History of the NRA and NRA’s Dominance in Modern-Day Gun Politics

Play

10:00

We’ll trace the history of the National Rifle Association (NRA) lobby, a non-profit organization with a significant role in forming modern-day U.S. gun policy. What does the NRA’s dominance means for gun politics?

Guests

  • Richard Feldman (author and former regional political director, NRA)
  • Robert Spitzer (Distinguished Service Professor/Chair, Political Science Department, State University of New York, College at Cortland)
  • Ladd Everitt (Director of Communications, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)

Learn More

Click here for more information on Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist by Richard Feldman.

Click here to purchase Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist by Richard Feldman.

Click here to purchase The Politics of Gun Control by Robert J. Spitzer.

Join The Conversation

  • Jan Brittan

    In an ideal world, the NRA would be the leading advocate for rational, public–protective gun policies, instead of advocating for all guns, all the time, for all people. The guest from the NRA proved early on that he was not a respectful person with his “joke” about his opposition to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). He also criticized Michael Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns for their “black and white” view of the problems of gun policy. But who is more “black and white” than the NRA, which plumps up paranoia among ill-informed gun owners with their “Get your guns while you still can” line on gun show advertisements? No politician would dare to suggest limiting gun ownership–that horse has been out of the barn so long, it’ll never be found. Still, who feels safer with a paranoid neighbor bristling with guns and a sense of being under attack?

  • http://www.RFeldman.com Richard Feldman

    Sorry for the attempt as a humourous line – works for some, not for others (that would be you).
    Probably prefer the paranoid neighbor with guns than paranoid neighbor with a meth lab that could blow us both up.  The point is I’d prefer neither. Stridency on either side of this issue fuels a great deal of  heat, but precious little light.