The finger pointing continues...

Non-citizens can be on NFPA seats.

Non-citizens can be on the TRA BOD.

Not sure about NAR but I think there is no prohibition.

The travel could be a killer :) But think of the rocket launches you could attend and all the motor guys would be your best friend!!

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...

Actually, no. It is, and always has been, a "Representative Democracy". There are major fundamental differences. The founding fathers gave much reason for making it so.

~ Duane Phillips.

Reply to
Duane Phillips

By jumping in, it created a divided scenario that doomed all possibles.

On the other side of the issue, John & Senator Enzi could have/should have spent quite a bit on P.R. effort with NAR/TRA. An ounce of problem prevention is worth a 100 pounds of cure in legislation. They were focused on the direct object and all the angles, and not on the other "proponents". One must sell one's own "kind" before/while taking on the other side... just like in political caucus races... and continue to do so during the entire life of the process. Being blind-sided by those you thought were on your side always leaves one staggering for footing.

But that's hindsight... and I, and I do believe most here, certainly would not have done a better job... far worse in fact, but it is teaching.

~ Duane Phillips.

Reply to
Duane Phillips

This should be in the FAQ.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

That may be their "right" but was it the "correct" thing to do?

As a NAR and TRA member at the time, I say NO! The "correct" thing to do was to work WITH JW/Enzi, as they were driving the effort, and not throw in the "Kyte Steamroller" to take over.. Support JW and not side-step him, would have been the "correct" thing to do..

BTW, and Bunny can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that NAR spent more on Kyte last year than they did on the lawsuit.

Kyte had ABSOLUTELY no reason for being involved (at the cost paid by TRA/NRA members), as the end result wouldn't have been worse if he'd had no involvement, and could have been better!

Think of JW as your corner store, and NAR/TRA as Walmart.. Yup, Walmart can come in and demo the whole block to get their way, as it is their "right", but is it the "correct" thing to do?

Reply to
AZ Woody

I haven't heard anyone from TRA/NAR blame the failure of the bill on "lack of support".

Reply to
RayDunakin

My recollection is that Wickman invited the NAR and its members to jump in. I think Wickman could have easily snuck it in under the NAR/TRA radar, but not under the Judiciary Commitee radar.

Alan

Reply to
Alan Jones

Now, now, let's wait until Bunny and the paid lawyer interpret the recent judges decision for us.

Reply to
Alan Jones

Complete and utter BS detected here Ray! From day one, NAR/ TRA BOT/BOD would tell members NOT to support JW/Enzi, and then a few days latter say "well, ok", only because the realized that the members were doing what they thought was right, and ignoring NAR/TRA anyway! NAR/TRA BOT/BOD were throwing "stop sticks" in front of this effort at every turn! NAR/TRA DID attack the effort on an ongoing basis, that is until they realized that no one was listening to them.. So they brought in Kyte to "take control", at a cost greater than the lawsuit in 2003 (correct me if I'm wrong Bunny)... And what did Kyte buy us? Zip - Nada - Zilch!

Hey, this is why SR is in B+W - too much was spent on Kyte! (and BTW, did I mention the dues increase?)

Reply to
AZ Woody

You obviously weren't paying attention. They clearly said, "Wait until we get can confirm this is the best course of action." Since this was a letter writing campaign, a delay of a few hours or even a day or two was insignificant to the outcome. (Even more so, if as you claim everyone was doing it without waiting for NAR/TRA to give the ok.)

Personally, I don't want an organization that goes off half-cocked everytime some yells "jump". I want some thought behind the actions, not action for the sake of action.

Reply to
RayDunakin

And they made poor decisions because it's their right...? Instead of letting Wickman pursue the legislative effort, and they the legal one, their resources were split to fight on two fronts.

Why? It wasn't theirs to start with. In other areas, that's called "theft". ;-)

Reply to
Len Lekx

Reply to
Alex Mericas

[snip]

If I as a consumer gets better selection and lower prices while employing more people than the corner store, then yes Walmart should move in and put the corner store out of business. That's how our system works.

Reply to
Alex Mericas

Every American citizen has the right (some would say the duty) to get involved in legislation that affects them. Poor decisions were made all around. Actually I think the NAR/TRA did Wickman a huge favor. They presented a perfect scapegoat for the eventual failure of the bill. Never mind that Mr. Wickman himself admits it was doomed from the start. In retrospect I wish the NAR/TRA had stayed out. Maybe JI/Izzy would have been silenced. Nah, they would have blamed the NAR/TRA for inaction and failure to support.

Funny how the guys > >

Reply to
Alex Mericas

What portion of the language proposed needed opposition?

Oh, yes, the lack of a mass limit. I forgot.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Check your history: When Enzi first proposed the bill, he requested, by way of Wickman, a show of support in the form of a _specifically_ timed _fax_ campaign, to be coordinated with his planned letter to his colleagues in the Senate proposing the legislation... the idea was to make sure that when Enzi made his proposal, the other Senators would be thinking, "oh, yes, we just got some messages about that ourselves!" This was _not_ the time for TRA to circulate a request to the membership that "nobody to write anything just yet untill our lawyers check it out"...

Further NAR/TRA "responses" to the Wickman/Enzi effort were in a similar vein at every turn...

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

Legislation.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

To write letters at specified times to specified groups.

NOT to split the message with a legislative "specialist" with a disparate agenda.

Imagine if another party became party to the ATF lawsuit and proffered an entirely different theory and position than NAR or TRA? Hmmm?

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Point(s)!

My ads are in B&W as a direct result.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Did I say it needed opposition? DID I?

Wickman himself admitted it HAD opposition:

Mr. Wickman's own words.

Reply to
Alex Mericas

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.