Survivalist Forum banner

The National African American Gun Association

8.6K views 86 replies 31 participants last post by  Sailor  
#1 ·
I discovered this today.

https://naaga.co/

Lifetime membership is $600
Annual membership is $29/year
Couple membership is $39/year
Family membership (up to 4) is $59/year.

Membership shall not be denied to any person because of race, color, gender, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability of the person.

The first convention of NAAGA will take place in Atlanta, August 14, 15, & 16, 2020.

The goal of the National African American Gun Association is to establish a 2nd Amendment Organization that educates and trains our community on the rich legacy of gun ownership of African Americans, offering education, training, support, safety standards, and cultural inspiration.

We are a pro 2nd amendment organization focused on the preservation of our community through armed protection and community building. We are a hub and network for all African American firearm owners, organizations, gun clubs and outdoor enthusiasts.

The long-term goal of the National African American Gun Association is to have every African American introduced to firearm use for home protection, competitive shooting, and outdoor recreational activities. We welcome people of all religious, political, social, and racial backgrounds.

We especially welcome African American members of law enforcement and active retired military.
 
#2 ·
I discovered this today.

https://naaga.co/

Lifetime membership is $600
Annual membership is $29/year
Couple membership is $39/year
Family membership (up to 4) is $59/year.
Membership shall not be denied to any person because of race, color, gender, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability of the person.

The first convention of NAAGA will take place in Atlanta, August 14, 15, & 16, 2020.
I think it's cool. Have always wondered why they didn't have 1. They have just about everything else so why not a Right To Bear Arms group.
 
#4 ·
I will have to tell my husband, he might join even though we can't carry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Optimist
#5 ·
There are many gun rights groups that African American gun owners can join. Many don't because of the racial concerns. I hope that this new organization can alleviate that and truly turns out to be a legitimate group that promotes gun rights and not just another way for anger against others to be demonstrated.

I will be very interested in seeing it grow and join the NRA, Gun Owners of America (GOA), National Association of Gun Rights (NAGR), the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and many others in lobbying Congress to protect all gun owners 2nd Amendment rights.
 
#6 ·
Where on the face of this earth is this country called "Africa America" located? A person is either African or they are American. I'm happy to see another gun support emerge, but they need to cut the Bull ****. It they were born in America they're "AMERICANS". The National African American Gun Association is a race based group and therefore a racist organization. They get no respect from me.
 
#23 ·
Amen friend!!! Try WET (White Entertainment TV) or NAAWP (National Organization for the Advancement of White People) and see what happens! Fudge would hit the fan!
 
#13 ·
You know what is really, really, really racist?

The history of American gun laws. If any group of Americans should be proponents for armed defense of liberties and embrace the true meaning of the 2A it should be Black Americans.

Having an "African American" Gun Association achieves more than simply joining the NRA and being singled out as an "Uncle Tom" or "Coon". It more directly addresses the issue that disarming Blacks has been historically used in the war against the 2A and takes away Progressive Gun Grabber's "for the minorities" angle.
 
#14 ·
You know what is really, really, really racist?

The history of American gun laws. If any group of Americans should be proponents for armed defense of liberties and embrace the true meaning of the 2A it should be Black Americans.

Having an "African American" Gun Association achieves more than simply joining the NRA and being singled out as an "Uncle Tom" or "Coon". It more directly addresses the issue that disarming Blacks has been historically used in the war against the 2A and takes away Progressive Gun Grabber's "for the minorities" angle.
No, it further separates people into us and them and weakens the NRA, the GOA and other gun groups that have NO racial element.

It simply creates ANOTHER grievance group based on their color. If you want to stop everything being about race, stop creating organizations that make everything about race.
 
#17 · (Edited)
All for it. I won't join because I'm not black and because I already belong to 4 other pro-gun organizations. I do wonder, however, how people abroad and on this site would react to a "National White Dude's For Gun Rights" organization. I can picture the word "racist" flying about to and fro.
 
#26 ·
I completely disagree with the assertion that this group is racist. This group does not deliberately exclude whites from membership. The reason that its focus is on legal firearms ownership by Americans whose ancestors came to what is now the U.S.A. as slaves (and later as immigrants from Africa or Caribbean nations with black populations) is the unique experience that blacks have had in the U.S. concerning guns.

Anyone who is getting hung up on this club being geared to attract black membership is allowing identity politics to get in the way of supporting (if not through actual paid membership, at least morally) a group of fellow Americans who support the Second Amendment.

It was not white Americans for examples who were barred from owning guns before the U.S. even came to exist. Statutes existed during the 1700s that prevented blacks from owning guns, knives, and even dogs. A reason that freedmen and freed women were so oftentimes easy targets for the tactics of the Democratic Party's terrorist arm, the Ku Klux Klan, was that blacks were often unarmed.

If you are a poster in this forum who opposes gun control because you consider the disarming of law-abiding citizens a precursor to tyranny by the state, then you are most indubitably fully aware that whenever a population or demographic or group is rendered completely unarmed and disarmed, it is then easiest to perpetrate evil upon said group. Anyone here with even a small modicum of what can be remotely described as a perfunctory knowledge of history knows that whenever, in the course of human events, one people group exerted total and unrestricted power and authority over another, the outcome was always violent, brutal, cruel, and ugly. We who love and defend the Second Amendment wish to avoid that for ourselves and our loved ones; witness the pro-Second Amendment patriots of Virginia who very recently mobilized to demonstrate to the Democrats in VA's power structure that they will not be pushed around and bullied. And mind you, there were both white and black Virginians demonstrating in defense of the Second Amendment.

If anything, a group like this NAAGA should be used by us as a weapon against leftists. Leftists love disarmament and claim minorities are harmed by gun ownership. This group and the statements on its website will leave leftists without comment; they claim minorities are oppressed, and what easier way is it to oppress people than to ensure they cannot defend themselves?

And as for exclusivity: anyone here think the National Organization of Italian American Women is racist and sexist? I am not Italian and I'm not a woman; does this mean this group is bigoted towards my background and gender? Or the German-American Heritage Foundation of the USA - I'm not of German ancestry. Does this mean I can't join, or learn about its programs, or study German, or contribute financially because my bloodline doesn't take me back to Germany?

What if one isn't a person who has English/British ancestry? I guess he/she is forbidden from even thinking about joining one of these groups, or at least attending an event held by it:

  • American Friends of British Art
  • American Friends of the Georgian Group
  • American-Scottish Foundation
  • American Trust for the British Library
  • The Anglosphere Society
  • British American Project
  • The British Schools and Universities Club of New York
  • CantabNYC
  • The Colonial Dames of America
  • Daughters of the British Empire in the State of New York
  • The English-Speaking Union of the United States
  • Historic Royal Palaces
  • Mountbatten Program
  • New York Caledonian Club
  • New York Welsh
  • The Order of St. John
  • The Pilgrims of the United States
  • Queen Elizabeth II September 11 Garden
  • Rhode Island Welsh Society
  • The Royal Oak Foundation
  • The Saint Andrew's Society of the State of New York
  • Saint Nicholas Society of the City of New York
  • Society of Colonial Wars in the State of New York
  • Society of the First Families of New York
  • St. David's Society of the State of New York
  • St. George's Society of New York
  • UK Alumni Group NY
  • Welsh Society of Western New England

And remember, one of the most virulently pro-2A groups in America is Jewish: Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership. It is an aggressively pro-gun ownership group whose views are shaped by the experiences of Jews throughout history. But the JFPO does not bar non-Jews from joining. I'm not a member the way I'm a member of the NRA or have previously been a member of GOA, but I see the JFPO - and the NAAGA - as allies.

Some people here don't realize they're acting like the very leftists we on this site criticize and strongly disagree with: leftists, who see racism in anything and everything.
 
#29 ·
Let's give em a chance to help protect the 2nd Amendment. If anyone thinks their racist because of their name, that's OK.

If more Blacks will join because of their name AND it turns out to help defend the 2nd Amendment then all gunowners will benefit. If they do defend the 2nd Amendment then they may not be as racist as some thought. If they just turn out to be a platform to rail about white gunowners, then we will know.
 
#42 ·
JCH, the Africans who make it over here are, as a rule, highly educated and have nothing but distaste (putting it mildly) for American Blacks, seeing them as dangerous, ignorant, thugs. I knew one such man who would not let his children associate with American Blacks as a result.
 
#44 ·
Mild distaste or indifference is fair. My wife is from Kenya and she calls American Black people “Blacks “ and Africans immigrants Africans. My wife would prolly not be happy if our daughter brought home an American black guy as her fiancé’Or if my son married an American black woman.

I should point out that there are Africans whose tribal membership would make her unhappy with them marrying into our family too.
 
This post has been deleted
#51 ·
the law specifically says "law abiding citizens" My question is, If I really was criminal because of my convictions, then why do I adhere to an unconstitutional law? So in my opinion since I do follow what the law says and do not own, possess or have access to firearms, my rights should be restored. That in and of itself makes me a law abiding citizen. It is just too bad that those who are "in charge" do not see it that way.
 
#65 ·
Isn't it crazy that they could be so inefficient at things that mattered, but so terribly efficient with extermination?
Say's something about them, IMHO.

And an unlawful order is only to be disobeyed if determined unlawful by higher military authority? Does the word My Lai mean anything to us?
It means a media pushed lie, an agenda driven social response, and a lot of misunderstanding of the realities, to me.
But it should be looked and and studied from all sides, regardless. There were definitely crimes committed.
 
#61 ·
Adopting your words, "Struggles are not won by defensive tactics." as a signature block line where it applies. Thanks for the whole response. Light fighter, long retired. "It's a great day to be a light fighter." (**** Knauer, Col, USA (Ret))
Doc
p.s.,
"Power to the people" means us, all of us, from our in-born natural rights of men.
I'm rambling.....
 
#64 ·
that was a very interesting read, Thank you for that.
 
#70 ·
Here is one for those who convey that a law passed is legitimate even if it is unconstitutional:

Unconstitutional Official Acts

16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....

A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.

No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

Jon Roland:

Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.

All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life.

Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.
https://constitution.org/uslaw/16amjur2nd.htm
 
#78 ·
.

Good for the NAAGA starting another pro 2A group. This pro 2A group should be welcomed as an ally, not as an enemy. Their not denying any person membership based upon race, color, gender, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability of the person.

60% of their current membership are Black women.

.
 
#80 ·
Assuming this group is actually a 2A group and not a front organization (I haven't looked at them yet), distinguishing themselves by race is an EXCELLENT offensive tactic against leftists and SJWs. We HAVE to start using the left's tactics against the left, because those tactics work. NAAGA seems to be doing just that. Unless they appear to be a sketchy false-front group, consider me another honky member.