The NRA is currently backing a lawsuit, Shew v. Malloy, to challenge the constitutionality of several provisions of the law, including its expanded bans on semiautomatic firearms and its restrictions on magazine capacity. Some have wondered why the NRA has not appeared as a named plaintiff in the suit. Simply put, experience has often shown that NRA is more effective in lending its expertise and resources, rather than its name, to litigation. Many within the legal elite have been slow to embrace the fundamental, individual rights protected by the Second Amendment, and getting a fair hearing on these matters is difficult enough. When NRA participates in a legal case as a plaintiff, its involvement attracts a traveling media circus eager to criticize and attempt to discredit whatever it does. This can further inhibit courts from giving the merits of the case a thorough and impartial hearing. Unlike some groups who will eagerly tout their participation in any “gun rights” case, no matter how ill-advised or unlikely to succeed, the NRA is more interested in advancing our Second Amendment freedoms through litigation, rather than just using lawsuits for publicity or fundraising purposes.
Right. Well how about this, Cox? Why don't you seek an emergency injunction so PEOPLE DON'T GET KILLED WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING YOUR PR GAMES? Can NRA risk something of their precious reputation on THAT? These Lairds of Fairfax make me want too puke. Consistently. The only thing "no-compromise" about them is their flaccidity.
"In the meantime, Connecticut gun owners can be sure that the NRA is standing with them to fight this injustice every step of the way." Shit and horseshit. This is just NRA's way of responding to the demands of their CT members to DO something, ANYTHING in the current crisis. So they do what they always do -- they issue a press release to try to make you THINK that they're doing something. Sellout bastards.