NRA Memberships Surge in Wake of Anti-NRA Protests, ‘Media Bias’
The Daily Mail reports that Google searches for “NRA membership” rose “4,900 percent” since the Florida attack. That rise occurred at a time when many Democrats, media personalities, and Hollywood celebrities were denouncing the NRA as causal in the shooting that took 17 lives in a gun-free zone.
The Hollywood attitude was epitomized by writer-director Judd Apatow, actress Mia Farrow, and comedian Chelsea Handler, all of whom responded to the Florida school attack by calling out the NRA to drive a wedge between voters and pro-gun legislators.
For example, Handler tweeted:
We have to elect candidates that are not funded by the NRA in November. We have an opportunity to elect candidates who won’t allow kids to go to school and get shot. It is disgusting how many times this has happened and Republicans do nothing. You all have blood on your hands.
— Chelsea Handler (@chelseahandler) February 14, 2018
CNN’s February 21 gun control town hall highlighted the media’s animosity towards the NRA, as it featured survivors from the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting confronting Republicans over NRA affiliation. The Guardian reported that one student spoke to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), asking, “Can you tell me right now you will not accept a single donation from the NRA?”
In addition, more than a dozen companies severed ties with the NRA in the wake of the school attack, ending discounted rates and fares for NRA members.
But a large swath of the American populace is equating these various attacks on the NRA with attacks on the Second Amendment, and others see the attacks as proof of “media bias.” The result is an explosion in NRA memberships.
The Daily Mail quoted Cleta Mitchell, a former NRA board member and former Oklahoma lawmaker, who said, “There is no one. NO ONE. Who joins the NRA for a discount on a rental car. You can rest assured that the NRA will not lose a single member as a result of this. If anything, it should spur people to join the NRA as a means of demonstrating that we who believe in the Second Amendment will not be bullied by these left wing multi-billion dollar corporations.” http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/05/nra-memberships-surge-wake-of-anti-nra-protests-media-bias/
I'm sure the NRA bulk mail membership campaign last month to registered Republicans had nothing to do with it.
renewed early for 2 years
The Daily mail? membership increased 4900%
wow, really?
Omg - there are comments here that have birthed a whole new level of stupid. “I don’t own guns, but I just joined the NRA to support easy access to bump stocks.” Stupid must be contagious.
Truly. A willingness to support an organization defending human rights must be "stupid".
You are against women having full rights to their bodies. Got it. But any asshole can get as many guns and assault weapons as they want because somehow that right is sacrosanct.
You love cussing, you love assholes! Getting the vapors now because somebody besides Trump is talking harshly? WTF? I'm getting whiplash. These different standards are ridiculous.
Full rights to ones body requires federal financial assistance?
No response necessary
What a laugh. As if owning an assault rifle is a "human right". That statement is beyond ridiculous.
I had a neighbor who concussed her husband with a frozen leg of lamb. Does it make it an AW?
And yet your every seed and post is vulgar in the eyes of god.
So, you have been made God's judge and jury????
How boastful of you.
Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms . [1] The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip , and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud . [1] [2] Some firearms are specified by name. [3] At the time that the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban passed in 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use." [3] The origin of the term has been attributed to legislators, gun control groups , the media, and the firearms industry itself. [1] [4] [5] [6] It is sometimes conflated with the term " assault rifle ", which refers to selective-fire military rifles that can fire in automatic and / or burst mode . [5]
Sadly. Another decrease in the quality of discourse .
I guess you haven't read the Constitution.
Sad.
When is the last time you offered at least a complete paragraph in a comment? Everything you write is just a tiny jab at something or someone. Sad.
I am god. Grok?
I remember seeing that phrase in a Robert Heinlein novel. It brings to mind another phrase from the same novel, "Do what you will is the whole of the law". When a fan wrote to Heinlein that he was obviously advocating doing anything you wished to do, whether legal or not; Heinlein replied that, "If you think that it gives you permission to screw whoever you wish, without consequences, remember that the same rule also applies to lynch mobs".
Yeah, after reading that comment I have to agree, stupid is quite contagious indeed.
Interestingly enough ... most all of the individuals that I have spoken to (even out at the gun club) had never heard of a bump stock before Las Vegas. (this is where the stupid starts) ... Yet now the bump stock is a lead talking point, as if every gun owner has one - when the truth is no one even knew what they were .. the opposition made a product popular by wanting to ban it - go figure
Individuals that are against something that they do not have knowledge of, need to choose their battles more wisely -
This could be said of all the liberals on this site. Just about all the articles they write or seed just fizzle out and are epic fails.
You should follow your own advice. And I have guns, by the way.
Thought that the guy with a gun as a name didn't own a gun. Now it seems you do. Please try to keep your story straight.
Or a horde of school children.
If they want to throw it away, who am I to stop them?
Who are hundreds of innocent concert goers to stop them either? I’m sure it’s quite a consolation for the families of the dead in Las Vegas that the shooter wasted his money on ammo.
Or concert goers.
One thing we have to keep in mind is that a very large portion of those that are against guns have no experience with them out side of playing Call of Duty or Sniper Elite. They don't grasp the mechanics needed to properly aim and control the weapon. They don't understand that a bump stock is only as fast as the weapon's cycle of fire.
One would be much better off spending the money on a quality target trigger and range time.
Aside from the source, which is totally unreliable, I would bet that most of the people, including NRA members do not realize that universal background checks require a universal gun registry in order to be effective. If you don't have that, it would be impossible to prove that the background check hasn't been done; the people would simply ignore the law and laugh at enforcement attempts which couldn't stand up in court. Universal gun registry by the Federal Government would not be tolerated and was specifically ruled out when the NICS system was formed. Also, universal background checks would require the Federal Government to interfere with intra State commerce, which the Constitution does not allow. The Federal Government is only allowed to regulate inter State commerce. Of course, following the Constitution is not exactly in the gun grabber's playbook.
Definitely. A Thompson is even more so, even though it is much heavier than an AR and shoots pistol cartridges. From experience, I can assure you that, if you fire a 30 round magazine from a Thompson in one burst, the last 27 rounds will be fired at the sky.
But getting these anti-gun fools to understand that will be impossible. For them certain rifles "look scary" and they want them banned (like that will ever work).
Off topic [ph]
Really?
________________________________________________________
The website “I Love My Freedom” published an article claiming that “millions RUSH to join the NRA after anti-gun lectures by the liberal media.”
Facebook users were skeptical of the story—which garnered over 25,000 reactions and several thousand shares—and rightfully so. Because “millions” of new NRA members in a couple weeks would be pretty amazing.
The only evidence provided in the article are Google trends and an assortment of tweets.
“Google Trends even show a massive surge in ‘how to join the NRA’ searches this week,’” I Love My Freedom touted . Indeed, Google searches did see an 80 percent increase in searches for “How to join the NRA,” but searches do not necessarily translate to actual new memberships.
In conclusion, the article cited several tweets claiming support for the NRA. One of the tweets cited in the story is from a fake “Clint Eastwood” account:
For a sense of scale for this “millions” of new members claim, the NRA, on its website, currently reports having “nearly five million members.” So 2 million new members—the minimum number to support the “millions” claim—would mean at least a 40 percent surge in the space of a week or so.
And for perspective, over the course of six months after the terrible spree shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, the NRA reported a 10 percent increase in membership. The claim from I Love My Freedom, then would require at least four times that increase, in about 1/25th of the time frame. And I Love My Freedom provides literally no actual evidence to support their claim.
The NRA did not respond to TWS Fact Check’s requests for comment prior to publication. Until they do, there is no reason to regard this claim as true.
If you have questions about this fact check, or would like to submit a request for another fact check, email Holmes Lybrand at hlybrand@weeklystandard.com or the Weekly Standard at factcheck@weeklystandard.com. For details on TWS Fact Check, see our explainer here .