Opinion
Fairfax, Virginia – -(AmmoLand.com)- The year 2019 will mark the 148th anniversary of the founding of the National Rifle Association. This organization has a long legacy of not just protecting our rights, but also for a host of other programs that serve law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights. But what will the future look like for this organization?
There have been rumors about NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre possibly stepping down, and speculation about who will replace him. There are major threats that are also being faced. But there have been some successes as well, and even the bad news of the mid-terms have given us reasons for hope.
So, what does the future look like for the NRA?
Well, it is hard to say, much depends on what those who support the Second Amendment do in response to the challenges we face, not just from hostile lawmakers, but from Silicon Valley and from major companies who are weighing in against our rights. They will even have to face growing social stigmatization pushed by pop culture icons and politicians, especially in the suburbs.
That said, the near future – at least through the NRA’s sesquicentennial in 2021 – will involve a fierce battle to keep confirming judges who will defend our right to bear arms. But in this time, it is also important to prepare for what happens down the road, especially if there is a less-friendly president.
But there is a need to think beyond 2021. What should the NRA of 2046 (the organization’s 175th anniversary) look like? Or the NRA of 2071 (it’s bicentennial)? The NRA has had to make big changes before. In the wake of the 1968 Gun Control Act, it shifted from primarily firearms safety education and training into the legislative and political arena.
That change was necessary, given the very real threats that a total ban on handguns would pass back then. It seems unthinkable now, but back in the 1970s and 1980s, those who sought to take away our Second Amendment rights were calling for a ban on handguns and they thought they would get it. That was ultimately beaten back, but even during the debates over the Brady Act in 1993, there were still proposals to ban handguns discussed (notably by Major Owens, then a Congressman from New York). That was then. Today, a total ban on handguns is pretty much unthinkable – and has been ruled unconstitutional in the Heller and McDonald cases.
These days, the old threats still remain.
Yes, legislation still moves, now mostly focused on semi-automatic firearms and standard-capacity magazines. But the new threats will need to be addressed. This will require changes – and some of those changes will be difficult, but necessary to preserve our Second Amendment rights in the future.
Whether it will be the fact that the NRA hires translators to make the facts about our Second Amendment rights more accessible, reaching out to urban communities, starting to get more involved with those who shape popular culture, or taking the fight for the Second Amendment to corporate boardrooms, the NRA of the future is going to look different from the NRA of today. Then again, the NRA of today would probably leave an NRA member from 1968 taken aback as well.
The protection of our Second Amendment rights in the future will require adaptation to address the newer threats. This doesn’t mean that the objective has changed. It just means that the tactics and strategy that will ensure the Second Amendment will be preserved will change to deal with the new threats.
Yeah, the need to change can be very difficult at times. But ask yourself this: Would you rather see an NRA that made the changes needed to adapt to new threats to our right that is still strong, and still protecting the Second Amendment, or do you want to lose the Second Amendment because we didn’t address the new threats coming from Silicon Valley and elsewhere? It’s your choice, ultimately.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
Yes there is a big internet please remove me from your list.
It seems to me that we have already lost more than we should have. at some point we’re going to have to take to the street ready to fight. short of that there just gonna keep taking little by little till our 2 right is gone and we’re looking around saying what just happened
Wayne LaPierre, Chris Cox and Marrion Hammer, like all traitors, need to be drawn and quartered.
It’s a simple, logical, argument that the NRA has danced around for years, because they can’t have you pay them to get your rights back if they don’t help you piss them away first. But, just like all in our government, they’re all just our stupid neighbors who needed a job, and now need to be fired. The argument (and no true gun-rights champion would want to have to make argument before the smoke clears) is this: The Second Amendment requires PARITY of arms with our government. How else could the Founders / Framers expect the average bona fide citizen… Read more »
Through the years NRA has chosen to compromise rather than stand firm on “shall NOT be infringed”, leaving us with the NFA of 1934, GCA of 1986, the “assault weapons ban” of 1986, and now multiple states’ passage of various forms of magazine, “ assault weapon” restrictions it bans, ammunition restrictions, and now accessory bans, plus all of the “red flag” laws being passed in so many states without much oversight as to the wording put into them. I am highly disappointed in the NRA of today, and not at all interested in supporting the bureaucratic type salaries the leaders… Read more »
The NRA needs another Cincinnati revolt. I’ve given the NRA more money than I could afford at times, but no more.
I am personally offended at NRA members being called leftist trolls because they call a spade a spade. You self rightist supporters of the current NRA administration sound just like the ” He din do nutten” mothers defending their thug children. “He was a good boy, went to church every Sunday, he sang in the choir, he was getting his life back together…He din need to be shot.” LaPierre’s and Cox’s suggesting and supporting Redflag laws and bump stock bans are a DIRECT threat to gun owners rights in this nation. They are no better than the Chicago leftists who… Read more »
@ Harold Hutchison 1. “This organization has a long legacy of not just protecting our rights, but also for a host of other programs that serve law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights.” The NRA also has a legacy now going on 4 decades straight of betraying Gun owners. In otherwords, they do not act to protect our rights in any way if they cut deals like supporting Red Flag laws and Bans on items protected under the Second Amendment. 2. “new threats will need to be addressed. This will require changes – and some of those… Read more »
Enough has been said, I have nothing I can add to the conversation. The NRA is dead to me. It needs to die and go away so people who care about our rights can use the funds they waste at the NRA alter to support the organizations the will fight for us.
Obviously K Street finally gut to the NRA. In the process they got the NRA to turn that proverbial slippy slope into a STEEP CLIFF!!!! (bump stock issue). Which we will soon be thrown off. I’m done with them, and I’m glad I didn’t have a lifetime membership.