As I prepare to travel to Houston for the 155th Annual Meeting of the Members of the National Rifle Association of America, there’s something we should talk about:
The size and diverse composition of the NRA Board of Directors, and rational expectations for changing those things, with particular interest in Directors who supported Wayne LaPierre and vocally opposed “reformers,” but now claim to be “reformers” themselves.
At 76 members, the NRA Board of Directors is unusually large. Unlike most comparable organizations, which tend to have a two-tiered board structure, with a large “Advisory Board” and a much smaller “Managing Board,” the NRA Board is all of that rolled into one. We serve on the NRA’s various program and interest committees, as well as handling the business of the Association.
I have long been an advocate for transitioning to a divided Board, with my preferred model having three different tiers:
- the small Managing Board that meets frequently and focuses on finances, legal compliance, and basic business oversight,
- a much larger Advisory Board that mets infrequently and focuses on programs and membership through our 40+ committees,
- and an Honorary Board where we honor distinguished NRA members who have demonstrated a significant commitment and contribution to the Association, including politicians, celebrity ambassadors, and major donors.
I usually take all of this a step further by organizing the Advisory Board as a primarily representative body, with one member from each state or region as a way of adding more accountability to the position, along with a number that are elected at-large to fill skill-set gaps.
My big concern with any restructuring like this is adequate checks and balances to prevent a few influential members of the small Managing Board from going rogue and steering the Association in a bad direction, as we’ve seen is possible. My answer has been to give some oversight and veto power to the Advisory Board, as well as giving that group the responsibility of nominating and electing members to the Managing Board.
There is a proposed amendment to the Bylaws that would elegantly achieve the above goals by restructuring the Executive Committee. Under that proposal, the Executive Committee would meet more frequently and become the prime mover on any matters dealing with finance and legal compliance, with the broader, full Board primarily focusing on committees and programs, while still retaining final authority over all NRA matters. This would give us a small, responsive body to deal with critical business issues in a timely manner, with the oversight of the full Board to ensure they remain true to the NRA’s mission and stay on the straight and narrow.
Meetings of the Executive Committee would – if I get my way – always be held primarily electronically, and all members of the Board would be invited and encouraged to attend, though we would only be observers and advisors. If the EC tried to go down a bad road, the Board could call a full Board meeting – one reason we need the Bylaw amendment authorizing electronic Board meetings – or handle the matter at our next in-person meeting, which we hold three times per year.
While this is not a perfect solution, it is, I think, a very good solution, and most importantly, it’s the solution that we can actually implement, as opposed to other proposals which can’t realistically be achieved. My father tried to tackle this issue decades ago, but gave it up upon realizing that restructuring the board would require 60 to 65 Board members to vote themselves off the Board… That remains the challenge, but this proposal bypasses the need for that suicide pact.
Which brings us to the next big issue: Directors who served in silence through the “troubled times,” and those who were vocal defenders of LaPierre and remain on the Board today.
There are a number of vocal NRA members who want the Board to purge itself of anyone who was on the wrong side of the fight for reform. They don’t explain exactly how we’re supposed to accomplish this task; they simply call for the expulsion of these folks.
Whether unfortunately or fortunately, that’s not really possible, and attempting it would result in more infighting and turmoil at a time when members are ready for us to be rebuilding the organization, not engaging in endless civil war.
I’m pleased to report that all of the leaders of the “Old Guard,” LaPierre enablers and apologists are now off the NRA Board. That happy result is thanks to a lot of effort put forward by “reformers” in the last couple of elections, and the decision of many of the “Old Guard” to resign from the Board and instead, sadly, focus their attention on control of the NRA Foundation – a separate problem that we continue to struggle with. (What was I saying about endless civil war?)
The “Old Guard” members and fellow travelers who remain fall into roughly three camps:
- A few true believers who still think Wayne was innocent, or “made mistakes,” and that the new leadership is incompetent and worse than what they replaced.
- A few who still put a lot of faith in what their friends from the “Old Guard” tell them, and try to argue against “reformers’” efforts to move the Association forward.
- A few who held onto their faith in LaPierre too long, but eventually saw the light in a “road to Damascus” moment, and who have been actively working with “reformers.”
Add to this many of the newer Board members – including me – who are strong-willed, independent-minded individuals who won’t just go along with a proposal because it’s endorsed by some person or group, and what we have now is a diverse group of people committed to the betterment of the NRA, with broad agreement on core, fundamental issues, while maintaining significant differences of opinion on strategy and tactics for achieving our universal goals.
There are people who said and did things for which they should apologize and repent. Some have done so, while others have done one or the other, but not both. That’s a bit frustrating, but not damning. People are probably getting tired of my frequent citation of Proverbs and the admonition that “iron sharpens iron,” but it’s absolutely true and fitting, and I don’t just subscribe to the idea, but strongly believe in it as the best way to get the best end result.
There are definitely people on the NRA Board who don’t like me and a few that I don’t care for either, but unless they are simply dullards droning on with nonsense – which we do get now and then – I value their input and find value in the debate. There are a few who are genuine pains in the posterior who will argue about the color of the sky and the hardness of the table, but I would take them over a genial “Yes man” any day, because they make us think and help us see the flaws we might otherwise overlook. I also believe in giving second chances, turning over a new leaf, and trying to make amends for past mistakes.
While I’d like part of that process to include public acknowledgment and apologies, it’s the actions that matter most, and if they’re doing what they should, I’ll give them credit.
As to anyone who remains that I don’t think deserves a seat on the Board, whether for past mistakes or current failings, unless they cross a serious ethical line, there’s nothing I or anyone else can really do about them until they come up for reelection, at which point I will oppose them and encourage the membership to elect better candidates. Until that time, though, they are my associates on the Board, and I will do my best to work with them and try to make sure we all always do what’s best for the Association and our members. That’s our job.
I hope to see many of you in Houston. If you’re there, please don’t skip the Members Meeting on Saturday morning. We need to hear from you.
NRA Sues the NRA Foundation as Internal Power Struggle Freezes Program Funding
NRA 2026 Director Election Results Show Reformers Gaining Ground
About Jeff Knox:
Jeff Knox is a dedicated political activist and the director of The Firearms Coalition, following in the footsteps of his father, Neal Knox. In 2024, Jeff was elected to the NRA Board of Directors, underscoring his lifelong commitment to protecting the Second Amendment. The Knox family has played a pivotal role in the ongoing struggle for gun rights, a legacy documented in the book Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War, authored by Jeff’s brother, Chris Knox.
Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, The Firearms Coalition is a network of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs, and civil rights organizations. The Coalition supports grassroots efforts by providing education, analysis of current issues, and a historical perspective on the gun rights movement. For more information, visit www.FirearmsCoalition.org.
