In an Opinion Article published in the Miami Herald, the author suggests that:
The NRA suing the Florida Legislature is like a parent suing the children. That’s Mom and Dad taking Johnny to court because he won’t eat his broccoli.
(Link and full quote below the fold)
(
The reference is to Florida's attempt to limit the rights of its citizens to own firearms; the state has more "rigorous" restrictions on just who, when and why its citizens may possess guns.)
I have no idea what point the author was trying to make in
the above quote; but I quite comprehend the rancor which is illustrated in the following quote:
Of course, the NRA picked as its target a patsy who probably won’t fight back too hard. It doesn’t have the guts to go after its real enemy, the courageous children of Parkland.
The NRA, as a representative organization of sportsmen and other legal firearms owners, is unlikely to "go after its real enemy" identified by the Author as "courageous children". The NRA is all about civil and constitutional rights, and its members demand that it protect the First Amendment as assiduously as the Second Amendment.
The very idea that this membership would continence an attack on patriotic teenagers ... even those who (wrongly) accuse the NRA of fomenting firearms violence ... is anathema. The author of this article has a private agenda, and has resorted to distortion of the truth and condemnation of strangers in an attempt to paint them with a bloody brush.
In point of fact, the Federal Government does have the power to impose Constitutional Rights on states which have historically denied them. Witness SELMA ( do your homework), where President Dwight David Eisenhower sent troops into Alabama to protect the rights of African-American children to get the SAME educational opportunities as white children ... as opposed to the "Separate-but equal" sham (which was far from equal, but certainly separate) acts of southern states who tried to maintain their apartheid restrictions on many of their citizens.
(The ACLU is great on protecting the First Amendment, but few rights supporters stand up for the Second. That's why Americans rely on the Constitution, instead of the sometimes-misguided efforts of states.)
It's not about "GUTS", and the author is wrong (and knows he's wrong) to suggest it.
The NRA's only enemies are those who would undermine or deny Constitutional Rights to its citizens. That's the reason for its existence, and the reason why over five million (that's 5,000,000 to those who are unfamiliar with, or don't understand the Bill of Rights) law-abiding American Citizens accept the National Rifle Association as their representatives in combating anti-constitutional laws at the local, state and national level.