NY AG has NRA in her sights.

Can NY AG Letitia James dissolve the NRA?  Will the decision hold in all states?

Her announcement was impressive.

I'm intrigued.


Alternative titles -

"NY AG Has NRA In Her Sights"

"NY AG Takes Aim At NRA"

"NY AG Hangs Target On Back Of NRA"

"NY AG to NRA: 


OK @nohero, trying to decide,  Those are catchy!


I don't understand why Trump says that he told the NRA for years that they should move to Texas.  They're currently base in VA - how would the move affect the actions of the AG of NY?


jamie said:

I don't understand why Trump says that he told the NRA for years that they should move to Texas.  They're currently base in VA - how would the move affect the actions of the AG of NY?

 It's probably related to the fact that Trump doesn't let facts get in the way of whatever it is he wants to blurt out.

Because he's "cognitively there", right?


jamie said:

I don't understand why Trump says that he told the NRA for years that they should move to Texas.  They're currently base in VA - how would the move affect the actions of the AG of NY?

I hope you are not assuming that everything Trump says is designed to make sense.

Anyway, I am not a tax lawyer, but I would assume that organizations can be tax-exempt at both federal and state level, so donations to them are deductible at both levels. If, say, New York, New Jersey, and California revoke their tax exempt status, donations from those states would still be deductible at federal level, but not anymore for state taxes. So that would make things a more complex, and it would also discourage NRA donations to a certain level.


basil said:

I hope you are not assuming that everything Trump says is designed to make sense.

Anyway, I am not a tax lawyer, but I would assume that organizations can be tax-exempt at both federal and state level, so donations to them are deductible at both levels. If, say, New York, New Jersey, and California revoke their tax exempt status, donations from those states would still be deductible at federal level, but not anymore for state taxes. So that would make things a more complex, and it would also discourage NRA donations to a certain level.

When it is suggested that the AG is attempting to dissolve the NRA, it would have to carry in all states correct?


Morganna said:

basil said:

I hope you are not assuming that everything Trump says is designed to make sense.

Anyway, I am not a tax lawyer, but I would assume that organizations can be tax-exempt at both federal and state level, so donations to them are deductible at both levels. If, say, New York, New Jersey, and California revoke their tax exempt status, donations from those states would still be deductible at federal level, but not anymore for state taxes. So that would make things a more complex, and it would also discourage NRA donations to a certain level.

When it is suggested that the AG is attempting to dissolve the NRA, it would have to carry in all states correct?

I don't know, as I said, I am not a (tax) lawyer


I was pretty excited to hear the NY AG rattling the cage of the NRA but a peek at FOX news reminded me that they have their, "coming to take your guns" slogan revamped.

I'm second guessing the timing.


It's going to amaze people that when the NRA disappears in a cloud of smoke that the 2nd Amendment is still there.   Suckers.


I dissent from what seems to be a consensus. A public official seeking to completely abolish an organization of millions of citizens is a very dangerous thing.

In the late 50s and through the 60s the Teamsters Union was investigated for corruption at the highest level. No one suggested dissolving the Union.

What prevents a future Right-Wing AG from trying to totally abolish Planned Parenthood or the NAACP?


STANV said:

...What prevents a future Right-Wing AG from trying to totally abolish Planned Parenthood or the NAACP?

Lack of evidence of graft? 


STANV said:

I dissent from what seems to be a consensus. A public official seeking to completely abolish an organization of millions of citizens is a very dangerous thing.

In the late 50s and through the 60s the Teamsters Union was investigated for corruption at the highest level. No one suggested dissolving the Union.

What prevents a future Right-Wing AG from trying to totally abolish Planned Parenthood or the NAACP?

 It seems as if Planned Parenthood is often under attack so that would not surprise me.

Anyway isn't the issue that the NRA presents itself as a non profit? Doesn't that qualify it as a group that is subject to oversight? 

As a non profit cat rescue, I think I would lose my 501C3 status if I started advertising kittens in dog fighting magazines under bait. I actually had an potential adopter disclose that he just happened to have a python, so that adoption fell through.



jimmurphy said:

Lack of evidence of graft? 

 Really? You think they couldn't "find" evidence?

If an organization whose policies you favor had a officer or officers stealing from that organization would you not defend the organization itself?


STANV said:

jimmurphy said:

Lack of evidence of graft? 

 Really? You think they couldn't "find" evidence?

 

Always.

https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229

The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets.


For purposes of the NY AG's action, the executives of the "nonprofit" are enriching themselves to the detriment of the stated aims of the nonprofit.  It's almost RICO-like in the level of activity they're engaged in.  Absent similar evidence of self-dealing, it would be difficult to bring a similar case against another entity.


Anyone see the footage of Wayne LaPierre's botched elephant hunt? It's sickening.


basil said:

Anyone see the footage of Wayne LaPierre's botched elephant hunt? It's sickening.

 Oh no. 

Matthew Scully, animal advocate, and Republican speechwriter, published a book, Dominion. There is a chapter on hunting and a group called The Safari Club and all of the "canned hunts."  It was just one of many infuriating topics. It's worth reading.

https://www.amazon.com/Dominion-Power-Suffering-Animals-Mercy/dp/0312319738



In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.