From: stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (Jack Stecher)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment Foundation and CCRKBA problem
Organization: Department of Economics, Univ of Minn
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:34:12 GMT

In article <9301061652.AA12393@pravda.webo.dg.com> googs@pravda.webo.dg.com (Joe Gugliemino) writes:
>
>
>This is a letter I'm mailing today.  It's posted here as an FYI.  
>
>
>Alan M. Gottlieb, President
>
>Second Ammendment Foundation
>James Madison Building
>12500 N.E. Tenth Place
>Bellevue, WA 98005
>
>Dear Alan,
>
>In October I received mail from your organization thanking me for a
>phone pledge I did not make.  When I called to question this mail I was
>promised a resolution including a follow-up call and a copy of your
>financial statement.  I received a call saying a "problem solicitor
>trainee" had been fired, but in the two months since I have not received
>a financial statement from you.  Instead, I have received 2 mailings
>requesting payment of "voluntary dues" from each of your two
>organizations (4 mailings total).


I received a call from the Second Amendment Foundation (yes, the one
I donated to last year spells `Amendment' properly, and shares an
address with the one you support) in late November.  The caller asked
if I would contribute $40, which corresponded to the $15 I gave last
year plus an increase of $25 they were asking everyone to make (so I
was told).

I replied to the caller that I did not intend to make any contributions
to any organization until after year end, and would not commit to any
level.  This ought to have ended the matter.  But within a few weeks,
I received a bill, asking me to remit my $40 pledge.  I ignored this,
and got a second notice not too long thereafter.

I called the SAF and complained; the person with whom I was eventually
connected asked me for the alpha-numeric sequence on my mailing.  It
included the letters `lar', which prompted the fellow on the phone to
say "I'll talk to Larry about this."  Anyway, I explained to this chap
that I think the SAF's work, from what I can see, is important, but I
resent this sort of fundraising activity.  He assured me that this isn't
the way things are supposed to work, so I suggested that he might check
up on the telemarketing firm they'd hired.  At this, he promptly informed
me that they do all there fundraising in-house, as this saves them on
expenses.  He sounded sincere enough, so I was ready to believe that this
was an isolated incident; besides, I had given him a convenient excuse,
and he passed it up.  Thus, I felt, until today, that everything had
been done in good faith.

I did, by the way, receive a statement after the new year, asking me
for my $15 annual contribution plus $25 to help cover expenses; I took
this to be a normal solicitation, and considered the earlier matter resolved.

Now, I'm not sure.  It's quite possible that everything the SAF has
done has been in good faith, and that the "Larry" fellow who'd called
me is the same fellow who called you, and that the SAF is a poorly
organized bunch.  But I'm skeptical.

Could you, and anyone else out there on tpg with a similar story, let
us know what happens as a result of your letter?  It will help me decide
whether my money should go to these clowns if I can determine whether they're
incompetent boobs (in which case, oddly enough, they deserve my money)
or if they're charlatans.  Come to think of it, I've taken it on faith
up till now that they actually spend their money on court cases, etc.;
perhaps they spend most of it on fundraising and on salaries.  If so, I'll
give some other fraud a chance to part my money from me.

Jack Stecher
stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
--
Governments make of philosophy a means of serving their state interests,
and scholars make a trade of it.
                                        --Schopenhaur
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns