I understand them doing it, and honestly, I think it's a good idea too.
But let me explain why.
JUst for arguements sake,. lets say there are 1 million members of the NRA.
MOst are probably great , outstanding people >
But you know how it is........in every group and in every crowd...there is at least a handful of people who will stand up, talk louder and be seen more than anybody else.
And they are idiots!
And they DO NOT represent the majority.
Take hunters for example: Most are thoughtful people who hunt only what they need or can handle, have respect for their prey as well as the environment. They understand conservation, species preservation, and presenting a good public image of hunters.
BUT..then you have 'ole Uncle Cletus who will not even begin to hunt without taking a 12 pack of beer with him, will plow through private fields and protected areas in his 4X4 truck of 44" mud tires, shoot animlas just to kill them ( but not collect or use them) and will be the first to stand up at a public meeting and state why it's his Constitutional right to use an M-60 machine gun and dynomite to hunt squirrels...and dares anybody to try to pry his weapons from his dead cold fingers.
Not the person you want to represent you right?
WEll, you know that just as soon as one gun control proponet make s a comment, that - "That" kind of NRA member will stand up. , and even though he may be one voice in a million....you know he's the one the media will latch onto.
The damage is almost unfixable.
I personally know some people who are NRA members and trust me...I doubt the NRA wants them to be the image that represents the NRA.
Likewise, I know somepeople who are NRA members and they NEED to be the ones on the news doing all the talking.
Thing is, which one does the media use to sell a story?
Which one does the gun control lobby use as an example of why more gun control is needed!
Shouldn't have to be this way, but alot of things shouldn't have to be the way they are.
JUst my own opinion , mind you.