National Rifle Association Pros And Cons

Lobbyists receive bad publicity in our country. It is the way it is. Most interest groups have extreme political beliefs in one or more political subjects, but when a catastrophic political event happens, many people attack that group. The one that has been under fire off and on over the last few years is the National Rifle Association. The N.R.A. has been the main group of people attacked when a catastrophic event happened that the main weapon used was a gun of some sort. They were blamed for taking a part in the event by still allowing guns in the country when all they can do is back up the idea of keeping guns in the hands of our citizens. With the debate over gun rights the last several years, The National Rifle Association has come under …show more content…
There is a group of people that are lobbying to keep the North American Free Trade Agreement intact. Just last week there was a group of lobbyists, “automakers, retailers and other business leaders stormed Capitol Hill on Tuesday in an extraordinary show of force against a Republican president they fear will cripple or kill the North American Free Trade Agreement, an outcome business leaders said could devastate their profits and harm the United States’ ability to compete in a global market” (Swanson). The way that the article is worded makes the group sound like they are a dangerous group. The first impression makes it sound like the country is in shambles and that they are being overrun by lobbyists. There are many groups that get this kind of attention. When seeing articles like this, it is easy to assume that most, if not all, lobbyists are aggressive, “want to be” politicians that do not like the way the government is working. This leads to many people not liking what the groups are doing. They do not like the way they go about their business. It did not matter whether or not they were a supporter of, in this case, keeping the North American Free Trade Agreement. The lobbyists are not a positive group in the public eye. They have a negative public effect no matter what they are getting done in the …show more content…
Some terms are long. Someone could have been put into office for their position on gun control, but a few years later, another policy may come up like what to do with minimum wage. Not everybody that was for keeping guns will want to raise the minimum wage, but the catch is that is what this politician believed in even though he or she did not have to make a position on it during the campaign because minimum wage was not the most important thing to discuss. If the terms were shorter, politicians would learn more about what policies that were up for without as much impact from lobbyists while they were in office. If they did not agree with the voters, the voters would vote someone else that would agree on that political point. The legislature in Texas could still meet the same amount of time, but they could break it apart into sections, so everybody could have time to educate themselves on a topic. Lobbyists should keep their distance while politicians are in office, but during a campaign, they should have every right to influence a candidate toward one thing or another based on their special

Show More

American Bar Association: Interest Groups

Stephanie 1gun control Essay example

Gun Control Research Paper

Why Is Gun Control Necessary

Essay on ATT and Gun Control

ELAD7033 Week 6 Arms at School Essay

Argumentative Essay On School Shootings

Right To Bear Arms Research Paper

Gun Control Essay

gun control Essay