but if it was the only way to access a range I would join again. We have a National Forest Range about 20 miles from the University I attend, and there is another one about the same distance where I'm from. So whether I'm in school or back home visiting my parents on weekends or breaks, I have a good place to shoot. All other decent ranges require NRA membership as well as a club membership to use the range. If not for the NF Ranges I would be a NRA member for that reason alone.
Does the NRA take money from the gun industry? Yep, no brainer, they promote shooting sports and the right to bear arms, which are directly related to the gun industry. They also get money from regular people involved in shooting sports, want the right to bear arms, and appreciate the effort the NRA puts into fighting for these rights. When billions of dollars get pumped into the fight to ban guns, it's kind of natural that billions of dollars would get pumped into actions to counter that effort. Like wincest said, anti-gunners created the NRA of today. The NRA would have never needed to fight back if the left had not picked the fight, and with billions of dollars in donations to pick the fight with.
As far as the video. It's dramatic. Shows a lot of the reasons we lose elections. In the end it basically says "fight lies with truth", albeit in a rather dramatic way. The NRA is playing hardball, just like the other side. I would agree that the NRA might benefit more using a softer approach. They should have known the left would frame it differently than "fight lies with truth", and the "Clenched fist of truth" would be used to say the NRA is saying "clench your fist and beat up liberals", or as some have said, "get your guns and start a war with them". That's BS of course but they should know it would be interpreted that way by antis.
= new reply since forum marked as read