The NRA Response

Seek's post: DEA agent....

Seek's funny post remarks reminded me of the same thing I was thinking.
The inept DEA special agent who shot himself with a .40S&W Glock 22 then he pulled out a M4 5.56mm rifle. The terrified crowd(mostly young children) screamed; NO!
Many people bring up the DEA nitwit shooting himself but few mention the dumber M4 rifle part of the clip.

I always say I'd of got up & left as soon as the moron shot himself.
To my understanding the "undercover" DEA agent left federal service & made a unsuccessful effort to sue the DoJ over the incident.

When Lapierre or Asa Hutchinson wants armed LE officers in schools, I hope this clown isn't made a security supervisor.

Clyde
 
IMHO this surge in gun control is not about anything other than disarming the citizenry. If we loose the 2nd amendment we will loose all the amendments. Its easy to see that federal funding for programs for the mentally ill have been cut, funding for school safety has been cut. This was shown in other posts and on other sites. You can confirm this by contacting your representatives and asking. Ask your local school board about the school security cuts. Ask your Doctor or local mental health facility about this.
I have a heard time believing that our own government and representatives are trying to take away our constitutional rights, they are supposed to be defending our rights not tearing them down.
I hope this was ok to post and posted in the right forum. If not I apologize
 
I thought I read in the transcript of the NRA's statement that they offered funding to help and offered free training also.
Click to expand...

The way I heard it, they offered to come up with a model "plan" (a document) that schools could adopt and implement and/or modify to their liking, but I didn’t hear anyone say that gun/ammunition manufacturers, or dealers, or NRA members, have agreed to take the initiative and make something positive happen, beyond that.

I could have missed something but, I believe if we, as a whole, did that, it would go a LONG way to demonstrate our commitments to the OTHER duties of being responsible citizens that was conceived by The Founders when they crafted the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And backing the talk up with real, selfless, action might have a more profound effect, than hot-air.

I call on Mr. LaPierre to undertake that mission, immediately.
 
Most of the stuff being proposed would not have made a bit of difference in the Newtown incident.

More rules to keep the mentally and emotionally unbalanced from buying guns! - except, this person did not buy any guns, he stole or borrowed or perhaps "inherited" the guns he used.

Ban assault rifles! - except the Bushmaster stayed in the trunk of the car the whole time.

Lock the schools! - except, he either got buzzed in or broke a window to get in.


Allowing concealed carry inside schools would probably be the best deterrent. Even if very few people chose to carry in school, just the knowledge that there COULD be an armed teacher, administrator, or janitor at school would make these cowards seek some other gun-free zone.

There also needs to be more focus on the mental health professionals and the drugs they prescribe. Why do we have drugs that can make people suicidal, or even homicidal, when not prescribed correctly or when withdrawal is not tapered properly? Almost all these shooters are on psychotropic drugs that can cause complete disassociation from reality.
 
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?
Click to expand...

Barry, I'm not sure exactly what I meant as it wasn't a fully baked idea.

Rating System Explained! Sort Of.

I guess what I had in mind when I was making that statement was something like like this.

EXAMPLE:
Beretta .25 Pistol. Rating: Good for target practice and as a first step deterrent against home invasion and personal protection. Recommended for most homes including those who may have young children, the infirm or even those with some mild mental ailments but should be kept out away, or kept safe, from the latter due to unpredictability of their actions. Ease of use: Moderate with slight learning curve needed to understand the weapon. Then add more information about perhaps where this gun is best used for self defense, it's maximum range of usefulness and some other information.

Now this is not a fully, 100% baked idea but it's "something." It's the basis of a rating system that would do the following; It would prevent unscrupulous dealers from trying to sell the most expensive thing they can to an uninformed buyer based entirely on greed of the dealer. There are millions of good dealers out there but there are also some scumbags.

The rating system could, at the very least, be a guideline that would inform a potential buyer of what kind of weapon they are buying and what they should expect from it.

That's basically all I meant by a rating system. It's really not intrusive in any way and is basically a "suggestion" from those who know more of what a particular weapon or type of weapons are good for and whom they are and aren't recommended for.

I think that this is completely harmless to the 2A, shows that we are doing something to try and help inform people and paints us in a better color as it pertains to the general public. It worked for the MPAA and the Video Game industry.

This rating system wouldn't outright stop any massacres neccesarily but it would inform the public about what it is that they are bringing into their home instead of the gun buyer in question, just taking the shop owners/salesmen word on what is best for them and their household.

Edit: I mentioned the Beretta .25 because I happen to own one and just use it as a backup from time to time. Not sure I'd trust the defense of my life to that weapon alone.
 
Last edited:
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.
Click to expand...

Oh, without a doubt and I couldn't agree with you more. The first thing that this phrase did to me is to ask the question; "Well what if the bad guy with a gun shoots and kills the good guy with a gun first?"

I understand what he meant but he could not have picked a worse "sound bite" if he tried.
 
Last edited:
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun..." was a horrible line...
Click to expand...

It was a great line because it's true and everybody knows it, they are just in denial -- and it begs the question, Is stopping the bad guy the real objective?
 
rickyrick, those were the early initial reports. We now have learned that the Bushmaster was indeed the weapon of choice for the massacre and the Glock was likely used as the weapon choice for the final suicidal shot.
 
That's a pretty standard police qualification target.
Click to expand...

The point is that shooting at digital human analogues with a digital gun for fun makes you no more inclined to commit mass murder than shooting at printed human analogues with a real gun for fun.

Let's be honest. Since the shooting the media rhetoric has been "blame guns", and the NRA is just trying to deflect attention by saying instead "blame video games". None of them (media or NRA) are actually interested in address the problems with our culture and mental health care that are really responsible here.

I'm sure someone at the NRA decided this would be a good idea because, let's face it, the average NRA member is not exactly "young" and probably has no interest in video games. Not to mention that a lot of anti-gun politicians have also ranted about violence games. However, there are a hell of a lot of younger Americans who are interested in games as well as gun ownership. The NRA is shooting itself in the foot by alienating them.
 
Agreed Merad

I'm 23 years old, I've played violent video games a good portion of my childhood life, yet I'm just as responsible as any senior member of the gun enthusiast world.

I advocate education and training, following of state and federal law. Despite me playing many countless hours of games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, never once did it ever occur to me that "I want to take my AR15 and shoot up a school or mall"

I've watched just as many violent movies as well, ranging from Black Hawk Down to the Expendables, and again I have no inclination to go out and shoot someone with my guns unless it's self defense.

It's just another way to place the blame on something else besides the perpetrator themselves. Such arguments are no better than the anti's blaming guns for these horrific crimes.
 
The point is that shooting at digital human analogues with a digital gun for fun makes you no more inclined to commit mass murder than shooting at printed human analogues with a real gun for fun.

Let's be honest. Since the shooting the media rhetoric has been "blame guns", and the NRA is just trying to deflect attention by saying instead "blame video games". None of them (media or NRA) are actually interested in address the problems with our culture and mental health care that are really responsible here.

I'm sure someone at the NRA decided this would be a good idea because, let's face it, the average NRA member is not exactly "young" and probably has no interest in video games. Not to mention that a lot of anti-gun politicians have also ranted about violence games. However, there are a hell of a lot of younger Americans who are interested in games as well as gun ownership. The NRA is shooting itself in the foot by alienating them.
Click to expand...

Exactly!!!

As I stated in previous posts I was disgusted that the NRA was so willing to deflect and try and sell out my FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS in order to save the 2A.

I'm sorry, that is unacceptable as the 1A is just as important as the 2A which is just as important as the rest of the Bill Of Rights.

Lepierre was oh so willing to deflect to other industries, like the Video Game Industry (which already regulates itself by having a rating system on all it's games) while refusing to even talk about what the NRA is willing to do.

I post above about how the NRA could "self regulate" or at least appear to, by creating it's own rating system on firearms so that a first time gun buyer can walk into a gun store and get the facts about each weapon instead of having to take the salesguys word for what is best for their needs.
 
Yes, they blame guns. Many are using this tragedy to advance their own objectives some on our side too.

I'm 42, grew up on video games and movies and so did my children and none had a desire to go murder. I conceal carry every day.

I'm not sure what new laws would prevent this, as this guy broke several local, state and federal laws in commission of the act. Including whatever moral restraints most of us had.
 
Why doesn't the NRA ask the gun and ammunition manufacturers, who admit they have been raking it in since O got elected, to support with dollars, the organizing and training of a militia, a National Guard of sorts, whose sole purpose is the armed presence in the schools of America?

Why won't they do that? Because of greed is why. If the gun manufacturers and the NRA really gave 2-****s they would offer something proactive instead of pointing their fingers. No problem has EVER been solved by blame.

Just another reason why, though I am a lover of freedom and of my natural Rights, the NRA will never get a penny of mine till they STOP being a defender of corporate profit and START being a defender of Liberty.
Click to expand...

Greed? Part of freedom is the ability to make a profit to stay in business, pay stockholders, cover liabilities etc.... If you don't like our current model of you work and then get paid for it based on what the market will bear... well I dont know what to say and this isnt the place for it anyway... Most large corporations are held by stockholders who in general are average citizens... am I missing something here?

The NRA did offer a logical and constitutional answer to a difficult problem. The 2A exist in part for exactly these situations where life is threatened by a BG and the other part is to protect ones self from tyrannical government... There are no compromises with antis, we have to give everything and they give nothing and then a decade or so later we do it all again..
 
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun..." was a horrible line...
Click to expand...

Agreed.....it should have been "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a BUNCH of good guys, each with their own guns."
 
possible solution to problem

put a metal protector in each school and a cop behind shield, pay for it with city bonds. put GOD back in school. on the tax level , to me it is simple. flat tax on every one and all corp. any monies made any where. can you think what five persent would do for some big corp, how much would wallmart pay, etc. just a thought. cjs
 
Gun and ammo prices have been rising well above inflation while my 2nd amendment rights have grown. The nra is the shell or Exxon of guns. They now represent an industry and not me.

I don't have a police department in my town. Who pays for a cop in the school? I cut up my nra card after the conference yesterday. Maybe the dues I once paid will compensate for the new taxes.
 
I don't have a police department in my town. Who pays for a cop in the school? I cut up my nra card after the conference yesterday. Maybe the dues I once paid will compensate for the new taxes.
Click to expand...

So what do you want?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top