The NRA Doesn’t Speak for Most Gun Owners
Dear Leading Ladies,
The son of a friend of ours lives in a western mountain state where he hunts for elk and deer. He then butchers the felled animals and feeds his family with the meat. His wife only eats the meat he has provided – other meat only if she knows how it was sourced. The deer and elk are hunted during specific times of year when the herds need to be culled. He doesn’t eat meat from methane-producing livestock raised in sometimes horrendous environments, such as calves raised in small pens to assure tender veal. Our friend’s son hunts wild animals, and he keeps his guns safely stored. He also recently enrolled his under-10 son in a gun safety course.
Moreover, like more than 80% of the gun owners in America, he is not a member of the National Rifle Association (NRA).
He doesn’t lobby for AR15-style weapons accessible for all or approve of the lawlessness flouted by the most vocal of second Amendment defenders.
And, despite common misapprehensions, he is more representative of gun owners in this country than the outspoken and deep-pocketed members of the NRA who wield such frightening and dangerous influence over our politicians.
Most gun owners approve of restrictions
The results of a poll from Ipsos conducted shortly after the Uvalde shooting found that two-thirds of Americans believe there should be moderate regulations or restrictions on gun ownership – with 53% of Republicans in concurrence.
And, in a Huffington Post survey of gun owners who do not belong to the NRA, one in four respondents selected the response “I disagree with the NRA’s political beliefs” as a reason they chose not to join; another 22 percent said they didn’t feel that the NRA represented people like them (whether that was because they didn’t feel like they fit the demographic profile of a typical NRA member ― Republican, middle-aged, white and male ― or another reason wasn’t clear).
So, then, why does the NRA wield such outsized influence on our politicians and lawmakers?
Is it all about money?
Mostly, there’s the money. In 2022, the NRA received $97 million from membership dues, according to the BBC. Although this was down from its peak in 2018, ostensibly because of the pandemic, dues still provide a substantial budget used primarily to influence politicians on gun policy, says the BBC.
“The NRA also has considerable influence via its membership, many of whom will vote for a candidate based solely on their stance on guns,” the BBC reports. In fact, it provides its members with guidelines for voting by grading “members of Congress from A to F on their perceived friendliness to gun rights. Those ratings can cost pro-gun control candidates their seats.”
The truth is that the NRA doesn’t just give millions to political candidates. For example, “in 2015 it paid more than $20 million to a single vendor that focuses on building the NRA’s membership.” And “one firearms retailer declared that [he] has contributed at least $15 million to the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action.”
“In 2021, the NRA spent $4.2 million on lobbying, according to non-partisan US research firm, OpenSecrets. OpenSecrets' figures suggest that since 2010, the NRA has directed more than $140m to pro-gun election candidates.”
And as Common Cause reports, “Empowered by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, the NRA reported spending at least $54 million on independent expenditures during the 2016 federal election cycle. Other estimates put the number closer to $70 million – accounting for spending on certain field and internet operations that is not reported on FEC reports.”
Although the NRA was founded in 1871 as a recreational group designed to "promote and encourage rifle shooting," it has become one of the most powerful political organizations in our country.
How can they wield such power?
The confusing part is why a group that represents a small minority of its supposed constituency can wield such enormous power? Is it just money? Aren’t there very wealthy people who care as much about gun control as those who care about preventing gun control?
One part of the answer may be that a majority of non-NRA gun owners, though they may not support NRA positions, are reluctant to engage in gun violence prevention, due to “feelings of alienation or being seen as part of the problem for owning a firearm.” according to a study co-authored by Michael Siegel of Tufts University and reported by NPR.
Therefore, Siegel maintains that gun owners need to be encouraged to be part of the solution. This can ensue if other Americans acknowledge their right to own firearms. "We don't have to agree with it, but we have to respect it," Siegel says. He believes that “showing gun owners that their point of view is respected, may help elevate — or draw out — the voices of those who support gun control,” according to NPR.
But, clearly, more is needed. The NRA boasts 5 million members, but others estimate it is more like 3 million. In any case, there are around 210 million registered voters in the US, and another 30%, or up to 70 million, eligible but not registered. Since only 66.8% of registered voters cast their ballots in the 2020 presidential election, and slightly more than 50% in the 2022 midterm elections, there is plenty of work to be done to garner votes for pro-gun control measures.
Common Cause agrees. They encourage gun control advocates to support “automatic voter registration, pre-registration for 16- and 17-year olds, and early voting; changing the way we pay for political campaigns to empower all Americans, not just the wealthy few; shining a light on secret spending in politics; and ending gerrymandering.”
All this and other “get out the vote” initiatives will help. But none of it happens without big money. Is that the dirty little secret no one wants to say out loud? As long as the Supreme Court continues to maintain that it is unconstitutional to place any monetary limits on the contributions of corporations, the gun control advocates are going to have to ante up in the big way that the NRA supporters do. Money for candidates like Massachusetts’ own Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Sens. Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, who all co-sponsored legislation to overthrow the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United. And money to fund efforts that end voter suppression and encourage voting. Signing petitions and attending rallies is nice. But money on the same scale as the NRA spending is needed.
A wonderful opportunity to learn more is coming up on Wednesday, October 25, when Leading Ladies will co-host a Community Conversation at The Cabot in Beverly about gun control and what we all can do about it. John Rosenthal, co-author of the Handgun Control Act; a representative of March for Our Lives; and other experts will comprise our panel. A short film will be screened and a moderated discussion with the audience will follow. Please join us.
Therese (she/her/hers)
Judy (she/her/hers)
Didi (she/her/hers)
Leading Ladies Executive Team