I also raised an eyebrow (spok-like, if you will)
The NRA keeps a membership list of folks that voluntarily joined and made “donations”. This is not an unusual practice. Among a couple of complaints I have, their tireless spamming (snail and electronic mail) is quite annoying.
Otherwise, we have to thank the NRA, whether we find a few faults here are there or not. They have been very influential as a pro 2A lobby group and legal support entity. I am glad they are out there and continue to support their agenda to combat gun rights restriction legislation.
Yes, based on what they do, I'm going to say that they're more interested in donations than in beating back contraconstitutional gun 'laws' — this is further supported by several of their recent involvement in court cases where they "help" by asking for the narrow ruling rather than a likely-accepted broad ruling.
Remember that bureaucracies exist to continue the bureaucracy, first and foremost: they will not do their stated mission if doing it would result in the bureaucracy's demise. (See welfare.) Associations and such can fall into similar traps, and I think that's where the NRA is: if they were to vigorously oppose contraconstitutional gun laws then they would lose the scare factor
of things like the jump in membership with Obama's election and so.
Otherwise, we have to thank the NRA, whether we find a few faults here are there or not.
More than a few, I think. It's my opinion that they aren't all that interested in sticking up fro gun-rights; especially as I've seen state-law slam-dunk cases be blown off because we don't get involved in state-level stuff
.