One Way or Another, Change Is Coming to the NRA
It is now conceivable that sometime in the not-too-distant future — 2022? 2023? — the National Rifle Association will cease to exist. Even more likely is that a New York court severely sanctions its leadership, or the prospect of this spurs dramatic changes in the organization’s leadership.
Stephen Gutowski, the longtime gun and Second Amendment-focused writer at the Washington Free Beacon has launched his own gun-focused publication, The Reload. This morning Gutowski lays out the grim assessments from bankruptcy and nonprofit law experts in the aftermath of federal bankruptcy court rejecting the NRA’s filing. Federal Judge Harlin Hale ruled that the NRA was “inappropriately trying to use the bankruptcy court to avoid government oversight,” and stated “in recent years, however, it has become apparent that the NRA was suffering from inadequate governance and internal controls.” One nonprofit expert concluded, “I think it actually made dissolution more likely.”
An accurate sense of the NRA’s problems requires keeping two things in mind. The first is that New York state attorney general Letitia James is just about the worst person to lead any investigation of the NRA, because of her past statements labeling the group a “terrorist organization” and obvious ideological vendetta against the group. The second is that the NRA’s management genuinely did bad things that may well have violated the law, or at minimum, represented self-dealing and egregious waste of donor money.
At the 2019 NRA Annual Meeting, it was clear the NRA’s Board of Directors faced an enormously consequential decision with the accusations and counter-accusations between Wayne LaPierre and Ollie North. The board largely decided to act as if everything was fine, and contend that the accusations of self-dealing and wasteful spending represented the usual media bias. That non-response to insiders accusing other insiders now looks like a colossal error in judgment. Having rejected the option of making changes on their own, the NRA’s leadership is likely to have change forced upon it by a court.
With the cause of the Second Amendment relatively strong, and the NRA relatively weak, some gun owners may see the dissolution or wholesale replacement of the current NRA leadership as less of a tragedy and political setback than a necessary step.
I’ve been yearning for a change in leadership for decades now. Every time I get a call from the NRA begging for funds I ask, “Has LaPierre stepped down?” When they answer in the negative I tell them, “You can stop wasting your time and mine as I won’t throw good money after bad. I won’t consider any donations or upgrade to my membership until he’s gone.”
And I know I’m not the only one who sees this as necessary. The story always seems to be about LaPierre and not about the regular members of the NRA. He pays lip service to protecting our rights, but GOA and JPFO seem to be more serious about it.
When ‘The Trials and Tribulations of LaPierre’© became the story, instead of the standard operational ‘NRA Mission’, that was the point where he needed to head off into the sunset, with or without his golden parachute and personal assistant.
That he didn’t is the NRA board’s fault and that means they’re as much of ‘the story’ as Wayne is.