Open Letter

[jimlongley]

I need to point out that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA or Alice and OCT or CJ Grisham. There are one way attacks by OCT and CJ, but that does not constitute
"infighting." My comments are just that, my comments and do not represent the position of the NRA. NRA Board Members do not represent the NRA unless we are acting as a body. The fact that CJ and OCT attack the NRA, TSRA and Alice does not mean my response is that of NRA, TSRA or Alice.

I realize your letter is intended to help put an end to the banter between CJ and me and I appreciate your efforts. However, I want everyone to realize that my comments should not be attributed to any other person or organization.

Chas.

That's a little disingenuous Charles, we, the members of the NRA, elect the members of the board with the expectation that they will represent the NRA at all times, the media certainly perceive it that way, although one has to consider that it is the media. While not stating or implying that the members of the board cannot have and express their personal opinions, those same members, by virtue of the position that they have been placed in by the general membership, must be somewhat circumspect and recognize that anything they say may be interpreted as the (horrors!) "Official Stance of the NRA" by anyone who disagrees with them or us, and that is a bell that can't be unrung. I hold my personal opinions dear and expect anyone else to do the same, it's just that expression of those opinions "ex-officio" can lead to misinterpretation, and misrepresentation despite any and all prefaces to the contrary.

It is a terrifying age we live in, where one simple word said in an unguarded moment and meant only to express a personal opinion rather than the organization's policy can gain a life of its own and travel the world in split seconds, but I can hardly characterize the rancorous give and take between you and Mr. Grisham as mere banter. I have also heard a (yes, only one) negative comment by a person of my acquaintance who is not (and says he will not be) a member of the NRA or TSRA, and also claims not to be a member or (direct, overt) supporter of OCT, that his perception is that you and CJ are about set to tear each other's throats out from what he has read here and in other places where he trolls. I should point out that I consider this person to be rather a strange duck, a shooter who is FOR licensed POSSESSION, registration, and all that, so his opinion may be pretty much worthless (and there is one of those paradigms sneaking in.)

It's not disingenuous, it's the law. Members of the Board of Directors of any corporation, other than officers (President, Vice-President, etc.), do not represent the corporation unless they are meeting as a body. If you want to see the official NRA position on open-carry or any other organization, then you must look to the NRA's official pronouncements.

I understand what you are saying about statements by certain persons being attributed to an organization and this is why I do not express my strongly-held positions on social issues. I do not want to alienate people from supporting the Second Amendment because they may disagree with me on those social issues. However, as an NRA member and Second Amendment activist, I will not let false allegations against the NRA, TSRA or Alice Tripp go unanswered.

The only reason I posted on this thread is because Canvasback expressly directed part of his comments to "NRA, TSRA . . ." and as a Board Member it is my duty to make it clear that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA and OCT.

Chas.

I understand your motivation, and even agree, but:

It may be the law Charles, but that does not change the perception, particularly that generated by one rather noisy opponent misstating the case. I cringe when I hear people state that so and so must be guilty because they "took the Fifth" and often try to correct the misapprehension, but in this case I was merely pointing out that, right or wrong, legal or not, the misapprehension does exist. As you note, you are being held up as representing the NRA, but I would point out that all of us who proudly were the logo are sen as representing the NRA, even including those who, however falsely, claim that they have resigned, and then claim they have not.

It rankles me to be accused, when an anti-gun nut spots my TSRA license plate with my ham call K5NRA on it, of being responsible for murder and mayhem, and it still hurts that walking down a street in uniform in 1969, I got accused of being a baby killer despite the fact that I never went near Vietnam, and those are examples of such misapprehensions, a ringing bell if you will. All of the answering of those false allegations will never change the fact that someone thinks like that despite the legal truth of the matter.

Just saying, Charles.