I take back everything I ever said.
[Via Dan Gifford]
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Why is NRA Ignoring Santa Barbara Gun Owners?
I've been compiling "testimonials" from Santa Barbara area gun owners concerning their attempts to contact NRA about their A rating and endorsement of anti-gun Sheriff Bill Brown. Note that in some cases, I do not have permission to use full names, but I would be able to produce evidence via emails should I ever be required to do so--plus many of them were copied to NRA reps, and phone records of calls exist.
This will be a long post, but I think you'll get the gist pretty quickly. Also note that I have not edited the original emails for spelling or grammar.
From Larry Rankin:
From BL:
From Gerhard Paul:
From JS:
From Jim Berkley:
From RD:
From TB:
From KD:
From Steve:
More from Steve:
From PS:
From WT:
It's evident the powers that be are hoping this will go away. Too bad.
It can't--not until the political "experts" come clean with why they misled their members on Brown's stance on their right to keep and bear arms, and come up with some way of ensuring they deserve credibility on future ratings and endorsements.
One thing is for sure--ignoring all these requests is no way to endear grassroots supporters to an organization that purports to represent their interests.
There will be a "Friends of NRA" dinner on June 2. Mr. Rankin is contacting Santa Barbara gun owners to boycott the event and sponsors not to donate to it. It's a shame it's come down to this, but it's also understandable. I'll keep an eye on this and report any developments that merit attention.
One final word: I also tried contacting NRA before my first post on this matter, and got the same runaround and lack of response as the people above. I repeat the offer I made last October:
UPDATE:
Well, we got somebody's attention (click to enlarge)...
Come on out fellas. Talk to us.
This will be a long post, but I think you'll get the gist pretty quickly. Also note that I have not edited the original emails for spelling or grammar.
From Larry Rankin:
Just so you know Ed Worley has been contacted about this issue many times, by many people in and out of Santa Barbara. Ed Has not responded to one person! Many have called his office three times. Also your Fairfax office has been contacted by many of the same people, because Ed has not returned there calls. NRA's response...call Ed. I have a Friend who call Ed a least three time and ended up calling Fairfax, he would not take, "call Sacramento", as an answer. After going through four or five people, he found someone that listened and even said they will contact me. He gave them all of my information. I was wise enough not to hold my breath! That was well over three weeks ago.
To be very honest, I do believe the NRA would like this to go a way by not addressing the issue! The only way this will go away at this point...is NOT with just an apology and we will not support Sheriff Bill Brown with an "A" as we did to help him get into office! They were warned by me and by David Codrea about this before he was elected!
Now NRA head quarters needs to call me and I can set up a game plan with them. This needs to be on a conference call, with the group, "Santa Barbara CCW United". Any thing less will not be accessible!
From BL:
R: Ed Worley _ I called and left a message - result: NADA! I called Virginia, was told to call Sacramento, I replied that was useless and the woman in Vir said, "We don't know about that," or words to that effect. What a load of crap.
From Gerhard Paul:
David, i was a paid voting member of the NRA but decided not to renew my membership because of the very same problems we are having now regarding Ed Worley! This is not new from the NRA in regards to giving "A" rating that should be "F".
You can use my name. Gerhard Paul former paid voting member of NRA
From JS:
My confidence in the ability of the NRA to defend the Second Amendment has been sagging for years , while my support of Gun Owners of America has increased . My vote for Sheriff Brown was based strictly upon the NRA recommendation and went against the advice of more informed local citizens!
One can only wonder how the NRA ever came up with its recommendation !! ??
From Jim Berkley:
Larry Rankin forwarded me your request for experiences calling the NRA to report Brown’s “anti” policies.
I was a holder of a CCW permit for 6 years prior to Brown’s election. I received an orange card from the NRA before the election endorsing Brown.
Although nothing changed re my “need” for a permit, Brown did not renew my CCW permit when I came up for renewal in Feb. I met with Brown and he stated allegiance to the NRA and the 2nd amendment, but that he didn’t want people carrying guns. Not sure how you reconcile those two ideas but he didn’t seem to have any trouble with it.
I called the NRA in Fairfax and told them what the situation was. I was told to call the Sacramento office which I did. A receptionist answered the phone and I told her that we had a new Sheriff, Mr Brown, and that he had been endorsed by the NRA and duly elected. The purpose of my call was to notify them that something had gone terribly wrong because he was actively denying existing permit holders and when I got together with him he made it clear that he did not want people carrying guns.
She said that the lobbyist, Ed Worley, would be very interested to hear this and took my number and said he would call back.
Two weeks passed without a return call, so I called the Sacrament office again. I left a message on Worley’s voice mail and also one on Steve Hellsley’s e-mail. Both messages were very nice and basically said you guys need to know what this man is up to so it doesn’t happen again.
It has been over a month since I left those messages.
Hope this helps – feel free to email me or call if you have any questions or need further info.
From RD:
I don’t know why the NRA does not support its members.
They do not return calls and the only people you can find at the NRA is those who will take your money!
From TB:
I wish to add my voice of protest to the NRA's policy of giving high pro-gun ratings to political candidates that have not proved themselves worth of our support.
I can understand how this could happen if a candidate falseifies his response to the NRA questionnaire. But there is no excuse for the NRA's maintaining their support and not informing the voters that the candidate misstated his positions and changing their rating to a a far lower grade.
Sincerely
TB
NRA member
From KD:
David - I recently dissolved my association with both the NRA and FNRA committee. My reason for doing so was the NRA's lack of response to my repeated requests for a return call to discuss Sheriff Brown's position on concealed carry in Santa Barbara County. I can no longer support an organization which, in the light of clear evidence, will not step up and recognize its mistake in endorsing Sheriff Brown. I will neither renew my NRA membership, nor will I assit in FNRA fund raising, until the NRA publicly decries Sheriff Brown's tactics and reassigns an "F" rating, as is
appropriate.
From Steve:
i called worleys office a few minutes ago. the lady i spoke to was very nice, but said she didn't know why he isn't returning calls. she gave me randy kozuch's number. he is director of state and local affairs. worley's boss. the first lady said to go up the chain of command. randy is supposed to call me back.
More from Steve:
I called Ed Worley Tuesday morning. I asked his secretary after stating my business in regards to the above subject, why hasn't or doesn't he return the calls people have asked him for? She said she didn't know why, but I could call HIS boss. Randy Kozuch is the Director of State and Local Affairs, and is a name I had not seen or heard of in my correspondence with Larry . Kozuch's "secretary" said he was out to lunch (approx 1100hrs-I didn't believe her) and would return my call when he came back. I left my number, and have not heard from him.
From PS:
I called the office of the NRA Manager of Governmental Affairs Executive Director Ed Worley 5-15-07 at 9:45 am PST.
I spoke with Intern Dan Reed who is a good 2nd Amendment proponent, and is law student at McGeorge Law School.
I stated that many people whom I know had called his office in the last 2 months and were upset that the NRA had given an A rating to then candidate Bill Brown for Sheriff of Santa Barbara County, CA. He said "This is about Mr. Rankin, right?". I said that many NRA members will not renew, nor will they contribute another penny to the NRA, including life members. I said that everyone whom I know who is informed about the rating, and once Sheriff not renewing Carry Concealed Weapon permits to long time holders, and not providing a questionnaire to then incumbent Sheriff Jim Anderson, is upset and will stay upset about the NRA misleading them. And that those persons will communicate loudly and clearly to all their friends, family and co workers and tell them to re-direct the funds they had given the NRA for years, to GOA, 2nd Amendment Foundation, JPFO and other actually pro-gun organizations with backbone and accountability.
Dan said that he'd been there 5 months 3 days a week and that all he could do was make notes in the call log and forward the message to Ed Worley. I said that many people of my acquaintance had called Ed already, multiple times, and that NO ONE had been called back by Ed Worley. Dan said that he had the call log, and "only a couple" of people had called, which I know personally to be untrue. The call log may not have been entered to reflect the calls, but people have told me they've called. I told Dan that people had also called Fairfax to complain, and been promised return calls, and again no one had ever been called back, in spite of repeated calls (as many as 4 from the same person within a 2 week period). Dan told me that it concerned him to hear people disgruntled and not supporting the NRA. He said again that all he could do was forward the subject and message of the call to Ed Worley. I told him to leave the NRA and get a position at an organization that had integrity.
Dan said I could also call Fairfax, which I did, immediately. I spoke with a mature sounding woman who didn't provide her name. I relayed the same story and message. She said that candidates must request a questionnaire, and that I should call the lobbyist (Ed Worley) in charge of the my area. I said that I just had, and that Ed Worley hasn't returned any of many calls from many people, and in fact has been completely uncooperative, unresponsive, irresponsible and people feel totally insulted. I then stated that the same people had called her office (the office of Chris Cox) and been promised return calls, and that calls would be made to Larry Rankin, and those people provided his phone number, and called back and been re-promised and again, no calls returned to them or calls to Larry Rankin.
She said that she'd pass on the message to Chris Cox.
From WT:
I had already decided not to donate this year as well as not contribute dues to the Golden Eagles. No one at the NRA acknowledged my letters (to three different officers) that were sent in April.
Too bad the principals stated by the NRA are not followed. For any years they have been at the forefront defending the rights of gun owners, but have apparently become an unwieldy bureaucracy.
It's evident the powers that be are hoping this will go away. Too bad.
It can't--not until the political "experts" come clean with why they misled their members on Brown's stance on their right to keep and bear arms, and come up with some way of ensuring they deserve credibility on future ratings and endorsements.
One thing is for sure--ignoring all these requests is no way to endear grassroots supporters to an organization that purports to represent their interests.
There will be a "Friends of NRA" dinner on June 2. Mr. Rankin is contacting Santa Barbara gun owners to boycott the event and sponsors not to donate to it. It's a shame it's come down to this, but it's also understandable. I'll keep an eye on this and report any developments that merit attention.
One final word: I also tried contacting NRA before my first post on this matter, and got the same runaround and lack of response as the people above. I repeat the offer I made last October:
If anyone authorized to speak for NRA wishes to post a response, I will be happy to post it in its entirety.
UPDATE:
Well, we got somebody's attention (click to enlarge)...
Come on out fellas. Talk to us.
I'm No Dick Cheney Fan...
...but what a shamefully exploitive way for an obvious democrat to make a cheap political point. And the left accuses us of having "no sense of decency."
I call these types "gun owners with big buts," and they certainly seem to be coming out of the woodwork lately.
I call these types "gun owners with big buts," and they certainly seem to be coming out of the woodwork lately.
Peace Through the Police State
“Anyone brandishing a firearm and is not a member of the armed forces or of the police will be arrested,” Duterte said today in a statement. “And if that someone is a bodyguard of a politician, the politician will be arrested as well,” he said. “This is how we will do it, we just have to be really firm in applying the law and protecting the people.”See, it helps that Duterte is mayor--that way, his bodyguards--the armed forces and the police--are exempted.
Hopefully There's a Middle Ground
Should everyone be armed, or should handguns be banned altogether? Hopefully, there is a middle ground that would be a step in the right direction.There's that lie again.
No Sense of Decency
If you want to know why the gun debate is so bitter, look inside the community room of the Mason District government center. There you could find plenty of guns, but no sense of decency to bind a community.
Mary Cocco proves she's self-righteous and ignorant.
Rudy #1 With Gun Owners?
Rudy Giuliani, a supporter of gun control, still comes out on top with gun owners, a new survey has found.
The above ought to be all a gun owner concerned about his rights needs to see.
The Daily News and the Gallup organization are hardly reliable and unbiased source for gun rights-related information.
Poll results and methodology are here. Of the "2,013 adults, aged 18 and older" surveyed, the sample contained "670 gun owners." Left unsaid is whether these were registered voters, if so, whether they were high propensity voters, whether the survey participants were a representative cross section, what questions were asked, and if the gun owners were highly motivated, indicative of a level of commitment. Also, gun ownership crosses party lines, and the report admits "[i]n the Democratic primaries, gun owners seem just as inclined as non-owners to support Clinton."
I hardly hold myself out to be a polling expert, but this appears to be a case "of sound and fury signifying nothing." If anyone with credentials would like to weigh in and either confirm or challenge my assumptions, or if you just want to say your piece about this, well, that's why there's a "Comments" section below.
[More on Rudy from WarOnGuns]
This Day in History: May 24
I find that the American Affairs, on this Side of the Atlantick, are in a State of disorder, very much resembling that, which is so much to be regretted on the other. Our Resources are very inadequate to the demands upon Us, which are perhaps increased unnecessarily increased, by several irregularities of Proceeding. We have, in some places, two or three Persons, who claim the Character of American Agents; Agents for commercial Affairs; and continental Agents, for they are called by all these different Appellations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)