A longtime pro-gun activist said Monday he is fed up with the state Senate's Republican majority and is willing to help Democrats win the few seats needed to wrest control of the chamber from the GOP.Naturally, the Republican establishment and the NRA are doing what they can to put the guy down, but think about it: the GOP leaders in New York, Pataki, Bloomberg Giuliani, Pirro...all are "gun control" proponents.
"You are no longer the lesser of two evils," wrote Gerald Preiser in an e-mail to state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and other Senate Republicans. Preiser gave a copy of the e-mail to The Associated Press.
How will that ever change if gun owners keep rewarding them?
Are we afraid the dems will pass a law taking our guns away?
They can only take them away if we let them.
Will you let them?
Maybe it will take letting them lose an election cycle or two for the Repubs to get the message gun owners are serious.
CORRECTION: Jacob takes exception to my use of the term "NRA" as attribution for quotes reported in the story that were made by the president of the NRA state affiliate (see comment thread to this post). Technically, he is correct and it was inaccurate of me to use that general term.
Tags: gun control, New York, Republican, NRA
9 comments:
This has been a problem with the "elite" Republican and/or Conservative thinkers for ages.
These guys don't do a thing for gun owners, even tacitly (or sometimes boldly) stand against our 2nd amendment rights. When it comes time to vote, they know they can count on the gun-rights crowd, because a passive anti-gunner is the lesser of two evils when contrasted to an active anti-gunner. But when it comes down to it, these elite "conservatives" detest the 2nd amendment, they think of all gun owners as red-neck thugs who are loopy and dangerous.
Why should we continue to support such clowns? We as gun owners are not doing ourselves any favors by supporting the lesser of two evils. We need to support those who cherish, promote, and protect our freedoms.
You don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about. Reflexively dumping on the NRA is a poor excuse for not doing your homework.
Gerald Preiser isn’t a “longtime pro-gun activist” as Newsday reports. The Federation of New York State Rifle and Pistol Clubs imploded back in 1994. Despite its name, it was never a statewide organization. It was confined to New York City only. Since the Federation’s collapse, Preiser likes to show up in election years peddling his magic "list" of gun owners to anyone stupid enough to pay him. Feel free to verify this by looking through the archives of state newspapers. Preiser doesn’t represent anyone other than himself. Do you really think we would have problems in New York if someone could deliver a 900K voting block?
Of course we should look askance at the NRA. Some of the most restrictive and ill advised gun laws passed were written by them and lobbied for by them in federal and state and local venues.
That's why I left them. I can surrender my rights without paying professional surrenderers to do it for me.
I used to get a lot of mail from the NRA wanting me to re-enlist, I finally sent in a card with the notation that I would rejoin when they when they fired LaPierre. Guess what? Haven't heard from them since.
I would suggest Jacob do some research on NRA sponsored laws that infringe the 2nd.
I have no argument with his portrayal of the subject of the article as I know nothing about him. I do know he couldn't be more dishonest or harmful to liberty than the NRA. I don't care if they are the 600 pound gorilla, if they aren't on my side. And they aren't.
The Newsday article has absolutely nothing to do with the NRA. Did you even bother to read it? Codera knows nothing about Gerald Presier or the defunct Federation of New York State Rifle and Pistol Clubs. But what the heck, any excuse to dump on the NRA.
Jacob said...
"The Newsday article has absolutely nothing to do with the NRA. Did you even bother to read it?"
Uh, yeah, Jacob, I did. It had plenty to do with the NRA. It quoted their state affiliate representative:
***
Tom King, president of the National Rifle Association-affiliated New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, said Preiser had no connection to the association and was wrong to attack the Senate GOP.
"To call the New York state Senate (Republicans) anti-gun is ludicrous," King said. "They are the only ones who have been preserving the 2nd Amendment in New York state."
King also said Preiser has no following and no worthwhile mailing list.
"He's doing this because he hasn't had any press in five or six years," King said.
***
Now, as for "any excuse to dump on the NRA", Jacob, I AM THE NRA. Life Member. Former Members Council officer. Former multi-year Golden Eagle. I've put in untold hours volunteering for them--for many years-- before I became disillusioned with current management and there are many reasons for that--and each time I have cited differences, I have documented them.
Here's a case in point: EVP LaPierre says the only ones armed in schools should be LEOs. Is that your position, Jacob?
How about Project Exile: Care to find me where in the Constitution the fedgov has that delegated authority?
What about "enforce existing gun laws"? Is it your position this is consistent with "shall not be infringed"?
Jacob--you're right about one thing--I don't know Preiser, but that's hardly the point of my conclusion: that to continue electing Republicans out of fear--even though they're not worthy--will NOT motivate the GOP to change.
Like former GOP Chair Lee Atwater said: Who else they gonna vote for?
I cited the most visible popular and electable NY GOP "leaders"--all of them are ardent gun control backers.
I won't back away from recommending that letting such as those lose an election cycle or two may be just what's needed to send the party a message that the Repubs can't take gun owners for granted.
And I also maintain that no matter WHO is in power, and no matter what laws are passed, a free citizen will not be disarmed unless he surrenders.
Oh, please. That article has nothing to do with NRA and you know it. It simply says NYSRPA is the state affiliate of NRA. That does not give Tom King the authority to speak for NRA nor would any reasonable person think that he is. It’s like a newspaper quoting you and saying you’re an NRA Life Member. You’re trying to twist this article into something it isn’t and that’s an unwarranted cheap shot at NRA. Is Wayne LaPierre or Project Exile mentioned in the article? Nope. Then why are you bringing them up now?
You not knowing Preiser is exactly the point. I’ll wager you don’t know who Joe Bruno is either nor do you have the slightest inkling about politics in New York. Have you ever in any way been involved in the legislative process in New York? Have you ever worked to elect candidates anywhere in New York? If the answer is no, then you really don’t know if what Tom King is quoted as saying has any truth or not nor can you make any statements one way or another on the New York Republican party.
Jacob, does the NRA back the GOP candidates of which Preiser speaks? Oh, they do, well then that legitmizes their inclusion in the response. Have you ever rescinded your NRA membership? NO.Then you have no right to speak of justification to those of us who have, do you?
That last sentence of mine was ridiculous, but no more so than your statement about our not being qualified to hold a position on the topic at hand. Plus, your position seems to be that we cannot mention anything that bolsters our opinion unless we have permission granted only if specifically addressed in the article. Using your strategem in this debate King shouldn't have been able to say anything at all about Preiser, should he? I mean, since Preiser didn't say anything about his own history or person. That means you should not be able to talk about anybody jumping on the NRA because nobody prior to you used the words "jumping and NRA" in juxtaposition.
Yours is an extremely dishonest form of debate. I am not prepared to say you are dishonest, you may just not know better. Anybody here would be happy to discuss the NRA sponsored laws and their appropriateness with a view to the second amendment with you, if you will. However, you haven't done that. You have merely said those with opinions different than yours aren't qualified to have an opinion. Your ideas won't garner any respect if you can't defend them. So far, you haven't. You just attacked those that have given valid reasons for their disenchantment with the NRA and its political positions.
That completely misses the point, doesn't it? The point being, should any political party be able to count on our votes if they repeatedly fail to serve us and protect our constitutional rights?
Your failure to do that or to even recognize the issue under discussion suggests to me (speaking only for myself) that you may be ruled more by emotion and a need to belong more than you are by logic.
Please discuss the topic, almost all of us are willing to examine the premise to see if there is a greater truth. A guaranteed loser is the premise that we are not qualified to hold a position. It is also insulting.
David C., See my question to Jacob about which candidates the NRA support in NY state; then look here again, "To call the New York state Senate (Republicans) anti-gun is ludicrous," King said. "They are the only ones who have been preserving the 2nd Amendment in New York state."
To correct your NRA attribution to "NRA affiliated state organization" is laudable, but do any of us believe Mr. King's stance is in opposition to the national organization?
It seems to me to be a distinction without a difference. For instance, Charley McCarthy never actually spoke any words Edgar Bergen didn't put in his mouth. Or would it be more appropriate to have cited Mortimer Snerd? Just asking.
straightarrow--understood, but didn't want Jacob to think I was going to be small with him over a technicality.
He's also right that I don't know much about Joe Bruno--after the guy endorsed New Yorkers Against Gun Violence supporter Jeanine Pirro for NY AG, I kinda lost interest, because it seemed like same old political whoring and principles be damned we have become so accustomed to...or perhaps it's just me not being "pragmatic"...
Post a Comment