would you rather support the NRA or the Sierra Club?

[taxidriver]

i've heard a lot about the NRA lately, and people saying they support it more than they used to. I, for one, have eased up on them a little since the idea of postponed elections and martial law were brought up. but as far as just liking to hunt and do outdoorsy stuff, wouldnt the SC be a better group to belong to?

[FatSlob]

1. NRA does have the best hunter education out there,

So I'd stick with the NRA. Or you can adhere to my motto and "JOIN BOTH"

[taxidriver]

2. ooh, good idea. but dont they dislike each other?

[slackmaster]

4. Not entirely

I have a cousin in Houston, TX who is active in both organizations. They've worked together on wetlands conservation projects.

[FatSlob]

5. I don't know, I like them both.

My memberships:

NRA, ACLU, Cincinnati Nature Center. You too can be multi-membered.

[MrBenchley]

3. You may have noticed right wingers just tried and failed

to take over the Sierra Club...the effort was centered around many of the anti-immigration groups like VDare.com.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0118-04.htm

http://www.btlonline.org/btl020604.html#2hed

http://www.groundswellsierra.org/

[iverglas]

29. oh good

Because I was fixing to reply to the initial question by saying:

Which would you rather do: hit that little old ___ over the head with this sack of shit, or beat out that rhythm on a drum?

(I expurgate because I can't find the Firesign Theatre line anywhere on line, and without a source to cite for the black humour I would undoubtedly be charged with some sort of racial/ethnic/religious bigotry offence by someone who had either no sense of humour or an axe to grind. I shall always remember the staggering irony of having my allusion to Lenny Bruce's anti-racist Tonto line deleted as racist ...)

Glad to hear the battle was won.

[Salmo Trutta]

6. I belong to the Sierra Club and Audubon Society

we have a beautiful bird observatory in Cape May, and these 2 organizations (esp the second) work hard to preserve the wildlife there, WITHOUT letting hunters blaze away.

[FatSlob]

7. And that is great.

I'm glad that they could do that. However, without hunters, most wetland conservation would never happen.

[Salmo Trutta]

8. Hunters, our saviours...

Let me see if I can play along...

Without hunters, wolves would still be keeping the populations of deer in check.

Without hunters, the passenger pigeon would still be alive.

Conservation of natural resources is best left to nature and NOT hunters.

[Retired AF Dem]

9. You have a point

but humans fuck up nature. Nature was never meant to have strip malls, subdivisions, cities, roads and highways. Land developers fuck up nature more than "hunters" ever could.

[slackmaster]

15. We're not living in a state of nature

If we allowed wolves to keep populations of deer in check they'd also be a threat to livestock. Millions of acres of what used to be untouched woodland and prarie is now agricultural or urbanized.

We've dinked with the system, and thrown nature out of balance. It's our responsibility to act as responsible stewards of the land. Managed hunting is essential under the present circumstances.

[Salmo Trutta]

18. Threat to livestock my ass...

The NA bison managed to reach herd sizes of millions of animals, despite there being many, many more wolves around and not one hunter (except the occasional Nat Amer) to be seen.

Yes, the system is out of balance and the best way to restore that balance is to let natural environments reach their equillibrium without or with less of our intervention.

[slackmaster]

20. Sheep and cattle are not bison

Yes, the system is out of balance and the best way to restore that balance is to let natural environments reach their equillibrium without or with less of our intervention.

Your personal opinion, unsupported by facts or scientific research. Frankly I think that's an unrealistic viewpoint. Even if you are right, that a hands-off policy would be best, it's simply not going to happen. We aren't going to demolish every dam, road, bridge, golf course, military base, airport, and fence to test your theory.

[Salmo Trutta]

21. I didn't say we would

"We aren't going to demolish every dam, road, bridge, golf course, military base, airport, and fence to test your theory."

No, we'll never do that! Our answer is to build more and more!!! Damn the environment, we need more!

Here's a little tidbit from my aunt:

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=73005&ran=126779

[slackmaster]

24. Gak

Salmo, just to be clear here I'm a hard-core environmentalist. Development like that along the coast has ruined a lot of places I used to go here in Southern California. I'm heavily in favor of healthy populations of predators like wolves and mountain lions.

But I don't believe that with the extent of human development and population that it's realistic to say that deer populations could be controlled by predators ever again. Our gardens and suburban landscaping and farms provide way too much availability of highly nutritious food, which results in very high populations of deer; way too many for the cats and dogs to take care of.

[FatSlob]

22. Hunters, through taxes supported by them,

pay for the conservation and management of thousands of acres a year. Thanks to hunters, the Federal, and State Governments are able to purchase more and more land each year.

[Salmo Trutta]

23. Also, thanks to hunters...

I can't take my dog for a walk in the woods from Sept - Jan. Some idiot (and it happens every year) would put a bullet through one of us.

[FatSlob]

WOULD put a bullet?

Are you sure.

[slackmaster]

25. Wear an orange vest

Get one for your pooch too.

[MrBenchley]

26. Pretty much every state ends up spending lots more

on hunters than they take in from licenses and fees...

And then if you want to tally up the true cost of hunting you have to add in how much it costs to rescue the ones who get lost in the woods or perforate themselves (or others)...

Hell, the biggest of the California wildfires last fall was started by a hunter who got lost and set a fire...how many millions of hunters would have to buy licenses to make up for the billions in property damage (not to mention the needless loss of life)?

Hunting's a dying sport that's too slow in the passing.

[taxidriver]

40. what do you have against hunters? is it personal or ideological?

you need to remember, hunting is a pastime enjoyed by millions of folks just in america, and is practically a way of life in lots of northwestern states like montana and idaho. maybe where you live, it is dying, but elsewhere it is going strong.

[MrBenchley]

44. It's a dying sport, a drain on the taxpayers

and one step above torturing household pets...other than that, it's swell.

[taxidriver]

45. how do you know it's dying? and how does it drain taxpayers?

is there an article your read about this, or maybe a government study?

[MrBenchley]

46. I've already pointed out

what a drain it is on the taxpayers...

As for the dying sport, fewer than 6% of Americans hunt...a precipitous drop from even ten years ago.

""The number of American hunters has been in a slow but steady decline for the last 20 years, and in the last five years alone fell from 14 million to 13 million, one of the steepest drops since the USFWS began keeping records in 1955. And as the general population has swollen to 290 million, hunting has become important to an ever shrinking minority. Today, only 6 percent of Americans 16 and older hunt.
More unsettling, the average age of hunters is increasing. Sixty-seven percent of all hunters are now over the age of 35. Only 14 percent are between 16 and 24—and just 4 percent are 16 and 17 years old. In the language of wildlife biology, the sport of hunting is having "recruitment failure"—a condition that, in the wild, ultimately leads to extinction. (Good riddance.)
The prospects for a quick turnaround are dim. Surveys by state game and fish agencies in recent years revealed that children who are not exposed to hunting by the age of 14 never become involved. That could mean hunting is facing a serious collapse over the next 25 years as the bubble in its population begins moving into its 60s. "

http://www.fieldandstream.com/fieldstream/hunting/article/0%2C13199%2C458090%2C00.html

Furthermore, the rationale for hunting (culling overpopulation in the wild) is somewhat phony--since many hunters now patronize game farms for guaranteed "trophies" rather than cull wild animals.

[iverglas]

47. and for the record

C'mon, you don't think it will come up again? You don't expect cries of "oh yeah, what an authoritative source that is, Field and Stream magazine!"?

The figures quoted in that article are taken from a US govt source. I know, because I did the research and located them, along with figures from some US states, I believe.

Anybody who came late to the conversation, or who has forgotten what has already been said, is welcome to use his/her little gold star to find it all. Or just go ask Google, like I did.

Me, I don't plan to doing anybody's research for 'em this time.

[iverglas]

48. oh, all right

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=39028

Specifically, post 80. Lots of other fun stuff there that any newbies or infrequent visitors/participants might like to read, too.

[MrBenchley]

49. SSDD....

(chuckle)

[CO Liberal]

10. The Sierra Club

The Nuts Ruining America does not deserve support from anyone as long as it has so many assholes in leadership positions, IMHO.

[taxidriver]

11. i heard that michael moore is an NRA member, is that true?

it was mentioned in one of the flame wars here in the gungeon.

[CO Liberal]

12. Actually, Yes

If I remeber what I saw in "Bowling for Columbine", he has a Lifetime Membership.

That's his choice. I choose to have nothing to do with an organizartion that would have assholes like Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent in its leadership.

[taxidriver]

14. did he say why he was? that's like giving anyone who wants to discredit

him a silver bullet, or so it seems.

("oh, he hates guns but he joined the NRA!! what a hypocrite!")

[MrBenchley]

16. I think it was just to annoy them

plus it meant they couldn't keep him out of the convention...even if they wanted to.

[CO Liberal]

30. I Believe He Joined the NRA....

...long before he made that film.

[John BigBootay]

41. My understanding is that he joined...

as a life member in order to attempt to be elected to the NRA's governing body and then monkey-wrench the organization from the inside.

NRA by-laws stipulate that only members of a certain duration or Life Members are eligible to be elected to the board.

If this is true then Moore is a bigger A$$hole than I suspected, primarily for the absolute hubris of believeing he had ANY chance of getting enough votes to be elected.

[JayS]

31. I don't think Moore hates guns. He may, but I don't know this. He...

...does point out the fear we are sold daily that may make some people buy guns because of a threat that may not exist.

[library_max]

38. Same reason he owns GM stock (or did while making Roger & Me).

It gives him a right to attend the meetings, see what they're up to, and (possibly) disrupt.

[Salmo Trutta]

13. Definitely Sierra Club...

Words from their founder, John Muir:

"Climb the mountains
And get their good tidings
Peace will flow into you
Like sunshine flows into trees
While cares fall like the leaves"

[MrBenchley]

19. Amen to that...

Worth noting that Iverglas some weeks ago did a little research and found that most Congress critters who supported gun control also supported envirnomental protection and reproductive choice...whereas nearly all of the gun rights bunch also pimped for polluters and were opposed to choice...

[gatlingforme]

33. Isn't that funny, I am pro gun, anti - NRA, prochoice, pro-environmentalis

AND PRO - PIT BULL. GO FIGURE. I am also Right to bear arms too. UGH. What does that make me??????

[library_max]

39. A statistical anomaly?

Since you asked . . .

[gatlingforme]

42. LOL yeah I guess that is a good discription LOL

[gatlingforme]

34. Also I am anti-hunting.

[iverglas]

35. found that thread

That was some weeks ago indeed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=26648

http://fecweb1.fec.gov/pages/24_2002_can.html

Lists expenditures that the Brady Campaign did report, along with expenditures reported by various other organizations, in 2002.

What's interesting is how they line up.

Reporting expenditures FOR a candidate that the Brady Campaign opposed:
- the NRA
- an assortment of anti-choice outfits (that's what the Susan B. Anthony List is, for anyone wondering)
- National Taxpayers' Union

Also reporting expenditures AGAINST a candidate that the Brady Campaign opposed:
- Planned Parenthood organizations
- League of Conservation Voters

Ah, those funny bedfellows.

If that's too convoluted for some to follow, it goes like this:

The NRA supported the same candidates as the National Taxpayer's Union and several anti-choice organizations.

The Brady Campaign opposed the same candidates as Planned Parenthood organizations and the League of Conservation Voters.

Where are all those conservation-minded hunters and other gun owners??

[MrBenchley]

37. Take it as a compliment

time passes quickly around you....

Like somebody else here said...if you want to join the NRA, you might as well send the check directly to the Republican party.

[RoeBear]

43. Broken record

[slackmaster]

17. I've been a Sierra Club member for about 30 years

I vote the SC's recommendations on most California and local ballot initiatives and candidates.

[AndyTiedye]

27. NRA = Repub shill. Gun rights aren't in danger. All other rights are

If you send a check to the NRA at this point you might as well send
it to the Republican National Committee, as the NRA is totally behind
the Republicans, and have been so for many years.

Our right to bear arms is in no danger. It is the rest of the Bill of
Rights that is being shredded, and it is being shredded by Republicans,
mostly.

I would urge DU'ers NOT to support the NRA.

[FeebMaster]

28. How are gun rights not in danger? (nt)

[JayS]

32. Interesting question.

Some groups I support are:

NRA for Second Amendment issues.
ACLU for civil rights issues
Sierra Club for national environmental issues
S.O.S. for local environmental issues
GCCA for coastal environmental issues
Audubon Society for our fine feathered friends

etc.

[iverglas]

36. let me try it here

I've got nothing but cricket noises in response to this information in that thread about how firearms control advocates are anti-union.

The New Democratic Party of Canada is a social democrat party formed about 40 years ago by the merger of its predecessor the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation and the national trade union federation, the Canadian Labour Congress. I belong to it and have been a candidate for it. It is the left wing of mainstream Canadian politics, way to the left of the US Democratic Party, and got 15.69% of the national popular vote in the June election (but only 9% of the seats in the House of Commons).

These results are taken from an academic study of various characteristics of party members.

http://www.mta.ca/faculty/socsci/polisci/scppm/ndp_frequency_report11.pdf
I just don't know why there are several sets of answers to the same question, but would theorize that the results may be broken down by region, or possibly some other indicator. Ah, here we are: http://www.mta.ca/faculty/socsci/polisci/scppm/ -- but no clarification.

I've highlighted all organizations relating to conservation and firearms.

14a) Do you currently belong to any interest groups or political action groups

Yes - 34.8%
No - 65.2%

14b) If yes, which one(s)?

African Advisory Committee to the NDP - 0.5%
Amnesty International - 4.1%
Canadian Alliance of Student Associations - 1.0%
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - 3.1%
Canadian Independent Filmmakers Association - 0.5%
Canadian Organization for Dev. and Education - 0.5%
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Association - 3.1%
Canadian Peace Alliance - 0.5%
Chamber of Congress - 0.5%
Citizens Concerned Against Free Trade - 0.5%
Council of Canadians - 32.1%
(an advocacy group focusing on national sovereignty and trade issues)
EGALE - 1.6%
(Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere)
Faith Partners Against Cuts to Social Programming - 0.5%
Federation Canadienne de la Femme - 0.5%
Friends of Medicare - 1.0%
Friends of Public Broadcasting/CBC - 2.6%
Greenpeace - 23.8%
Hand Gun Associations/National Firearms Association - 0.5%
LEAF - 1.0%
(women's legal action and education fund)
Local Action Group - 7.8%
Local Environmental Conservation Group - 2.1%
NAPO - 0.5%
(national anti-poverty organization)
National Action Committee for the Status of Women - 1.0%
National Taxpayers Federation - 3.1%
(right-wing outfit - ?)
One Voice - 0.5%
Other - 1.6%
Oxfam - 1.0%
Public Service Alliance of Canada - 0.5%
Raging Grannies - 0.5%
Sierra Club - 0.5%
Sierra Club - 0.5%
Tenant Federation - 0.5%
United Nations - 1.0%
Western Stockgrower's Association - 0.5%

14c) If yes, which one(s)?

Amnesty International - 9.6%
Animal Protection Services - 1.2%
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - 8.4%
Canadian Civil Liberties - 4.8%
Canadian Environmental Law Association - 1.2%
Canadian Legion - 1.2%
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Association - 1.2%
Coalition for Social Justice - 1.2%
COAT/Nanoose Federation - 1.2%
Council of Canadians - 16.9%
David Suzuki Foundation - 4.8%
Dying with Dignity - 1.2%
EGALE - 1.2%
Friends of Medicare - 1.2%
Friends of Public Broadcasting/CBC - 8.4%
Greenpeace - 9.6%
Industry Associations, misc - 1.2%
Local Action Group - 8.4%
Local Environmental Conservation Group - 3.6%
Local Taxpayer/Homeowners Associations - 1.2%
Nuclear Resister - 1.2%
Other - 2.4%
Oxfam - 1.2%
Project Ploughshares - 2.4%
Sierra Club - 1.2%
United Nations - 1.2%
VANA - 1.2%
Women's Network - 1.2%

14d) If yes, which one(s)?

Amnesty International - 2.4%
Canadian Asking for Social Security Equality - 2.4%
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - 4.8%
Canadian Civil Liberties - 4.8%
Canadian Foundation for World Development - 2.4%
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Association - 2.4%
Citizens for Public Justice - 2.4%
Coalition for Gun Control - 2.4%
Council of Canadians - 2.4%
David Suzuki Foundation - 9.5%
Friends of Public Broadcasting/CBC - 2.4%
Greenpeace - 4.8%
LEAF - 2.4%
Local Action Group - 11.9%
Local Environmental Conservation Group - 4.8%
Local Taxpayer/Homeowners Associations - 2.4%
NAPO - 2.4%
Nuclear Resister - 4.8%
Other - 9.5%
PETA - 4.8%
Sierra Club - 7.1%
Stop Cancer Organization - 2.4%
VANA - 2.4%
Women's Network - 2.4%

14e) If yes, which one(s)?

Amnesty International - 5.0%
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - 5.0%
Canadian Civil Liberties - 5.0%
Canadian Peace Alliance - 5.0%
Citizens for Public Justice - 5.0%
Coalition for Gun Control - 5.0%
Coalition for Social Justice - 5.0%
David Suzuki Foundation - 5.0%
Friends of Public Broadcasting/CBC - 25.0%
LEAF - 5.0%
Local Action Group - 5.0%
Local Environmental Conservation Group - 10.0%
National Action Committee for the Status of Women - 5.0%
Western Canadian Wilderness Committee - 5.0%
World Federalists - 5.0%

I would guess that in 14(b) the 0.5% of respondents who belong to category described as "Hand Gun Associations/National Firearms Association" amounts to 1 respondent. The only one in the survey.

Based on those appearances, it looks like 2 respondents belonged to the Canadian Coalition for Gun Control, and 92 belonged to one or more conservation/environmental organizations.

For comparison: the survey results for the Alliance Party (previous incarnation of the right-wing party): http://www.mta.ca/faculty/socsci/polisci/scppm/alliance_frequency_report.pdf

14a) Do you currently belong to any interest groups or political action groups

Yes - 20.9%
No - 79.1%

14b) If yes, which one(s)? (numbers may not add to a hundred as respondents were able to list more than one group)
- only top 8 listed
National Taxpayer's Federation - 38.5%
National Citizens' Coalition - 29.0%
(even righter-wing than the NTF)
National Firearms Association(or similar) - 6.5%
Canadian Federation of Independent Business - 6.5%
Pro-Life Groups - 6.0%
Greenpeace - 6.0%
Council of Canadians - 4.5%
Local Environmental/Conservation Group - 4.0%

Just for the info of anyone interested in what social democrats / progressives do, and support, in other places.