Truth be told, THAT gun has probably never been fired.

Michigan is indeed a sportsman’s paradise.

Naturally, the coveted NRA scoring and endorsement will be flaunted by would-be Michigan politicos who want an edge up on their opponents.  In the strange circumstance however, the NRA has been rewarding legislative support for ammo registration in Michigan yet is fighting it in California.

Go figure.

Yes, in Michigan, several legislators are being punished by the NRA scoring process for voting against a package of bills designed to ‘Keep ammo out of the hands of felons.’ Certainly the NRA is acting responsibly, right? Until you carefully think through what it takes to enforce such an act.

Lets consider what the NRA uses as legislative candidate scoring criteria first.

A+: A legislator with not only an excellent voting record on all critical NRA issues, but who has also made a vigorous effort to promote and defend the Second Amendment.

A: Solidly pro-gun candidate. A candidate who has supported NRA positions on key votes in elective office or a candidate with a demonstrated record of support on Second Amendment issues.

AQ: A pro-gun candidate whose rating is based solely on the candidate’s responses to the NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire and who does not have a voting record on Second Amendment issues.

B: A generally pro-gun candidate. However, a “B” candidate may have opposed some pro-gun reform or supported some restrictive legislation in the past.

D: An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues.

Emphasis in bold.

READ MORE ►