Next week a new documentary, The Price of Freedom, is going to open at theaters around the country. The movie was made by Judd Ehrlich, a skilled and well-known documentary film-maker, and it’s a look at how the NRA has morphed from being an organization devoted to hunting and sport shooting to an organization that increasingly pushes a radical, far-right agenda about guns. You can view a 2-minute trailer here.
Guess which side the film comes down on? Hint: It was shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. And now the film is getting the usual positive notices by the usual liberal media sources like thefailing New York Times. Actually, the NYT stock price has gone down from $49 on January 20th to $42 today, so maybe the NYT is failing. But what would you expect when Joe and the Deep State are turning the country into a Socialist mess? Anyway, back to reality.
Talking about reality, Ehrlich’s new film is a realistic view of the NRA’s shift into media stupidity and crowd-pleasing, alt-right pandering during the administration of what’s his name, which began before the election was stolen last year, but today, America’s ‘first civil rights organization’ has once again begun to follow its traditional path. Gone from their website are the loony and vicious video tantrums of Dana Loesch, gone are the conspiracy theories of Grant Stinchfield, gone is the AR-wielding, prancing around of Colion Noir.
For the boys in Fairfax, it’s back to business as usual, which means sending out the monthly magazine to the members, planning for the annual meeting that’s coming up in September at Houston and re-stocking the online store with what is really a very good collection of clothing and other goodies that promote the NRA.
I’m assuming that Ehrlich took his camera to an NRA annual show, I’m also assuming that after the interviews with all the big machers like Clinton, et. al., that Ehrlich took the trouble to sit down with a couple of your average, NRA types who are members more out of habit than anything else. If he did, he would discover what I have known since I attended my first NRA show in 1980, namely, that most of the people whose yearly payment of dues is what keeps the organization alive, pay their dues out of habit and could care less about what the leadership says or does.
Do most NRA members vote Republican? Gee, what a surprise. Are most NRA members older, White males who drive around in a truck? Another big surprise. Do most NRA members believe that liberals want to take away their guns? Surprised me again.
My response to those surprises is – so what? If you think that NRA members voted for Trump because they really believed he would stand up and fight for their ‘rights,’ think again. Every Republican candidate for President has showed up at every annual meeting of the NRA and promised to protect the 2nd Amendment since Ronald Reagan showed up in 1980 and pledged the same thing.
When I go to the annual NRA show these days there’s a good chance that I’ll be introduced to the children of NRA members I have been meeting and greeting for the last 40 years. In fact, at the more recent shows I’m introduced to grandchildren. The NRA show is no different from the yearly get-together of the Shriners, except maybe the NRA folks don’t get quite as drunk.
Incidentally, Judd Ehrlich’s idea that the NRA has been promoting a complete dissolution of all gun laws is simply not true. In fact, the NRA always refers to its members as ‘law-abiding gun owners,’ and it’s not all that easy to abide by laws that don’t exist. The argument between the NRA and its opponents is about whether laws which regulate the behavior of lawful gun owners make any difference insofar as more than 85% of all gun violence, including suicides, happen to be committed by individuals who, generally speaking, don’t obey any laws at all.
Jul 15, 2021 @ 11:47:34
Good post, Mike. Thank you.
Jul 15, 2021 @ 12:11:34
Great, more antigun propaganda. Mike, you seem to disagree with everything the NRA stands for. So you are you a life member?
Jul 16, 2021 @ 09:31:20
Do you even bother to read my blogs before you make a comment? This blog says in no uncertain terms that the criticism of the NRA by this film-maker is completely and totally wrong. I’m not only a Life Member, I’m also a Benefactor Life Member, okay?
Jul 16, 2021 @ 12:23:34
“Do you even bother to read my blogs before you make a comment?”
Yes, although it starts to turn into white noise after a while. You cra*p on progun people for being progun. You cr*p antigun people for not being as antigun as you want them to be, ie “get rid of the guns.”
“This blog says in no uncertain terms that the criticism of the NRA by this film-maker is completely and totally wrong.”
Yeah, I’m sure it’s a bunch of malarkey.
“I’m not only a Life Member, I’m also a Benefactor Life Member, okay?”
Don’t forget to brag about they can’t throw you out no matter what you say because you give them so much money.
You still haven’t answered my question. By American standards, you’re an antigun extremest. That’s a fact, not an insult. You want to ban and forcibly buy back all or nearly all bottom loading pistols and rifles. Even though you yourself own many of these ‘killer guns’ and have sold them to many people. You don’t even consider the Second Amendment to be an individual right to gun ownership. But being so obviously antigun, you pass yourself off as a ‘gun guy’ and remain an NRA member. Why?
Jul 18, 2021 @ 10:35:53
This may come as a surprise, but I really don’t know when you were elected to determine who is an antigun extremist and who isn’t. I never said that Americans can’t own bottom-loading handguns or bottom-loading long guns. What I have said is that bottom-loading, semi-automatic handguns which are chambered for military-grade ammunition which, by the way, would exempt all 22-caliber pistols, aren’t ‘sporting’ guns which is how the gun industry refers to them. And because they aren’t ‘sporting’ guns, they are designed for the sole purpose of being used to injure human beings, they need to be regulated much more strictly than ‘sporting’ guns. And by the way, the 2008 Heller decision makes the same point. You want to have a discussion with me? At least read what I have written and not just make it up as you go along, okay?
One more point. You keep referring to gun ‘rights.’ There are no gun ‘rights.’ There is a 2nd Amendment which isn’t a ‘right.’ It’s an Amendment. How do the Courts define ‘rights? By the laws that are passed to define what someone can and cannot do based on what the Constitution says about that particular behavior; i.e., ‘right’ versus ‘wrong.’ How are these ‘rights’ defined when it comes to guns? In the federal laws that were passed in 1934, 1938, 1958 and 1994. Why don’t you read through these laws and then come back and tell me all about gun ‘rights,’ okay? You haven’t read one, serious book about Constitutional law. But why ever let facts get in the way of your opinions, right?
But then again Mister Fudd, why bother to read anything? You clearly haven’t read what I write because it’s much easier to simply announce that I’m an anti-gun extremist because I happen not to agree with what you say. Good for you. After all, when I said that the documentary film was wrong about the NRA, that was just a bunch of ‘malarky,’ right?
Jul 19, 2021 @ 11:09:33
“This may come as a surprise, but I really don’t know when you were elected to determine who is an antigun extremist and who isn’t.”
Antigun people get so mad when you call them antigun, lol.
“I never said that Americans can’t own bottom-loading handguns or bottom-loading long guns.”
And now you’re backpedaling. You have repeatedly stated your desire to ban and forcibly buy back bottom loading ‘killer’ guns.
“What I have said is that bottom-loading, semi-automatic handguns which are chambered for military-grade ammunition which, by the way, would exempt all 22-caliber pistols, aren’t ‘sporting’ guns which is how the gun industry refers to them.”
Tell that the the millions of law abiding ACTUAL gun guys and girls out there that use bottom loading guns for sport. These guns are used for sport a heck of a lot more often then they’re used to kill people. But you just want these guns banned, so of course you portray them as ‘killer guns.’
“And because they aren’t ‘sporting’ guns, they are designed for the sole purpose of being used to injure human beings, they need to be regulated much more strictly than ‘sporting’ guns.”
They’re designed to put holes in what their owners are pointing at. Most people who own these guns put holes in paper targets and not people. Also, these are YOUR words from March 28th post:
“Here are 5 reasons why Mike the Gun Guy, a bone-fide gun nut, believes that assault rifles should be banned. Not regulated – banned.”
So yeah, you ARE saying that Americans can’t have these guns. You even provide an estimate for the cost of buying back (read: CONFISCATING) these guns later in that post:
“If the Federal Government were to compensate every owner of an assault rifle at fair market value for turning in his/her gun, the total cost would be 11 billion dollars. The 2020FY budget is $4.83 trillion dollars.”
So much for me not reading anything.
“There are no gun ‘rights.’ There is a 2nd Amendment which isn’t a ‘right.’”
In your dreams. How come nobody else seems to think that? Even antigunners acknowledge 2A as a right. Although of course, many of them are doing all they can to take that right away. I’ll say it plainly, RIGHTS not ‘rights.’
“But then again Mister Fudd”
You’re projecting I’m not a fudd. I don’t stab my fellow gun owners in the back for owning scary black guns that aren’t ‘sporting.’ I don’t collaborate with antigun organizations by giving them money.
“After all, when I said that the documentary film was wrong about the NRA, that was just a bunch of ‘malarky,’ right?”
Settle down, I was agreeing with you that the film was malarkey.
“it’s much easier to simply announce that I’m an anti-gun extremist because I happen not to agree with what you say.”
You’re an antigun extremist because you support gun control that would make Dianne Feinstein recoil.
Jul 21, 2021 @ 06:41:46
I have never ‘stabbed’ anyone, either in the front or the back and while you might think that exchanging opinions is some kind of physical exercise, it’s not. How come I don’t refer to you as a ‘pro-gun extremist?’ How come I don’t accused you of ‘collaborating’ with pro-gun group? I’ll tell you why. Because I don’t need to back up my opinions with what every one of you pro-gun trolls do, which is to remind everyone how tough you are, how much you just love to vent your anger at the liberal, tree-hugging anti-gun people like me. Can’t you write a comment without always having to promote yourself for being such a big, tough guy?
Jul 21, 2021 @ 16:32:11
Do you seriously deny that you’re an antigun extremist? You want to ban all bottom loading firearms. You can’t backpedal your way out of this one. And I never said anything about me being tough. You’re not a victim here.
And go ahead and call me a pro gun extremist if you want. I don’t care.
RIGHTS not ‘rights’
Jul 23, 2021 @ 09:35:41
Go ahead. Mis-quote me again. I have never said that I want a ban on “all bottom loading firearms.” I have said that I want restrictions on bottom-loading guns that were designed and are carried by the military. And by the way, this may come as a shock to you, but calling someone an ‘extremist’ doesn’t necessarily negate the truth of anything they say. Of course if someone’s an anti-gun extremist than everything they say is a lie, right? You’re not interested in debating issues, you’re interested in saying some snarky crap about anyone whose views you don’t like.
Jul 24, 2021 @ 08:08:32
“I have never said that I want a ban on “all bottom loading firearms.””
You have said that bottom loading firearms are dangerous because they allow for higher capacity magazines. So what then, you’d let people keep their .22 plinkers?
“I have said that I want restrictions on bottom-loading guns that were designed and are carried by the military.”
You have said that you want FORCED buybacks of these ‘military guns’ because they’re ‘not sporting.’ You want to take away a huge amount of guns from law abiding citizens. That’s what makes you very antigun. Well who the heck died and gave you the authority to decide what gun is and isn’t sporting? Just because you call yourself a ‘gun guy’ doesn’t mean you get to make that distinction. Oh, and have you turned in the ‘killer guns’ that you own yet?
“Of course if someone’s an anti-gun extremist than everything they say is a lie, right?”
Not necessarily. But if an obvious antigunner goes around masquerading as a ‘gun guy,’ he’s not going to get any credibility with gun owners.
RIGHTS not ‘rights’
Jul 15, 2021 @ 17:15:40
“Do most NRA members believe that liberals want to take away their guns?” According to a New York Times (the paper whose stock price have gone down from $49 on January 20th to $42 today) article on September 8, 2005, described the happenings in New Orleans by stating, “Local police officers began confiscating weapons from civilians in preparation for a forced evacuation of the last holdouts still living here… Police officers and federal law enforcement agents scoured the city carrying assault rifles seeking residents who have holed up to avoid forcible eviction.”
On the 4th day of September 2017, The United States Virgin Islands, Governor Kenneth Mapp, order to take whatever actions the Adjutant General considered necessary in the seizing of arms, ammunition, explosives, incendiary material and any other property that may be required by the military forces for the performance of this “emergency mission.”
President Joe Biden admitted he wants to Confiscate Guns “BINGO.” But then again he calls the ATF the AFT, and does a lot of whispering. So who knows.
And let’s not forget during the third Democrat Presidential Debates, Robert Freancis O’Rourke proclaimed, “Hell yes, we’re gonna take your AR-15, your AK47…” O’Rourke also said “If someone does not turn in an AR-15…then the weapon will be taken from them.”
Cory Booker, and Kamala Harris have all called for confiscation.
There is also a recording of Lt. Paul Vance, CT State Police, saying that he’s not going to talk about the constitution when asked about gun confiscation.
So, as to most NRA members believing liberals want to take away their guns, maybe there is cause to believe so. I don’t know if I’m an NRA member or not, I do have a card with a number, but that may just show I contribute money to them. However, I believe many liberals, and liberal politicians, and some conservative politicians, Romney, would like to take away your guns and while they’re at it take away the 2nd Amendment.
To quote my Grandpa, ‘since the first gun control organization, the KKK, people want to take your guns away.”
Jul 16, 2021 @ 09:29:08
Believe it or not, I happen to agree with you. But if ll the guns were confiscated, what difference would this make? If gun owners want to defend their ownership of guns, they really need to come up with a better spiel than the idea that a gun is needed to protect yourself from the ‘tyranny of the state.’ Yea, yea, I know all about how Hitler took away everyone’s guns. So what?