NMLRA Membership

[ApprenticeBuilder]

Unfortunately in the micocosm of our own petty personal selfish self interests we oft times will sit idly by complaining about a "small particular" instead of looking out for the greater good.
As lead IS being baned and calibers ARE being restricted; As "lead posining" IS being regulated and guns in general ARE under attack some still find it convenient to stay segregated, watching an era pass (most likely for ever) complaining the whole way :shake:

Mountian Men are all but extinct for a reason and its NOT because the mountians are gone but due to an ignorant arrogance that prevents one from joining in for a greater cause....the enemy knows this....the enemy has won.

For the record I am a member os SEVERAL firearm, hunting, outdoor, fishing, "organizations". Most coast what $25.00 a year or so? I dont attend all the meeting or even most, I dont enjoy all the publications either and in fact just throw some away; BUT when THAT particular orgaization goes to lobby and they put down thier members list I am one of many providing some "weight" that CAN make a differance to some door-knob legistlater.
Its the EXACT same tactic that the hippies use to strip US of our heritage and rights.....It works.

Generally I do not agree with Wattsy on much of anything but here he is right on the money.

:hatsoff:

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

Why do some people think that joining the NMLRA has any effect on the law? :shake:

Uh, the NMLRA is not a lobby organization, so joining this "club" won't effect firearm laws or influence politics, anymore than joining a small local club or this forum.

Uh why is it that "some" people don't understand that bringing new people into the shooting sports is in fact a way to influence politics... :wink:

 

Why do some people think that joining the NMLRA has any effect on the law? :shake:

Uh, the NMLRA is not a lobby organization, so joining this "club" won't effect firearm laws or influence politics, anymore than joining a small local club or this forum.

Uh why is it that "some" people don't understand that bringing new people into the shooting sports is in fact a way to influence politics... :wink:

I think that many people understand they they can bring people "into the sport" without joining a club. I don't understand why some people think that the NMLRA is a lobby group, influencing the government? They are a CLUB, not a political entity.

I also don't know why people think they have to evangelize their hobby. I guess it makes them feel better to know that others enjoy it too?

Many of us have hobbies that we enjoy, without trying to "bring others into the sport". If you're worried about your "gun rights" get involved politically where you will make a difference, but don't try to convince me that joining a club is the same thing.

Sending money to the NRA is a different story. The NRA is a recognized lobby.

 

[paulvallandigham]

The NMLRA has joined forces with the NRA so that the NRA will promote the NMLRA's legislative interests, also. So, for those who have not been members of the NMLRA for years, and therefore didn't know this, the NMLRA actually does have a LOBBY working for us- in the form of the the NRA-ILA. Your contributions to the NRA-ILA help both organizations.

Thank you for those contributions.

The reason for belonging to the NMLRA is not to have a separate lobbyist in Washington, or all the state capitols, but to further the promotion of this special shooting sport. That is reason enough for most of us to who do belong. For years, all I got was the monthly magazine, and its quality was lacking in the early years, IMHO. Recently, with a new editor who is a BP shooter and hunter, I Believe the magazine has improved. I still would like to see Al Raychard actually hunt with a traditional Side lock rifle using BP, and open sights, but Rome was not built in a day, either! The Bevel brother's column is worth the membership price alone. But there are other articles that expose members to the history of the firearms, and to wilderness living, as well as active reporting on the shooting and other events taking place at Friendship. It is a club newsletter. It does report on regional rendezvous, provided the information is sent in by participants/organizers. What the editor does not receive, he can't publish. There was an excellent report on Larry Pletcher's time lapse photography testing of flintlock ignition that took place in 2007 at the Spring Shoot, for instance.

It would be nice if the NMLRA expanded its magazine and insisted on reports from all its Charter clubs, so that they would be promoted. The problem is that many clubs have no members interested in writing anything! You can't even get State Associations to send in their match results and photos of the winners, and ranges, much less guns and gear! On the Primitive side of the grounds at Friendship, again, no one wants to write up anything about the camps, the ongoing construction of buildings and palisade, much less the shooting events. And don't expect to hear much of anything about the various renduzvous and annual camp outs and shoots around the country- not because MB won't publish it, but because no one will send the information to the editor. People expect a shoe-string national organization to finance the travel of staff and officers all over the country to attend matches and report back through MB. There is just not that kind of money to do those things.

Join or don't join. That is the American ideal. I really don't want people joining because someone asks them to do so. If you want to join, JOIN. But when you join, commit yourself to meet the current board and officers and staff, and then find a way to help make the NMLRA a better organization when you leave than it was when you joined. If you don't like the articles in MB, write a better one and send it to Eric Bye. He will seek God's blessing for you and thank you a thousand times. :thumbsup: :hatsoff:

 

Paul,

Excellent post. :thumbsup:

 

[Bountyhunter]

I liked the thought that was used in the Quigley movie, when Selleck said "I said I didnt have much use for pistols, I didnt say I did not know how to use them", as he shot ol' what's his name.

I worked in public office many years, I hate politics, but I do know how to use it.

So, let me pose this question. How many members does the NMLRA have? What is their leaning?

This forum alone has 13,000 members. If we all joined, we could tip any vote, install new officers and shape policy. It is all a numbers game. I have seen many organizations change overnight when new blood rushed in. Out with the old, in with the new. Did I mention it is all a numbers game?

I dropped out years ago, but I may sign back up. Every one of us that joins up, AND shows up at a voting meeting, shapes the policy.

I am sitting here within 80 miles of the most premier shooting range in the US. The NRA Whittington Center. It has both modern and primitive ranges. There is no reason what so ever that the annuals could not cycle between Friendship and Whittington. It doesnt because you allow it to be that way.

 

[FishDFly]

I spent sometime recently with a former BOD member of the NMLRA and a past president of the TMLRA.

He shared some insights into what is happening on the national, state and local club level. After a bit he said, if someone has the miracle cure to increase the level of interest in traditional muzzle loading he and others would really like to know.

In all honesty, as the decrease continues in traditional muzzle loading, what is the NMLRA and the manufactures of muzzle loading guns and equipment suppossed to do?

Stay with traditional purchasers or enter the other market to survive? If it was your organization and your company, what would you do?

Years ago, there was a movie about fly fishing with Robert Redford, fly fishing became the thing to do. I was recently in a small town in a small fly shop, the owner said a new movie is due out, he hopes it will re-kinder the fly fishing desire.

As far am I am concerned the NMLRA is the best thing for the survival of M/L. Who else is prepared to do something better?

All offers are accepted to the above.

Thank you Mr. Paul.

RDE

 

[Bountyhunter]

I went over to the NMLRA site and browsed around. There appears to be 11 paid employees. Only one is a man. Perhaps we are looking at a good ol girls club here.

Only way to change it is to participate. Otherwise they run it to suit themselves.

 

[FishDFly]

Bounty Hunter,

Yes, this forum has/had 13,000 registered members.

How many are active participants?

In most clubs and organizations if you can get 20% participation, you have really accomplished something.

You hit the nail on the head, "if", I did something. My father had a phrase, "IF" a frog had wings he would not bump his rearend when he hopped". The frog does not have wings and each time he hopps his rearend hits the ground.

Join the NMLRA and make a difference. I have called and personally visited with the President of the NMLRA. He does listen, call him!!

Actually this whole discussion reminds me of politics, there are whiners and those who are not
are not registered to vote or do not vote.

Thanks Mr. Claude for what you do and tolerate.

RDE

 

[paulvallandigham]

Richard: You are of course correct. MLers as a recreational interest got a huge boost with all the TV shows, and movies during the past 50 years, as well as all the Bi-centennial and centennial celegrations of historic American Battlefields. We didn't get much of a bump with the Bi-centennial celebration of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, but there was some interest renewed in the Harper's Ferry guns. The next Bi-centennial will be bigger, because its celebrates the War of 1812, ending in the Battle of New Orleans. I suspect there will be some small increase in interest in MLers in 2012, but not much in the meanwhile. There are other battles, with Indians, etc. but most of these will receive local attention, not national attention. That is what the NMLRA could do to help the interest and the industry sales" Give these smaller centennial and bi-centennial dates and battles more national coverage. Some western movies, and movies about the Mountain man era would also help rekindle interest in older shooters, and bring new interest from younger people.

My local club used to gain new members every year from the audiences that attended our Demonstrations around the area. The Anti-gunners took charge of those towns, or groups that hosted these events, and at first refused to pay us to participate, claiming hard times, and then refusing to allow us to participate, even for free. During the Clinton Years, with all the effort nationally to run firearms training out of schools, we were slowly pushed out of all our prior venues. We have not gotten it back. There still are laws on the books prohibiting guns in schools without a school authorities written permission, so that even conducting a Hunter Safety Class, or any other firearm training class in a school runs into objections by the Superintendants, and Principals, and some School attorneys, who know nothing about firearms, or safety training themselves, advise the schools to not expose themselves to potential civil liability arising out of any " accident " that might occur during the training, even when they are assured that no loaded firearms will be used during the training. So, we need to get those laws repealed, too. And, our legislatures can offer broader immunities to local units of government from liability for any injuries arising out of celebration activities, so they too don't have to worry about being sued if someone is hurt.

In the 15-20 years my club performed live shooting demonstrations, we only had two reported injuries, one when a ball hit a knot in a Railroad tie, and bounced back, striking a spectator along side her ankle, leaving a small cut, that was easily closed with a bandaid. We responded by prohibiting the use of handguns at our shoots( too little power) and put a 4 x 8" sheet of plywood in front of the RR tie backstops to act as a " splash " guard in case balls bounced back. The second incident was when some non-participants from our club showed up and wanted to stage a " raid " on our camp as we were breaking down camp. No one wanted to participate, as most guns had been cleaned, and put away in the cars and trucks already. But, a couple of guys, who had no idea how re-enactment battles were fought, loaded up some guns, including one teenager with a BP revolver. He was hiding in a tent, when the attackers burst in, He was so caught by surprised, that he just threw the revolver up at the attacker, and pulled the trigger. some powder debris hit the attacker in the eye. He fired at the same time as the kid, but missed the kid who was crouched down.

It should not have happened, neither the " battle" or the entry into the tent, or the shooting by either man in the tent. But it happened, and our club paid the man's ambulance bill, and he paid the doctor's bill. The city that sponsored the event was never involved( and should not have been. The attacker was part of a group that had not been invited to participate in the celebration, by the city, or by my club. We didn't even know the guys until they showed up and introduced themselves.) Our club by-laws were change to prohibit any " battle " re-enactments by our members as a club event.

 

In all honesty, as the decrease continues in traditional muzzle loading, what is the NMLRA and the manufactures of muzzle loading guns and equipment suppossed to do?

Stay with traditional purchasers or enter the other market to survive? If it was your organization and your company, what would you do?

It makes perfect sense for a business to change their product line to survive in the marketplace, but they have to remember that when their product changes, they will loose customers (members), who were only interested in the "original product".

If you have a "traditional" muzzleloading club and change your policies to allow modern firearms, you're going to loose people - plain and simple.

Some companies are content to have a small percentage of the market. They provide a high quality product to a discerning customer. For others, if they cannot make it with a small niche, they go out of business.

If their is truly a need for something, someone will fill that need.

 

[Bountyhunter]

I always heard it that IF the dog hadnt stopped to take a manure he would have caught the rabbit. Same theory. My point was, that you either join and participate, or you dont join. They insist on keeping everything back east, and the only news you hear on the TV is from the Outdoor guru and his inlines at Friendship, so I just saved my money and bought an NRA Life with what would have gone East. They have no representation in this area, so I dont send them my money. If they were to alternate the annuals between Friendship and perhaps Whittington Center, then I most certainly would join up again.

I would like to join my state association, but it is tied to the national, a situation that takes my money and sends it east where I would have little say in how it was used. Therefore, I have not joined the state association either.

 

[FishDFly]

Bountyhunter,

You are right, participation is the answer.

I became irritated with the NRA, thus I send my money to the NMLRA, kind of figure that they needed the money more.

I placed an order yesterday with a company, they asked if they could round up the change to the even dollar and donate it to the NRA. I said no problem.

Then I asked them to consider the NMLRA for us M/Ls. The lady said she would take my suggestion upstairs.

Guess my feeling is, don't whine about whom you do not send money to. If you send money, then do what you feel is correct. I don't spend my money and be miserable.

I guess I just get tired of people beating up on the NMLRA who do not pay dues and do not use their real names when beating up on an organization. Is the NMLRA perfect no, but then again, who is in second place supporting M/Ls?

RDE

 

[Vaino]

I was a member of both the NRA and NMLRA for many years and they both lost me for very different reasons. In 1994 the NRA "strayed" from it's single purpose of fighting gun control to advocating social issues that I didn't agree with. The NMLRA published "Muzzleblasts", which when I joined had many interesting articles on antique MLers and on building MLers and which was the main reason I joined. Three years after joining, the "primative camping" crowd {rendevooers} took over and most of the articles then concerned their bickering over whether this item was pre-whatever and also that one rendevous attendee had his entire stay ruined because he espied a plastic cooler. Presently, I belong to only a "generic" gunclub because I can no longer shoot in my neighborhood and really don't intend to join any religious, political or lobbying organizations. By the way....what ever happened to the "gun control" issue seeing neither candidate has mentioned it. Are we to suppose that we're safe from the anti gun crowd?.....Fred

 

[paulvallandigham]

You get the " shot myself in the foot " :blah: :shocked2: award, Flehto.

If you were still a member of either the NRA or NMLRA you would know exactly where the candidates stand on the Second amendment and gun control, and would not be asking the question here.

Speaking as an Illinois resident who has had to suffer with Mr. Obama during his stint in the legislature, and now as my U.S. Senator, I can advise you that Mr. Obama has never met a gun control law he won't support. He claims to support the Second amendment, BUT...... when he gets finished with all his conditions and exceptions, it becomes clear that he doesn't believe you have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms. Rather, he wants this to be a government issued PRIVILEGE, doled out to only the chosen few( which won't include either of us!). He doesn't speak in those terms, of course. You actually have to use your own brain to figure out all his double speak, like that of so many other candidates and office holders.

 

[Vaino]

I've listened to quite a few of the speeches of both candidates and all of the debates and the gun issue wasn't mentioned......Fred

 

[mykeal]

Fred - gun ownership rights were in fact mentioned in the second debate. Both said they supported gun ownership. It received absolutely zero press coverage because nobody believed it.

Paul's point was that if you had retained your membership in the NRA/NMLRA you would know because they would have told you very clearly what the candidate's records were on the issue. They told me, and having also been a constituent of the Democratic candidate I can affirm what Paul said about the truth of his record and his statements.

You have the right to not belong to either organization, but you should understand that they are the best place to get accurate information on the candidates' positions on gun rights.

 

[Vaino]

I stand corrected if the 2nd debate did include the gun issue. I prefer to do my own thinking on many issues including the gun issue and have been a non-joiner for many years now. Have been building MLers since 1978 and at 76 it's my main source of enjoyment and I would act accordingly if my right to bear arms was in jeopardy....Fred

 

[paulvallandigham]

Freed: Put it simply: John McCain has been a strong supporter of Gun Rights, and Sarah Palin is an NRA Life member. Both Barry Obama, and Joe Biden have consistently voted in favor of gun controls, gun bans, and any other restriction that comes along.

It doesn't get much simpler to understand than that.

Of the third party candidates, Ron Paul also supports Gun owner's rights to the fullest. I don't know his running mate, nor that person's record, but I would fall over if Ron Paul picked someone who believed so opposite from one of his core values.

Ralph Nader, who is, or is not running again, depending on the day, and source of your news, is very anti-gun, and always has been.

I think its a terrible mistake for the Republican candidate not to make Gun Control and the Second Amendment an issue. Had McCain made this a key issue, he could have gone into some of the areas of strong Labor Democrat support, and torn votes away from Obama by talking about the First Civil Right, as the late Charlton Heston so eloquently wrote and spoke about. Since June, when the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled that the second Amendment protects an individual right, the door has been open to the Republicans to hang the Democratic candidates- both Hilary Clinton and Barach Obama- for their Anti-Civil Rights stances! That would have gotten the attention of a lot of His supporters, and not a few of hers. But, McCain has stayed away from the issue and it has cost him. He still doesn't have the full support of the Conservative wing of the party, even with his pick of Sarah palin as his running mate.

This is the year, if there ever is one, when the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the right of the people to demand that all the gun control barriers to their rights to protect themselves both at home, at work, and moving around the community as free citizens, should be repealed. The role of government should be altered to begin helping to train citizens in the lawful use of firearms in self defense, by providing ranges for practicing, and classes in self defense law, and firearms safety and use for our citizens. After all, is not the government suppose to be working for all of US?

The Democratic Party platform is a bunch of mush, talking about " rights" but meaning Privilege; talking about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, but then meaning only the right to keep a gun in your home. They refuse to accept the idea that people have the right to be safe on our streets, at work, and anywhere they may lawfully go. There is no discussion of your right to BEAR ARMS.

Sadly, the Republican party platform is only slightly better. At least it talks about Rights, and means that. But, I saw no wholesale endorsement for the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves in public and elsewhere outside their homes.

If the McCain/Palin ticket wins, perhaps in the next 4 years Mrs. Palin will be able to do something about the Republican Party Platform for 2012, and perhaps do something in the Congress about changing legislation from being oppressive of our rights, to protecting, and encouraging citizens to exercise them.

 

Paul's point was that if you had retained your membership in the NRA/NMLRA you would know because they would have told you very clearly what the candidate's records were on the issue.

Membership is not required for this information. It's free on the NRA web site and other pro-gun sites.