Talk:Wayne LaPierre

I'm very surprised that the Criticism section does not include references to the Ackerman McQueen controversy of 2019. Mr LaPierre received withering public criticism for his spending, as did the agency who worked with the NRA. This was covered extensively in WSJ, NY Times, WaPo, and others. 76.118.42.231 (talk) 02:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same. Dcsutherland (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where was the NRA support when the I-594 came up for a vote in Washington State this past November election day? I put in a considerable amount of time and money trying to get the word out on the very bad law I-594 vs. I-594 the good law, that was also supported by several thousand Washington State law enforcement officers. You say that the NRA is always there for the membership! I did not see one televised NRA anti I-594 commercial put on by the NRA establishment, letting the people know what was in the hidden pages of the law. You say that the membership dues is not enough money to keep the NRA going, well you can count me out, I will not send you anymore fanatical support until I see the NRA vocal support that will be needed to wake up the voting community.

Including this as part of the description of the NRA is basically uncritically repeating official propaganda. Some have been skeptical of the organization's alleged safety efforts for years, and recently the wheels have pretty much fallen off: Participation in the NRA's child gun safety education program "dropped 96 percent in 24 months, as the NRA cut funding on 'safety, training & education' by $14 million, or more than a third."; "For a really long time, the NRA has pretended that Eddie Eagle is a responsible way to teach kids about gun safety. But it's actually more like a marketing or a propaganda tool, similar to Joe Camel in marketing cigarettes to kids."[1] etc. etc. AnonMoos (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that LaPierre received a medical deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. All we know is that he had a draft number (097)that placed him in the “most likely to be drafted” category, and that he did not serve. He could have had a medical deferment or he could have avoided service in another way. Right now, the current published version is providing unsubstantiated - or false - information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moomat (talk • contribs) 02:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moomat, did you read the relevant reference from Snopes.com? For your convenience, here are the most relevant sentences. the record states that LaPierre reported for an armed services physical exam in August 1971 (while still at Siena College), and shortly thereafter was reclassified 1-Y (registrant qualified for service only in time of war or national emergency). During the Vietnam War period, receiving a 1-Y classification was essentially the same as being classified 4-F (registrant not qualified for military service). The 1-Y deferment was eliminated at the end of 1971, at which time all registrants who had previously received it, LaPierre among them, were administratively reclassified 4-F. Like that of Donald Trump, who also received a 1-Y draft deferment, LaPierre’s classification record includes the notation “yxx,” meaning he was found unqualified for military service based on medical reasons. Accordingly, your expression of doubt about the medical deferment is unsupported by the references to reliable sources now in the article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On August 6, 2020... New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a civil lawsuit against the NRA and LaPierre... calling for the dissolution of the association due to chronic fraudulent management.

What was the outcome of this lawsuit? Valetude (talk) 09:55, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added most recent (Mar 2022) development to article. Schazjmd (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]