New USA requirements in addition to the form 4457

[Mr. 16 gauge]

I think you are being a tad unfair to the NRA here. The NRA is about protecting gun rights for American gun owners and that means all guns. The NRA is not just about black rifles or AP ammo, not at all, and it certainly does not shun protecting hunting rifle rights. Not sure how you got that idea, but it aint so. They are about protecting our rights as citizens to continue to own and shoot what we currently can own and shoot and not giving up anymore than we already have. The NRA has never been about hunters rights per se., its a pro gun group, not necessarily pro hunting though it obviously is that as well and does what it can with its limited resources, but again its about protecting our gun rights, regardless the type of gun, and its still the big dog in town when it comes to membership and funds for that purpose. SCI, DSC etc., are the ones more involved in hunting and travel etc. I don't work for the NRA but I am an Endowment Life Member. On a lighter note my old grandma used to liken getting a "high colonic" to anything that would be particularly unpleasant, right along with getting a root canal! She was a real hoot!

Unfair? No.....I don't think so. The NRA used to be a prohunting organization in that it would throw it's support against antihunting as well as antigun legislation. The focus of the organization now is black rifles; hunters and their firearms have taken a back seat. However, the continue to push for support from the hunting community when, IMHO, they are giving less and less back when it comes to lobbying/supporting hunting rights.......seems that they could care less where their base of support originated; they now are catering to the "AR15" crowd, and hunting issues only get lip service, if that.
While they are a "progun" group, and, as you say, "has never been about hunters rights per se," they certainly don't have any qualms about advertising in hunting magazines for membership or donations.
Anyway, that's my opinion..........................

 

[lcq]

Unfair? No.....I don't think so. The NRA used to be a prohunting organization in that it would throw it's support against antihunting as well as antigun legislation. The focus of the organization now is black rifles; hunters and their firearms have taken a back seat. However, the continue to push for support from the hunting community when, IMHO, they are giving less and less back when it comes to lobbying/supporting hunting rights.......seems that they could care less where their base of support originated; they now are catering to the "AR15" crowd, and hunting issues only get lip service, if that.
While they are a "progun" group, and, as you say, "has never been about hunters rights per se," they certainly don't have any qualms about advertising in hunting magazines for membership or donations.
Anyway, that's my opinion..........................

Sadly that is a necessary evil. As with CSSA (Canadian gun rights) there are only so many resources. Unless you are a bowhunter guns are where the focus must be. The anti-gunners like Clinton and Obama (US), Trudeau, Mulcair (Canada) seek to divide the gun community then conquer us one piece at a time.

Substitute handguns, black rifles and semi autos and you will see their plan

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

[sierraone]

Unfair? No.....I don't think so. The NRA used to be a prohunting organization in that it would throw it's support against antihunting as well as antigun legislation. The focus of the organization now is black rifles; hunters and their firearms have taken a back seat. However, the continue to push for support from the hunting community when, IMHO, they are giving less and less back when it comes to lobbying/supporting hunting rights.......seems that they could care less where their base of support originated; they now are catering to the "AR15" crowd, and hunting issues only get lip service, if that.
While they are a "progun" group, and, as you say, "has never been about hunters rights per se," they certainly don't have any qualms about advertising in hunting magazines for membership or donations.
Anyway, that's my opinion..........................

Mr. 16, You are correct. As a member, I subscribe to the American Hunter mag. I flip through once and throw it in the trash. Half of the articles are wanting money to defend against 30 rd mags, suppressors, or carrying a rifle into a Starbucks or a church. You can guess my opinion on this. After carrying "black rifles" a large part of my life, I have no interest in hunting with, shooting or even owning one. The NRA definitely focuses on them!!!

 

[Mr. 16 gauge]

Sadly that is a necessary evil. As with CSSA (Canadian gun rights) there are only so many resources. Unless you are a bowhunter guns are where the focus must be. The anti-gunners like Clinton and Obama (US), Trudeau, Mulcair (Canada) seek to divide the gun community then conquer us one piece at a time.

Substitute handguns, black rifles and semi autos and you will see their plan

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Well unfortunately, I, too, only have so many resources........and I will put them to where I feel they will best support my position as primarily a hunter. The NRA used to defend both the rights of hunters AND gun owners, but I no longer feel that they care about hunter's rights to lobby for them.
......if it's a question of resources, O.K.......I get it. But then you need to also understand that if you aren't going to fight for me (like you did in the past), then I'm not sending you any more money....either in the form of membership OR the countless amounts of phone calls I got every month. They can get it from all the 'black rifle" owners (esp. all the new ones that cleared the shelves after Sandy Hook), and I will send my hard earned cash to folks like delta waterfowl, etc., that will defend my right to hunt.
I am a gun owner AND a hunter........you need to stand up to both sides of the issue if you want my support.
Like I said, just MHO.........................

It used to be that antihunting and antigun were considered one in the same; the NRA has helped to change all that.

 

[sestoppelman]

Unfair? No.....I don't think so. The NRA used to be a prohunting organization in that it would throw it's support against antihunting as well as antigun legislation. The focus of the organization now is black rifles; hunters and their firearms have taken a back seat. However, the continue to push for support from the hunting community when, IMHO, they are giving less and less back when it comes to lobbying/supporting hunting rights.......seems that they could care less where their base of support originated; they now are catering to the "AR15" crowd, and hunting issues only get lip service, if that.
While they are a "progun" group, and, as you say, "has never been about hunters rights per se," they certainly don't have any qualms about advertising in hunting magazines for membership or donations.
Anyway, that's my opinion..........................

Well you are entitled to your opinion no matter how misguided. No point in trying to change your mind, its fixed in place, the wrong place. IMHO.

 

[Mr. 16 gauge]

Well you are entitled to your opinion no matter how misguided. No point in trying to change your mind, its fixed in place, the wrong place. IMHO.

Glad you're so open-minded.

 

[sestoppelman]

I know right? Look who's talking, LOL!

 

[lcq]

American Rifleman
American Hunter

Both NRA publications and just because you don't see the lobbying NRA does on your behalf as a hunter doesn't mean it is doing nothing

 

[sestoppelman]

Mr. 16, You are correct. As a member, I subscribe to the American Hunter mag. I flip through once and throw it in the trash. Half of the articles are wanting money to defend against 30 rd mags, suppressors, or carrying a rifle into a Starbucks or a church. You can guess my opinion on this. After carrying "black rifles" a large part of my life, I have no interest in hunting with, shooting or even owning one. The NRA definitely focuses on them!!!

I assume by this that you are a vet, if so, Thank you for your service. As to your opinions on evil black rifles, well, most of us don't have a problem with them, I own two and they are fun, very accurate rifles. I don't hunt with them but have no problem with others that do. After all it is the same as hunting with a Rem auto or any number of others. Just because its black (usually, I have a green one), doesn't make it something its not, its just a rifle, like any other. Sounds like you have fallen into the same trap many have regarding carry rights, etc., but that's a whole 'nother discussion. I disagree that the NRA focuses on AR15 rifles any more than any other, but you have to remember, these are the guns that the govt you served wants to take away from all of us, and that includes you my friend! We gotta stick together on this stuff or we stand to lose it all a bit at a time, and the NRA is like I said above, still the big dog with the most money and INFLUENCE in DC to keep the wolves at bay. United we stand a chance. We start caving into the 'black rifle' nonsense, and that's exactly what it is, NONSENSE, the next thing on the list will be something you like. Think about it.

 

[sierraone]

I assume by this that you are a vet, if so, Thank you for your service. As to your opinions on evil black rifles, well, most of us don't have a problem with them, I own two and they are fun, very accurate rifles. I don't hunt with them but have no problem with others that do. After all it is the same as hunting with a Rem auto or any number of others. Just because its black (usually, I have a green one), doesn't make it something its not, its just a rifle, like any other. Sounds like you have fallen into the same trap many have regarding carry rights, etc., but that's a whole 'nother discussion. I disagree that the NRA focuses on AR15 rifles any more than any other, but you have to remember, these are the guns that the govt you served wants to take away from all of us, and that includes you my friend! We gotta stick together on this stuff or we stand to lose it all a bit at a time, and the NRA is like I said above, still the big dog with the most money and INFLUENCE in DC to keep the wolves at bay. United we stand a chance. We start caving into the 'black rifle' nonsense, and that's exactly what it is, NONSENSE, the next thing on the list will be something you like. Think about it.

We partially agree, but not fully. I don't have a problem with people owning an AR15 or an equivalent. They are no more evil than a .375 H&H or .416 Rigby. It seems that everyone that even has a remote interest in firearms has one currently. My son has owned many different ones during the past 10 or 12 years or so. I believe he has two now. I don't own one as a matter of choice. I am focused on middle grade hunting rifles with above average wood and deep bluing. Such as M70 Supergrades and Ruger RSMs. Why middle grade? Because I can't afford the high end, although I am saving for one of those. This discussion started with me agreeing with 16 gauge about the lack of support in more recent years of the NRA and hunting. And I fully concur with that opinion. Likewise SCI is not nearly as supportive of hunting as DSC in my opinion. No I can't prove it, but it is what I believe. I am a member of the NRA, but that does not mean that I agree with everything that they do. The most recent political gun discussions that I am aware of are about background checks. In my view we need more stringent background checks. In my life I have bought probably 25 firearms. I have never bought one with the idea that I had to have it that day. Waiting a few days if necessary does not pose any stress upon me, nor does it violate my rights. I am aware of the second amendment and also aware of most of the other amendments. I also know what is required to amend the constitution. Most people in my view have no idea. And ah, the slippery slope argument. I first became aware of that argument in the 1970s and it is applied to many constitutional questions, not just firearms.
You are totally correct in that the NRA is the big dog with the most money. I want to see them spend more of it on hunters issues and not so much on a particular type rifle!

Sorry it took so long to respond. I am working a contract in Kosovo (to buy that high end rifle) and the power has been off in my house for the past 10 1/2 hours!

 

[sestoppelman]

Well again, the NRA is not focused on any particular rifle but for the fact that it is the one most often attacked and vilified. There is no question of that, and also again, the NRA's main focus has been and should be the protection and support of our 2nd Amendment rights as opposed to our hunting rights which by the way are not in the Constitution as are our gun ownership rights. Hunting is a privilege. As far as background checks go, sure they don't bother me much, I get about 20 a year these days, and since I am licensed to carry I don't have to wait the 5 days to get it, cash and carry. My own state of Washington does now have universal background checks in place, (so does Oregon BTW, we see how that went) but unfortunately and this will always be the case, its essentially unenforceable except for guns bought at retail level. The law here states that ALL gun transfers must go thru an FFL and background check, but how are they going to get between two guys doing a cash deal in private? You cant, so its nothing more than feel good BS to keep the ignorant masses happy and feel like they are "doing something" about crime when it fact it does nothing, except inconvenience the mostly law abiding shooters. Most of the mass shooters of late passed a background check. And really its all BS anyway because suppose Obama with a stroke of his pen, makes a new Fed law making all gun sales subject to a stringent background check. Do you imagine that the gun grabbers will go yippee and give up the ship? Hell no they wont! It will always be something that they must have and as soon as they get that, it move on to the next thing they must have and so on, and on it will go. So anyone who thinks just having universal checks will help or solve anything is delusional. The gun grabbers will never be happy until as Sen. DI FI once said, "Mr and Mrs America, just turn them all in". I don't think you want that, I sure don't and the NRA is really the only game in town when it comes to influence in DC. They are doing what they are supposed to be doing, looking out for all of our 2nd Amendment rights. Stay safe out there.