I don’t like the NRA.
I wrote a post about this https://cogitabunda.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/im-not-a-fan-of-the-nra-but/.
At the time, I said to myself, “Well, I don’t like them, but they do seem to at least publicly do an important job for the sake of the public.”
Really, NRA? For a group who brings in over 200 million dollars annually, based on public records, they show little interest in something that I find pretty obvious.
It’s hypocritical to have an ‘in-house’ registry of gun owners while fighting against the government having such a list. You have effectively hamstrung your own argument against having such a list-there was previously a thought that no such list exists.
But now, it exists, everyone knows it, and you have it.
What’s the argument against Gun registration, now? That the government could use it too easily to bring about confiscation?
If they want the list, all they have to do is find a reason to hack your systems or raid your offices. If the intent is tyranny, they’ll do it and apologize profusely.
Of course, that would make them the bad guy, but you guys would wind up with plenty of bad press and a general increase in distrust and decrease in funding. I mean, why should you exist if “the big list” is in their hands anyway? Prevention of a registry has been your supposed hard line stance for years, and with that gone, you are nothing anymore.
But, if I were the government, and I wanted to bring about confiscation but maintain some kind of good press, I’d cut a deal with you. All you have to do is keep fighting the public legal fight, drawing in that cash, paying your six-figure incomes to your people, and one other small thing…
I would just want the list, quietly, discretely, no one would ever have to know…
That is, that’s if I were an untrustworthy government. That sort of thing would never happen, right?
Because we can trust our government. Just ask them, they’ll tell you that they can be trusted.
Just like you guys. You’d never agree to this, right? This is all a misunderstanding and you have the data kept nice and safe, at least as safe as the government’s highest level military secrets.
Maybe that’s not the best example, right?
But we can trust our government not to want to collect all of this information, right? They’ll respect our privacy as citizens, right?
So, in effect, you guys have made it so that your own major argument point is moot. Not only that, but since you have done it, and much of your information has come through publicly available sources, if the government had NOT figured out how to get the information themselves before, you have given them a simple template.
They don’t need to confiscate the guns, not really. They just have to make sure that the gun owners suffer, somehow. A note somewhere for Law Enforcement would do it,”Potentially dangerous, gun owner”.
Thanks, NRA. Over the past 10 years I suspect you guys have taken in somewhere near 2 billion dollars to defend gun owners from the government.
Now you have given the government what they need to do what you were supposedly trying to prevent.
The only questions left are these:
1: Did I call your collusion right, or was this simple imbecility on your part?
2: If you aren’t working with the government on this, then what are you going to do to prevent them from following in your footsteps?
Piece of advice for you guys, come out with a press release stating, “We were trying to find out how hard it was to gather this information, so that we can fight against the government acting to collect it.”
It’s really your only hope for justification.
Join the NRA, folks. They need your money to… honestly? I have no idea.
If you want to take your rights into your own hands, you can contact your representatives.
For more articles on politics I highly suggest ivoter.
For liberals: http://ivoter.net/
For conservatives: http://ivoter.com/