The NRA Response

I think he did a credible job representing gun owners. He was firm enough and gave away nothing, which is where we all need to stand on this issue. Let's all get on the same page and start standing up like men for our rights before they are gone, for us, and most importantly for future generations. GUN CONTROL IS NOT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE GENERAL POPULACE. It is about control of the general populace. One question: How many of our essential freedoms have we seen slowly being taken away from us over the past few decades? We're being nibbled to death. If there is another ban, then I can almost guarantee that it will be forever, and we will have lost a major portion of the right that ultimately guarantees all others. What will be next?. It is a certain thing that a similar incident will happen again, because a ban had no effect on the Newtown incident. Then there will arise the call for registration. Down the road comes the knock on your door at 3AM in the morning to search your home for weapons. Do not be so jaded as to think it cannot happen here because it is the good old USA. It has happened before.
Freedom requires two things to be maintained, vigilance and often blood. Many have given their all to preserve it. If we are not willing to do the same then history will judge us harshly. We as a people have grown complacent and lazy. It is time for all of us to wake up. We are standing on the edge of the slippery slope. We must all stand together and shout loudly with a single voice for the ideals we hold so dear, and for the sake of future generations. E-mail your Congressmen and Senators. Let them hear your voice. Let us stand with Mr. LaPierre and draw the line here.
 
Quote:
We should also be ready with a proposal for all of the existing high capacity magazines already in private ownership. I am not sure how that would work.
Click to expand...

I too, agree that since guns did not cause this or any other such tragedy ,nor did the lack of laws cause this tragedy and neither did not having an AWB in place cause it ... we should not settle for a loss of any gun rights or AWB's.

I will/do support this:

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/
Click to expand...

And I am proud of this organization for taking action towards helping to try and fix the actual problem rather then make a bunch of new laws that will do nothing but soothe some peoples shallow minds till the next massacre.

Thank You Buckeye Firearms Association.
 
Last edited:
I too, agree that since guns did not cause this or any other such tragedy ,nor did the lack of laws cause this tragedy and neither did not having an AWB in place cause it ... we should not settle for a loss of any gun rights or AWB's.
Click to expand...

the gunshow loophole will be addressed
 
So earlier today I got an email form the NRA containing a link to the video of this speech. That same email gave an email address that is apparently a direct line to Mr. La Pierre. He apparently wanted to hear my thoughts on the subject, so I wrote him one that covers my reaction to the speech and some ideas floating around in my head.

Here's what I said to him.

Sir,

I applaud many of the points you made in your speech. I believe that you're the first person to start making sense since the despicable incident of a week ago.

I do however think there was one important point you made that I feel was not entirely accurate; when you referenced violent video games and movies. Yes, these forms of entertainment are often very graphically violent, but they are just that, forms of entertainment. More importantly they are protected by the first amendment.

In the same way that millions of people own AR-15's, yet don't go out into public places and start shooting at innocent people, millions of people play these games and watch these movies, yet are no more motivated to commit heinous crimes after doing so.

I believe a relevant course of action would be to educate the public, the media, and the law makers in the differences between military grade weapons and sporting weapons that the public is allowed to have. The most important thing I think the NRA can do is to educate all Americans, at least in the differences between weapons. A more informed public won't be so quick to panic and make purely emotional decisions.

Everyone payed attention to what you said today, and because each person is an individual they all have different interpretations of what you said. the point here is that they paid attention. Given your position and access to media, educating people should be fairly easy.

The most important thing we can do is educate as many people as possible, to dispel myths created by false reporting. It's not enough to say that the media is wrong for calling the .223 a high powered cartridge, they must be respectfully shown that their information was incorrect.

Thank you for representing law abiding gun owners, but please realize that these are emotional times, and as an organization the NRA needs to tread softly and respectfully.

Thank you, and let's hope that cooler heads prevail when new legislature is written, that logical, effective and reasonable laws be put in place to keep us all safe, yet still free to practice our sports, collect intriguing examples of interesting weapons, and defend ourselves form harm.

Kind regards,
Click to expand...
 
Maybe they are to blame for some of it, but assigning the blame to them is no different than the anti's blaming guns for violence. There were murderers and psycho's running around long before there were any video games, tv's or movies to be watched. They were out there long before guns had been invented as well.
Click to expand...

I agree with this greatly.

Here's what bothers me about the official NRA statement. It just sounded like a deflection after defelction and an attempt to blame movies and video games.

Maybe it's just me but am not willing to shred the First Amendment in favor of the Second Amendment or vice versa. Or any other Amendment for that matter. The 1A and 2A are at the very least equal in their importance and the suggestion that LaPierre made that the country should go on the warpath against 1A rights just sits very badly with me. Just as badly as when the 2A is attacked

Video Games are regulated by the Video Game industry in the form of a rating system.

Movies and television are regulated by various entities and also already have a rating system.

I don't approve of anyone attempting to sell out my 1A rights in favor of 2A rights or any other rights for that matter and I got mad because that is exactly what the NRA statement today was attempting to do.

I'm not saying that the 2A should be messed with any more than it's already been messed with. I was thinking that maybe, just maybe the NRA would attempt to introduce, even a scale or some variation of a rating system, for firearms in a weak charade of appearing to be self regulating. Thing is that we're not even willing to do something that basically means nothing except for giving us some good PR.

I'm sick and tired of people thinking I'm a "gun nut" and I don't like Ted Nugent or anyone else in the NRA leadership hierarchy making comments that make me/us look worse than we already do.

I'm sort of rambling in this post because it's late and I'm tired but I hope that my meaning is somehow getting through.

Restricting the 1A is just as bad as restricting the 2A & todays speech certainly didn't sound like it was supportive of my non-2A rights.
 
I was thinking that maybe, just maybe the NRA would attempt to introduce, even a scale or some variation of a rating system, for firearms in a weak charade of appearing to be self regulating.
Click to expand...

First, let me say I have enjoyed reading your comments today and I believe you make some excellent points related to protecting all Constitutional freedoms.

Secondly, I am not sure I totally understand what you mean by a rating system for firearms. Are you perhaps suggesting that although all firearms would remain available citizens would need to meet diffrent criteria to obtain items based on the rating placed on the item?
 
I too, agree that since guns did not cause this or any other such tragedy ,nor did the lack of laws cause this tragedy and neither did not having an AWB in place cause it ... we should not settle for a loss of any gun rights or AWB's.
Click to expand...
the gunshow loophole will be addressed
Click to expand...

Oooops, sorry ,I forgot to add that in as well...

...I too, agree that since guns did not cause this or any other such tragedy ,nor did the lack of laws cause this tragedy and neither did not having an AWB in place cause it the gunshow loophole did not cause the tragedy... we should not settle for a loss of any gun rights.

Accepting any form of further gun restriction implies that in some way we are acknowledging, believe and accepting guns were/are responsible, we are acknowledging,accepting and believe that our current gun laws are not sufficient and stricter laws need to be put in place in order to stop these tragedies.

I don't believe,acknowledge or accept any of the above and my beliefs will not be swayed by time sensitive anti-gun rhetoric when history proves tighter gun control does not work.
 
Who will pay for armed officers at every school? We will, with huge taxes on ammunition in the calibers of M-16 clones like the Bushmaster, transfer fees costing a big percentage of what the gun is worth on such weapons, etc..

The justification: "You want to play with weapons of war, then pay for protecting innocent kids from your hobby when it goes wrong." Heard that on local radio; it got a lot of positive responses.
 
The NRA would do well to dispel many of these gun myths as they answer this issue... Good heavens I have heard so much totally untrue crap... Did you know hollowpoints according to Foxnews explode? Here I spent all these years thinking they fragmented, broke... but explode?

Also I have heard the AR15 is the most powerful guns one can buy.... When in fact it is one of the weakest long arms available.. Not to say it cant kill but it is not by any stretch a powerhouse...

Also apparently all AR15 style rifles were intended for military use only and some NRA rod says we shouldn't have them... This was like 3 minutes of tv... We need to get some facts in this non factual discussion...
 
Two points gun owners need to understand:

1. Any potential new AWB will NOT be anything close to the previous one. The anti group has been well-educated (mostly by us) as to how little effect it had on gun possession and how much of it was focused on the appearance of the gun and not the function. This time around it WILL focus on issues such as "grandfathering" and "dates of manufacture" and easily-reloading of magazines and rate of fire and semi-automatics versus lever-action and bolt-action loading.

2. There are generally three camps of thought on guns in our society. The true 2nd amendment guys like most of us, along with our weak-sister friends, represent the first. The antis, who have never seen a gun they didn't hate -even in the hands of a policeman, represent the second group. The third and largest group are all of the in-betweens which represent a broad spectrum of gun attitudes, from some level of comfort with guns in society to some apprehension of guns in public.

We must understand that the second group has no intention of honest negotiations, compromises, common sense, or all of the other buzzwords that they throw out as a smoke screen. They have only one goal - relieve you of your guns, hopefully all at once, but in increments if that is the only way.

We can have discussions with the third group and we should, but it is imperative that we realize that any committees formed by the democrats and their leader will be chosen from the ranks of group two. Dealing with these committees is like gambling on a slot machine. In the long run, the slot machine will win - it is just a matter of time depending on how often you shake it's hand and how much you have bet on each handshake.
 
IMO, he made one huge mistake. "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun..." was a horrible line...

IMO.., i believe that phrase went completely over their heads.
 
The biggest disappointment to the NRA position is that it infers that the Gun-Free Zones should remain in place and that teachers & other school staff (in whom we already entrust with our children's safety) should not be allowed to voluntarily participate in armed defense. Instead, we need more "Only Ones Professional Enough For This Glock .40" types while educators will continued to be trained to hide behind locked doors unarmed....by the NRA, no less.
 
Terrible response. Minimally, tactically, they would have been well advised to give some appearance of being willing to talk. Closing the gun show/private sale 'loophole' would have been a good start.

I think the NRA needs to learn to talk to people that aren't solidly in their camp. Thus, I think the line "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" will sound really terrible to a large swath of the public and the elected officials.

I think it is better to be at the table and involved in discussions, and I really think that this response makes it less likely that they will be invited.

Moreover, there are 23,200 schools in the country already with armed guards, but that is only 1/3 of the total. If each one is paid the median police salary of $55k, then we're talking about $2.5 billion. Besides, Columbine had an armed guard.
Click to expand...

agreed. I've never been a supporter of the NRA and LaPierre's reponse further solidified my opinion of him. I also don't believe arming teachers is the way forward. I also don't think he gave much thought to his armed guard scenario. Will they be government employees? The same government employees he refererred to as 'jack booted thugs' (the same meme being parroted around the internet)? Who picks up the tab to pay for these armed guards? Really bad PR move. the only thing LaPierre has done is drum up more fear among gun owners and line its own pockets
 
I think BPowderkeg nailed it. That particular statement ("The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun...") by LaPierre will be shown over and over by the media to try to show what nuts gun owners have become. Even though it may be true, the timing was terrible.
 
What do people thinks happens when the police show up at a violent scent? Do they really think every officer has a magic wand they waive and the BG gets arrested... No, the officer generally pulls his gun and is prepared to end the violence with potentially lethal force.... How does that differ in stopping an active shooter who is faced with a CCW/CHL carrier or a employee of whatever with a lawfully used weapon?

No, the CHL/CCW carrier isn't a officer, I get it, but it is directly the good guy having a gun that CAN enable the situation to end... No gun and the violence may well go on...To stop armed violence most average citizens would need a firearm... No guns = extra vulnerable population... Right now most citizens on the street would have to resort to cowering and maybe some foul language to stop a shooter.. You put a lawful carrier using force lawfully and you at least have a chance to end the situation at less cost...
 
the video game, tv and movie industries are to blame for much of this.
Click to expand...

Saw this picture someone made in response to the NRA remarks... seems very appropriate here.

3OpfH.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top