If guns are so great for every body; why don't they push for carry laws for every body even blacks and latinos in the inner cities. They want to be protected too. They won't do it because they feel inner city and minorities in the cities are the enemy! These guys are real close to being domestic terrorists. They are ruining the republican party for years to come. People are scared to death of them. Why don't they test market and require all of congress to bring their guns to work. Maybe they will get something done! I would not be surprised if obama has drones watching the nra headquarters and those madmen that run that organization.
NRA president says things like "False President" and seems a little bit disappointed by the outcome of the civil war? I know that the NRA as an organization is not openly racist, but as with conservative groups all around, does seem to be embracing ideas and stances that would serve to benefit racist views.
The NRA does more to represent the gun manufactures than gun owners, and takes no stand with the government on further regulating sales of low quality cheap firearms that are commonly used in crimes.
Yes, the NRA has a SOLID history of banning black people from owning guns, as well as having xenophobic and racist members on its board such as Ted Nugent.
"The organization's first major involvement with promoting gun laws tainted by prejudice was in the 1920s and 30s. In response to urban gun violence often associated with immigrants, especially those from Italy, the NRA's president, Karl Frederick, helped draft model legislation to restrict concealed carry of firearms in public. States, Frederick's model law recommended, should only allow concealed carry by people with a license, and those licenses should be restricted to "suitable" people with "proper reason for carrying" a gun in public. Thanks to the NRA's endorsement, these laws were adopted in the majority of states.
Determining who was "suitable" under these licensing schemes was left to the discretion of local law enforcement. Predictably, racial minorities and disfavored immigrants were usually deemed unsuitable, no matter how serious a threat they faced. In 1956, after his house was firebombed, Martin Luther King Jr. Was turned down when he applied for a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Montgomery, Alabama.
The 1960s saw another wave of gun control laws that were, at least in part, motivated by race. After Malcolm X promised to fight for civil rights "by any means necessary" while posing for Ebony magazine with an M1 Carbine rifle in his hand and the Black Panthers took to streets of Oakland with loaded guns, conservatives like Ronald Reagan, then governor of California, began promoting gun control. Black radicals with guns, coupled with the devastating race riots that wiped out whole neighborhoods in Newark and Detroit in 1967, helped persuade Congress to pass the Gun Control Act of 1968. That law barred felons from purchasing firearms, expanded the licensing of gun dealers, and barred imports of "Saturday Night Specials"—cheap, often poorly made guns that were frequently used for crime by urban youth. As one gun control supporter at the time frankly admitted, a close look at that law revealed that it wasn't really about controlling guns; it was about controlling blacks. And the NRA, in its signature publication, American Rifleman, took credit for the law and extolled its virtues."
Cited from the New Republic
I know NRA members that are well adjusted, good people. Many of us do. With regards to their leaders, however, you can hear the banjos ringing over the hills every time they hold a press conference or are quoted. Why do we need more guns? Because of blac- uh I mean street thugs!
The NRA leadership is racist. Disproportionately, black and Hispanic people are the victims of gun violence. The NRA could support increased backgrond checks and other gun regulations that would aid law enforcement in reducing violence in black communities including renewing the assault weapons ban. If large numbers of white youth were dying as a result of gun violence they would surely take steps to address the issue. That is the truth! They simply don't care that these victims come from poor, under-served communites far removed from their sight. The urban black/brown communities in our country have been deserted. The NRA is deeply implicated in that tragedy.
Go to a NRA meeting and hear for yourself. You will hear more racist humor and racist labeling, N word, etc., then anywhere else you experience. We all can be racist at times but if your want to find a hateful, unreasonable racist, go to a NRA meeting. Enough said.
The NRA, like most conservative organizations, is not inherently racist. With that important reality acknowledge, it is also important to recognize that a large part of their support is contingent on promoting the background-level stereotypes that foment fear in the citizenry. Without the xenophobic specter of the black robber, the Mexican drug lord, or even the commie invader, I find it difficult to imagine the NRA having much of a constituency. In my view, reliance on negative stereotypes makes the NRA a racist institution.
The NRA is not some crazy, evil organization. They speak for the people. Others who think that they play off of racial fears are wrong. People don't join the NRA because the NRA scared them into joining. We as humans try to avoid anything that makes us uncomfortable, so if the NRA is spewing racial stereotypes in order to scare people (which they aren't) then anyone who isn't a member is very unlikely to join because they don't want to deal with it. The people who join the NRA do so because they realize what the NRA stands for. Equality. Firearms are the great equalizer. A thug/robber/rapist is going to have a gun regardless of the legality of it. The way to equalize yourself and stand a chance of defending yourself is to also have a firearm. Obviously, be responsible enough to know your limits and to be realistic. Don't carry around some 500 S&W magnum, and be sure to take defensive handgun courses. The NRA is here to make sure you maintain that right. Yes, they sometimes sound extreme, but so does the government. It's like buying a car, you don't offer what you're willing to pay, you offer well below it so that the final price is still in your range. If the NRA plays off of any fear, it is a (logical) fear of the government. You may think that sounds crazy, but look back through history, and literally every country devolved into either tyranny or anarchy. Some reformed themselves after that to be a good enough country. Look at England, they used to be a monarchy, now they have parliament. A fear of the government is a healthy thing, provided you aren't retiring to your "compound" every weekend and praying to the god of black powder to give you strength. The NRA isn't a racist, evil, scary, ridiculous organization. They are an organization representative of gun owners who happen to believe incredibly strongly in the second amendment, and it doesn't matter to them what race you are. They'll just invite you to come out to the range one weekend.
I am myself half black. The first anti-gun laws were introduced by white people who feared an uprising from Africans.
It's like saying if you defend freedom of speech you are a racist because you want it to be legal to say "n****r."
The reason behind the second amendment was so that everyone could be a free man. Stop trying to make this a racial issue. I bet most of you who think this are whites who know nothing about how it is to be black.
The NRA is not at all a racist organization. Anybody is welcome to be a member, regardless of their race. There is nothing about the organization that fosters any race. Often, though, people are going to believe what they want or the politics direct, and fall into this trap. Just because you might be able to find an NRA member who is racist doesn't mean the NRA is racist.
The NRA supported the suits by Mr. Heller (Washington, D.C., 2008) and Mr. McDonald (Chicago, Illinois, 2010) which established the right of citizens to possess firearms IN THE HOME and OUTSIDE the home, respectively. These were the first cases decided on Second Amendment grounds sine the United States v Miller (1939) decision.
Were the NRA "racist" WHICH of these cases would it have supported?
Would the "racist" NRA have supported the case of Dick Heller, "the white guy," against the black city administration in Washington, D.C.? Or, would it be more likely to have supported the case of Otis McDonald, "the black guy," against the white city administration in Chicago, Illinois?
THE RACES OF THE PRINCIPALS DID NOT MATTER TO THE NRA.
Nor should they matter to us.
What a bunch of idiots. The only racist I've ever seen are democrats. Who founded the KKK? Who was pro-slavery? Who was pro-jim crow? DEMOCRATS! I love the bullshit argument, they magically "switched sides". How convenient for the lying democrats, you support racism for 150 years, then all of a sudden ... Poof... Magically the "other" guys are now the racists. How you people buy into this shit is amazing. I've read about the mythical "southern strategy" and the dixiecrats (all but 2 switched back to democrats btw).
I am a Black American woman and I am an NRA member because I believe in protecting the "right to bear arms." Even though I may not agree with the NRA on the issue of universal background checks, I do not believe that the organization is racist. If my view ever changes, it will be based on personal experiences and research. The reality of life - there are racist people in every organization.
I have no doubt there are racist members in the NRA and even on the board of directors but that doesn't mean the organization is racist. I also believe there are other people we would just as soon not be members but trying to discover them would be nearly impossible and cost prohibitive.
I can't remember ever hearing racist talk from someone I knew to be an NRA member but I can assure you that if I did I would shut them down.
I'm going to go with not racist because of their historical stance of allowing blacks to own weapons. If they were racist then I would think they wouldn't support that. Now is the membership composed of many racist, more than your average organization of this size, I'm guessing yes because of the demograph.