From: jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:06:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.004225.15048@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com>, paull@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Robert Paull) writes:
> 
> 
>  What about the national organizations: GOA, CCRKBA, SAF.
> They are an alternative to the NRA.
> 
> (Gun Owners of America)
> (Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and bear Arms)
> (Second Amendment Foundation)
> 
> 
> RP- Member of all of them, including NRA.

	All good organizations ... so why don't we hear from them ? 
	I've never heard a TV spot I could attribute to them, never
	a radio ad, never even a little square blurb in a large-
	distribution newspaper. Silent organizations are useless.
	They must be even *louder* than the NRA, make themselves
	distinct from the NRA and hammer their point of view home
	to the mass audience. 

	While there is some value to organizations that work behind
	the scenes, enlightening politicians and such, the NRA is
	serving as the focus of the anti-gunners ire and its poor
	image hurts the cause. Other prominent images are necessary
	so that the general public can see that it isn't ONLY the NRA
	that supports the RKBA, but many people - for many different
	reasons.

	The NRA has commonly used hunting as the main reason to own
	firearms. The result has been the ban on 'non-sporting' 
	weapons ("assault" rifles) from many foreign suppliers and
	soon probably on domestic suppliers as well. Even worse,
	there is not a single excuse, reasonable or otherwise, to
	support sport hunting that will stand-up to even 10 seconds
	of 'Bambi'. The public sees hunting season as the government
	encouraging violent, sick loonies to do carnage to cute
	furry animals. Over-population ... who shot the predator
	species ? Hunters ! Let the game wardens thin the herds as
	required, but don't sanction Bambi-cide ! (they may say)

	So, we see a unique turn of events ... the NRA says that
	hunting is the purpose of guns (no mention of defending
	ones life - too nasty a subject). So, the fed says "Fine,
	then you won't mind if we ban all weapons unlikely to be
	used by hunters.". Next thing, the anti-hunting groups are
	doing a great job making hunting into a great moral evil
	that only bloodthirsty savages would indulge in. So, soon
	enough, sport-hunting will be gone. Next, the fed will
	say "Well, since ther is no more hunting, then you really
	won't be needing those hunting weapons anymore will you?".
	In this manner we are trapped by the NRAs rhetoric. The
	worst thing is that the NRAs line is probably the only one
	they could get away with saying without being further
	demonized. Other groups - lots of them - vocal - will be
	necessary to tackle the other issues revolving around RKBA.

	Personally, I never hunt anything larger than your average
	common rodent - squirrels, jack-rabbits etc.. I have a
	gut feeling that rejects sport hunting of larger species.
	Survival hunting is OK by me, however. So, even myself who
	strongly supports the RKBA is unmoved and unmotivated by
	the typical NRA ad. Breech the issue of self-defense or
	keeping would-be totalitarians at bay and I get very
	interested. The situations in LA and Homestead should have
	figured promenently in national pro-RKBA spots ... but the
	NRA just can't do it. Someone else has to. (and for gods 
	sake, don't place pro-gun ads in GUN MAGAZINES ! Talk about
	preaching to the converted ...)

-- JM 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns