The NRA describes itself as the nation’s oldest civil rights organization in the country, and that’s not an inaccurate claim. It’s been around for a long time, and though its history may have been marred by capitulation to the anti-Second Amendment forces in the nation at certain times, it still ended becoming the boogieman for every gun control fan in the country.

Unfortunately, its days may be numbered if New York Attorney General Letitia James has her way about it.

She’s currently trying to force the courts to shut down the group. The NRA, unsurprisingly, is saying that such an effort is uncalled for.

The National Rifle Association urged a judge to dismiss a lawsuit by New York Attorney General Letitia James, saying she hasn’t shown rampant misconduct by top executives. Even if she could prove her claims, they would mean the NRA was a victim and that James’ push to dissolve the guns-rights group is misguided, it argued in a court filing.

James is seeking the NRA’s “corporate death” over allegations that executives at the New York-chartered nonprofit misused millions of dollars of assets, the organization said Wednesday in a court filing. The attorney general sued in state court last year and amended her complaint after the NRA’s failed attempt to declare bankruptcy and move to Texas.

“Even if the disputed allegations against the individual defendants were true, the NRA itself, its Board, and its members were the victims of the wrongdoing, not the perpetrators,” the organization argued. “It would be a fundamental miscarriage of justice — and contrary to New York law — to punish the NRA’s 5 million members by dissolving the NRA.”

James has failed to provide evidence that the NRA, longtime leader Wayne LaPierre and three executives diverted millions of dollars in assets to themselves, the group said. The NRA also said the attorney general hasn’t provided support for her claims that LaPierre improperly controls the 76-member board of directors. The NRA repeated an earlier claim that James had a “political vendetta” against the group.

I mean, she called the NRA a terrorist organization, so yeah, I’d say she has a vendetta against them. If that doesn’t work against her, I don’t know what would.

As for the NRA’s claim, they make a fair point.

Now, I haven’t looked at what’s been happening in court in and of itself. I just know what the media has revealed, much of which I suspect was provided by a certain disgruntled former employee. How much of that is completely accurate remains to be seen and how much of that is the basis for the court case also remains to be seen.

However, what I can tell you, though, is that what the NRA’s attorneys are saying about the possibility of them being true is dead-on accurate. If there’s been mismanagement of funds within the NRA, then the group and its membership are victims. They’ve been stolen from and James is essentially trying to get the death penalty for an armed robbery victim.

This wouldn’t be an issue if it weren’t for the fact that James loathes the NRA’s mission. She supports gun control and figures that if she gets the NRA out of the way, her party can successfully ram through whatever agenda they want, so she’s pouncing on the idea that she can kill the organization.

I’m sure the fact that it would put her on a sure path toward higher office isn’t hurting her motivation, either.

Regardless, the legal mechanisms James is trying to use exist for organizations that are little more than scams, not groups that have been effectively accomplishing their mission since 1871.

James doesn’t care about that, though. She’s only worried about settling that vendetta.