communities who often look to them for guidance and support. This is not just a matter of reputation, it is a matter of moral turpitude, and working together, we can put an end to the murder of unborn babies in Texas once and for all.”

Perhaps the Democrats should be totally ok with it, right? Now you can claim that Planned Parenthood is nowhere near as bad as the NRA, and most on NSG will agree with that. But where do you draw the line with such broad statements? I think quite a few posters on NSG will disagree on that. Cuomo has assisted in the nation's division; it is all as the Babylon Bee foretold: https://babylonbee.com/news/russia-anno ... t-unaided/

As for the claim that the NRA will go broke, erm, they raised $2.4 million in donations in March. Not seeing that. Sadly.

[Vassenor]

The scarequotes and loaded emotive language have been noted.

I mean, there isn't really any reasonable measures coming from the other side and given near every Dem signed onto a bill that would ban pretty much all modern guns...

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

[Washington Resistance Army]

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

This is a shitty meme tier argument and you should actually feel bad for using it lol

[Shofercia]

This is likely a pity party campaign on their part. Or trying to play victim after the Russia scandal.

Could also be the NRA hurting Cuomo's career. If they managed to hurt his career, it'll send a message to other politicians, and that's more in line with NRA's logic than a pity party.

I'd guess it's a legal manoeuvre and/or fundraiser.. someone or other will bail them out - it's Trump tweet fodder.

Yeah, I'm a little suspicious that they're blowing things out of proportion as a way to get their supporters fired up.

I wouldn't miss them, though. I think people should be allowed to own guns, but the NRA has just gone off the deep end lately.

Lately?

Now I'll admit I'm not super well versed in all the ins and outs of fraud laws but I don't think this would meet the requirements for such a label. It's hyperbolic certainly but I don't really see how "oh shit we're almost broke and if we don't get more money ASAP to keep up the fight your rights will vanish so donate!" is fraud. Desperate and frankly kind of pathetic marketing yes, but that's pretty much the status quo nowadays.

This strikes me as literally the Wikipedia "Oh God guys, if y'all don't donate Wikipedia goes bye bye!" campaign they toss up every year.

^ Also this.

What we really have here NY trying to put Americas oldest civil rights organization out of business. The NRA should sue NY and Coumo to bankruptcy.

Does Andrew Cuomo not have the right to advise people against associating with the NRA?

He's doing it officially as Governor. That's the issue.

Would you not get mad or irritated if they constantly want every cent you can spare on an excessive basis?

I'd default to: "I've given plenty of money already, before I give more- explain what happened to the previous funding and how new funding will be used? To hell with you all if you say there is never enough, you'll get whatever is sent."

The member dues are presumably to strengthen the NRA and its functions and not to line the pockets of NRA officials or for them to be reckless with that money via wasting it unnecessarily.

Life members don't have recurring dues, thus they have to hit me up for donations. No, that doesn't irritate me, as I try to donate a (small) percentage of my gun related purchase totals to the three groups I am a life member of already.

You can be a member of NRA and GOA?

[Kernen]

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

The NRA has done no such thing.

[Ifreann]

So if the Governor of Texas was to say something like this:

“I am directing the Department of Financial Services to urge insurers and bankers statewide to determine whether any relationship they may have with Planned Parenthood or similar organizations sends the wrong message to their clients and their communities who often look to them for guidance and support. This is not just a matter of reputation, it is a matter of moral turpitude, and working together, we can put an end to the murder of unborn babies in Texas once and for all.”

"if"

Allegations have come out that Planned Parenthood is harvesting baby body parts. Texas Governor Greg Abbott has sued Planned Parenthood for Medicaid fraud in the past, and has now directed the Texas Health and Human Services Commission to conduct an immediate investigation.

Which is just one statement of several Abbot has made about Planned Parenthood.

[Valrifell]

I'm almost ambivalent to the second amendment but I don't like the NRA.

My thoughts & prayers are with them.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I'm almost ambivalent to the second amendment but I don't like the NRA.

My thoughts & prayers are with them.

They're actually doing fine, this is just partly to troll Cuomo and keep the donations rolling in. It'd be almost impossible for them to go bankrupt solely because of membership dues alone.

[Ifreann]

Does Andrew Cuomo not have the right to advise people against associating with the NRA?

He's doing it officially as Governor. That's the issue.

What about that is an issue?

[Greater Germany]

I'd guess it's a legal manoeuvre and/or fundraiser.. someone or other will bail them out - it's Trump tweet fodder. Anyway there's others, the one WRA likes because the NRA is just too liberal.

Though if NRA TV was shuttered that would be great thanks.

Mostly Russian donors I bet.

lol

[Kernen]

He's doing it officially as Governor. That's the issue.

What about that is an issue?

Interfering with lawful action in your governmental capacity implicates the 1st Amendment.

[The Holy Therns]

They're more likely to get busts made of them than going bust, I think.

[Ifreann]

What about that is an issue?

Interfering with lawful action in your governmental capacity implicates the 1st Amendment.

He's not interfering with lawful action though.

[Kernen]

Interfering with lawful action in your governmental capacity implicates the 1st Amendment.

He's not interfering with lawful action though.

He is. The government convincing private entities not to do business with a nonprofit organization based on distaste for their speech has the proximate effect of infringing on free speech rights. It is the kind of government action that the 1st Amendment is designed to protect against. Had the governor acted in his personal capacity, this would have been totally permissible. The government simply cannot push entities out of the public sphere like this when it implicates political speech, the kind of speech most highly protected by the 1st Amendment.

[Crockerland]

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

"I don't like this thing that has nothing to do with me and doesn't affect me so it violates the right to life!"
Making an actual point < Channeling the vengeful spirit of a late 2000s Republican congressman to support your indefensible beliefs with a vague, nebulous, and sarcastic comment that can't be argued against because it lacks any substance

[Kernen]

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

"I don't like this thing that has nothing to do with me and doesn't affect me so it violates the right to life!"
Making an actual point < Channeling the vengeful spirit of a late 2000s Republican congressman to support your indefensible beliefs with a vague, nebulous, and sarcastic comment that can't be argued against because it lacks any substance

And NRA advocacy deprives nobody of their right to life. Nor does firearm ownership. The one depriving people of that right, such as anybody has that right, would be the individual abusing their right to own a firearm. That individual should be the sole recipient of scorn and punishment.

[Ors Might]

WRA said it better than I can.' The other side is clearly not interested in respecting rights. They are, by definition, not reasonable.

But failing to respect the fundamental right to life is perfectly reasonable?

Great point. Anti-2A’s oughta start respecting the right to life and support people defending themselves with firearms.

[Musk]

What perplexes me is why liberals want to give their guns to the government, which is run by Trump, who according to them is a fascist Russian agent.

[Petrasylvania]

What perplexes me is why liberals want to give their guns to the government, which is run by Trump, who according to them is a fascist Russian agent.

Invoking Donnie Trump, a guy who ran on leaving the 2nd Amendment alone, as the spectre of government gun confiscation. So cynical I swear you're an NRA fundraiser.

[Grenartia]

God, this is amazing news if true. Even if you're a gun owner, the NRA is an utterly shitty organization.

[Musk]

What perplexes me is why liberals want to give their guns to the government, which is run by Trump, who according to them is a fascist Russian agent.

Invoking Donnie Trump, a guy who ran on leaving the 2nd Amendment alone, as the spectre of government gun confiscation. So cynical I swear you're an NRA fundraiser.

Look, the simple fact is that as commander in chief of the armed forces, HE is going to be the one who gets your guns. This is why I think that the left should support gun rights. What if another Trump is elected, what if he isn't as lenient on guns, what if he falls for the TPUSA lie that all people left of Pinochet are communists? What if his solution to this is an authoritarian crackdown? Also, no matter who's president, the police force is still attractive to those who have hate in their hearts towards minorities. If Trayvon Martin had a gun, he would still be alive.
https://socialistra.org/ This is a good site for gun rights from a left wing perspective.

[Ors Might]

Invoking Donnie Trump, a guy who ran on leaving the 2nd Amendment alone, as the spectre of government gun confiscation. So cynical I swear you're an NRA fundraiser.

Look, the simple fact is that as commander in chief of the armed forces, HE is going to be the one who gets your guns. This is why I think that the left should support gun rights. What if another Trump is elected, what if he isn't as lenient on guns, what if he falls for the TPUSA lie that all people left of Pinochet are communists? What if his solution to this is an authoritarian crackdown? Also, no matter who's president, the police force is still attractive to those who have hate in their hearts towards minorities. If Trayvon Martin had a gun, he would still be alive.
https://socialistra.org/ This is a good site for gun rights from a left wing perspective.

Don’t you know? Black lives matter right up to the point where they arm themselves. Then they’re just thugs.

[Musk]

Look, the simple fact is that as commander in chief of the armed forces, HE is going to be the one who gets your guns. This is why I think that the left should support gun rights. What if another Trump is elected, what if he isn't as lenient on guns, what if he falls for the TPUSA lie that all people left of Pinochet are communists? What if his solution to this is an authoritarian crackdown? Also, no matter who's president, the police force is still attractive to those who have hate in their hearts towards minorities. If Trayvon Martin had a gun, he would still be alive.
https://socialistra.org/ This is a good site for gun rights from a left wing perspective.

Don’t you know? Black lives matter right up to the point where they arm themselves. Then they’re just thugs.

Am I agreeing with a libcap?
Stalin, it's not what it looks like.