Thursday, February 19, 2015

Why Did The NRA Support The Wrong Permit Fee Reduction Bill In Mississippi?

Two competing bills were introduced to the Mississippi legislature last month, both intended to reduce the state’s sky-high fees for concealed carry permits.

One of the bills was much better than the other one. SB 2226 called for a reduction of the licensing fee by fifty percent, while SB 2394 called for a reduction of twenty percent.

Yet the NRA came out in support of the weaker bill, which passed the Senate last week. The stronger bill never made it out of committee.

Mississippi’s gun permit fees are some of the highest in the nation. The permitting program’s fund at the Department of Public Safety is currently running a $2.5 million surplus.

Why would the NRA pass up the opportunity to make permit fees more affordable?

Because the NRA has no interest in making changes to the permit process, in Mississippi or anywhere else. Permit requirements increase profits for NRA gun instructors and create tax revenue for NRA-backed politicians.

This is one of the reasons why the NRA has refused to support constitutional carry bills around the country, even threatening to lobby against them. Constitutional carry would change or abolish the system that they have come to depend on.

Gun owners should not have to ask for permission to exercise our God-given rights. Any person or organization that says otherwise does not have the true interests of gun owners in mind.

Instead of looking out for Mississippi gun owners, the NRA and Mississippi legislators chose to prioritize their profits and protect the status quo.


  1. Is there any actual evidence that the NRA has threatened to lobby against these bills? I routinely see claims by various other gun rights organizations that mirror this claim, but I've never seen any actual evidence other than "someone said". I think that if we are to take this type of accusation seriously maybe we need to start seeing texts of emails or substantiated details of conversations. I am a life member of the NRA, would be very opposed to actions such as this on the part of the NRA, but can't help but notice that it is always a competing organization that stands to benefit from bashing the NRA that comes out with these unsubstantiated claims. Meanwhile, the NRA continues to be the loudest and most powerful voice FOR gun rights in this country. If they need reform, so be it. Let's get some evidence and make it happen. But if these are just cases of sour grapes or attempts to gain influence by smaller groups, they are destructive to the cause.

  2. By the way, a quick search uncovered this tidbit. An NRA backed bill in Kansas to allow permitless carry.

    This doesn't jibe with the claims made in the Iowa article so I suspect that there is more to the story than reported.

    1. Calvin, thanks for your input. I can see where you are coming from. I often read posts by gun groups and activists to find news for the blog. Here is some of the reading I did for this one: