I apologize for messing up the quote. I copied and pasted from the other thread and the quotes indicators were not copied. I didn't notice it until you mentioned it. Please note I did provide a link in order to make sure there was no confusion with regard to context. Attach is a screenshot for clarification.Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:15 pmFirst, you need to block the quotes properly so it doesn't appear that I wrote statements that were made by other members.mojo84 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 5:53 pmCharles,
I am not trying to be confrontational or knock/bash you or the NRA. Again, I will remind you and others, we are on the same side of when it comes to gun issues. I am just confused as I seem to be getting conflicting info regarding how the NRA develops it's ratings. See the thread at these links. www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=1 ... s#p1173537
www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=1 ... s&start=30
Re: Straus not running for a new term.
#23 Post by Charles L. Cotton » Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:12 pm
Captain Matt wrote:
I would assume the NRA ratings are based on actual votes or legislation sponsored, not just surveys.
Maybe so but (1) they don't seem to be based on results and (2) gun rights bills do get killed behind the scenes and I can't recall anybody getting downgraded for it. Either way the lack of transparency in grading results in a lack of usefulness for myself and others. Which is fine if that's what they're shooting for.
As ScottDLS noted, grades are based on votes, not questionnaires unless the person is a freshman with no voting record. You act as though we don't pass pro-gun bills and that complete garbage. Gun bills die in the House based upon the Speaker and in the Senate based upon the Lt. Governor. Yet you want to blast all Republicans you call RINOs and the NRA for its rating system. You clearly don't know how the Legislature works.
Chas.Here is a quote of me when I said I think the NRA should take more into consideration than just votes.Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 4:52 pmWe can and do consider any action taken that impacts the Second Amendment.mojo84 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 4:06 pmWe'll see. Not sure how they take into account such as this since they use recorded votes and published positions on gun issues. I understand them trying to keep their ratings as objective as possible but as long as reps can hide behind not voting and killing bills in committee with them getting a vote, I do not know how they will change the system to consider such.
Hopefully, they'll figure something out.
Re: Straus not running for a new term.
#33 Post by mojo84 » Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:30 am
My point is that I am not sure the TSRA or NRA takes enough into consideration when they assign their ratings. I think one has to look beyond just voting record when it comes to the speaker of the house.
Secondly, the posts you quoted are not inconsistent with what I posted in this thread. Here, you stated that NRA/TSRA only grades based upon votes. The two year old post you quoted dealt with votes v. questionnaire responses. For the first time in decades, a Republican Speaker appointed one F-rated Democrat and one D-rated Democrat to chair the two most important committees for gun-owners. Bonnen earned his A-rating with his votes. Once in power as Speaker, he betrayed Texas gun-owners. Unlike most representatives, we have more upon which to rate Bonnen down.
Straus-haters and the all-or-nothing crowd want to equate him with Bonnen's actions and they are not equivalent by any stretch of the imagination.
As far as your dig about Straus haters and all-or-nothing crowd, I can assure you I am not a part of the all-or-nothing crowd. That dig was uncalled for and inaccurate. As far as being a Straus hater, that is somewhat accurate as I have developed a great distrust for him and his lieutenants that did his dirty work during his tenure as Speaker. As far as Bonnen being equivalent, I do not know. However, I do know he was a very close ally of and a lieutenant for Straus. Because of that I was not surprised when Bonnen did what he did and I did not feel dupe as many do.
I understand with all you have invested in 2nd Amendment issues this is very personal and an emotional hot button for you. However, someone that is trying to better understand how something works and how the NRA develops it's ratings doesn't deserve your digs and innuendo.
All I was trying to do is get a better understanding of the NRA ratings development as I have been provided conflicting information over the years. Some have said votes only, some have said votes, questuonnaires if no voting record available and others have said position papers are also included. Now it appears other actions may also be included. That's good new because other actions should be included.
I apologize for stepping on your toes. I tried to ask the question in a way I wouldn't.