The NRA Response

I see 4 factors in this equation:

- murderers / terrorists
- large groups
- defenseless
- recognition

- murderers / terrorists...as long as there are people,we will have them
- large groups...as long as there are people, we will have them
-defenseless...this we know we can change this
-recognition...with the proper security, this can be accomplished and greatly reduce the chances of a perps actions in some situations but not all. Too, taking notice of drastic changes in someones actions, moods and speech of a person we are very familiar with could be helpful as well. Especially if the drastic changes are of a violent manner.

Changes in the last two along with changes in building structures(especially schools) are the only chances of drastically reducing these tragedies.
 
I just finished reading all this and want to throw in my .02 Nothing much that has not been covered but hear you go.

I am an NRA member and I also question what is being done with my money. If they would stop spending money to ask me for more money maybe they could afford a speech writer and a press person that has some public speaking skills.

I agree with most of what was said in the speech but the delivery was poor and some of what was said was ill considered. The "good guy with a gun" statement might be true but was delivered in a way that says gun people are a bunch of nuts that think guns are the answer to everything. I am using my keyboard and fingers to write this not shooting at the computer from across the room.

The remarks about the video games and such are pulled from the same research bin that says more gun laws will prevent crime.

I would like to point out that the NRA is not the gun industry or a regulatory agency. They might be able to start a conversation about a self regulating industry but that is about it. Also the idea suggests to me that gun owners are thinking the industry should voluntarily infringe on the 2ND. :confused:

I am retired military and in a couple of years should be starting a teaching job. I would have no problem going armed in school or having armed guards but would not want to turn it into a prison setting. But if anyone is going to have this conversation, the NRA, government, or whomever else thinks they are qualified, they would do well to start the conversation, in a rational manner, with teachers. Even though teachers are often not consulted when education decisions, rules, and laws are being made they are the ones in the trenches and have a much clearer view of what works in the classroom.
 
I just finished reading all this and want to throw in my .02 Nothing much that has not been covered but hear you go.

I am an NRA member and I also question what is being done with my money. If they would stop spending money to ask me for more money maybe they could afford a speech writer and a press person that has some public speaking skills.

I agree with most of what was said in the speech but the delivery was poor and some of what was said was ill considered. The "good guy with a gun" statement might be true but was delivered in a way that says gun people are a bunch of nuts that think guns are the answer to everything. I am using my keyboard and fingers to write this not shooting at the computer from across the room.

The remarks about the video games and such are pulled from the same research bin that says more gun laws will prevent crime.

I would like to point out that the NRA is not the gun industry or a regulatory agency. They might be able to start a conversation about a self regulating industry but that is about it. Also the idea suggests to me that gun owners are thinking the industry should voluntarily infringe on the 2ND.

I am retired military and in a couple of years should be starting a teaching job. I would have no problem going armed in school or having armed guards but would not want to turn it into a prison setting. But if anyone is going to have this conversation, the NRA, government, or whomever else thinks they are qualified, they would do well to start the conversation, in a rational manner, with teachers. Even though teachers are often not consulted when education decisions, rules, and laws are being made they are the ones in the trenches and have a much clearer view of what works in the classroom.

Absolutely agree with about 99% of what you said. I say 99% because there may be a nuance or two that I would maybe change but I'm not sure which ones just yet. ;)
 
I thought Waynes words were spot on, though I only read the transcript and didn't get to see the video feed. I wasn't offended by the words he said regarding video games or movies. I think it only supports the fact that we as a society in general, tolerate violence and gore for entertainment and then look for things to scapegoat when the violence becomes reality.(In this case it is the gun or the NRA, not the actor) A so called assult weapon may have been the tool he used, but influences of violence in our culture when added to a mind that obviously wasn't stable certainly doesn't make for a good combination. At least that's the point I got from his address.

I'm in the "not another inch" camp. I don't even own an AR but I sure as hell don't want another AWB that outlaws them because the media is expoiting the fact that he used one. Right now the NRA is the most influential voice of the gun lobby and yes there are other organizations you can donate to if you have a grudge against them, like Gun Owners of America, Firearm Owners Against Crime or The Second Amendment Foundation. Wayne LaPierre may not be the best speaker in some of your minds, but under his watch, he has swelled the ranks considerably and that is what we need. Numbers in the ranks equates to a huge chunk of the voting block. Remember it's the House and Senate that have to take measures before sending it to Obamas desk.

Another valuable resource is your voice. If you don't want tighter restrictions, contact your representatives. Beleive it or not, it works. It only takes a short ammount of time to send an e-mail and although it may not be read directly by your congress-critter, they usually have staffers keep a log of how a particular peice of legislation is being supported or opposed. I'm proud to say that I was part of the grass roots effort that got us a Castle Doctrine bill passed into law last year here in Pennsylvania. I personally like to send an actual envelope to their office as it is a tangible item that is harder to ignore. Phone calls are probably the best way to convey your message, as you get to talk to a live person, just be polite, factual and to the point. And if they do vote in favor of your support, be sure to thank them. Everybody likes to be told they're doing a good job.

The Anti's are already chewing away at their ear and playing on their emotion, the last thing we need as a firearm based community is to fight over how bad of a speaker he is. They are smart, well financed and already have the ball in their court with the circumstances of this shooting and the support of the media. As has been said before, we must hang together for we will surely hang seperately.

I like the idea of supporting the teachers with education and training to arm themselves. Our local school district has had police outside the school directing traffic before and after school all week and I appreciate the display but I don't see it as a viable long term solution. To throw in another quote, "If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you'll feed him for life." Alot of us gun owners carry concealed every day. Most of us are well versed and very proficient in terms of safety and use. Alot of the local teachers here are avid hunters and marksmen. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they would be forced to undertake this responsibility untrained or unwillingly, but I see it as a very do-able situation that alot would volunteer for if given the chance.
 
I thought maybe they spoke to soon, or that possibly it was best to remain silent(at least for moment after their good, initial + short statement). Maybe as an organization they felt they had too or that they were supposed to. I'm not sure.
 
If they would stop spending money to ask me for more money maybe they could afford a speech writer and a press person that has some public speaking skills.

Mass mailings do make money. If they didn't the NRA (and other organizations) wouldn't do them. If you don't want them, simply contact the NRA and op-out of the mailings, which will save them more money since they aren't wasting money on those who don't contribute.

I'd also like to state that simply being a member of groups like the NRA, SAF, GOA, etc. is not enough. You must be an active member, the membership fees are not enough to fight the battles that are looming. I was planning on buying myself a G19 for Xmas. instead I am sending the money off to protect the 2A. $250 to the NRA-ILA and another $250 to GOA.
It's not enough to be a member....you must be an active participant in the organization.

Also, if your only discussion of these topics are on forums such as this, you are only preaching to the choir. Get out there, contact your reps at all levels of government, stand up with the NRA, not behind them.

Either stand up and be heard, or sit down and shut the hell up. (sorry if that's a bit harsh, but it's true)
 
Last edited:
Mass mailings do make money. If they didn't the NRA (and other organizations) wouldn't do them. If you don't want them, sinplycontact the NRA and op-out of the mailings, which will save them more money since they aren't wasting money on those who don't contribute.

I have and it has slowed down some. I generally pass up most of the free membership stuff so that more money can go were it needs to. I am not apposed to giving extra but when I have extra to give I go to the website and look for places to give it. I am the same way with other organizations I send money. Repeated calls and mailings are a waste when sent to me.
 
Mass mailings do make money. If they didn't the NRA (and other organizations) wouldn't do them.

no, fear makes money. the same fear that has driven up panic buying of guns and ammo as well as prices for guns and ammo. the gun manufacturers are laughing at all of you

as for LaPierre on Meet The Press, I couldn't get past the disgusting spittle on the sides of his lips to take him seriously. plus, he kept dodging straight forward questions about solutions to the gun problem.
 
gaseousclay, so now you are more worried about saliva than about paying attention to subject matter and content?

This does not lend itself to taking you seriously as a defender of RKBA.

Disagreement on tactics is one thing. You are going over the top.
 
the gun manufacturers are laughing at all of you

Well, I’m not a gun manufacture so I have no idea what they are doing, but somehow I doubt they are laughing. Keep in mind proposed legislation will most likely result in many companies closing and folks losing their jobs somehow that is not funny to me.

I understand the NRA is not perfect and they are sometimes over the top in the mailings. However, what may have seemed over the top two months ago is now happening, so who knows maybe they were right.

At the end of the day I’m not sure what organization does better job protecting our Second Amendment freedoms.
 
People are not understanding the issue here. That press conference wasn't for the 45% of Americans who own guns, they've never held a press conference like that for us before. That press conference was for the 55% of Americans who don't own guns, and that response was abysmal and tone-deaf to non-gun owners.

And before you say to hell with the anti-gun crowd, not all non-gun owners are anti-gun owners, there is a wide spectrum, just like there is a wide spectrum of gun owners, from the ardent 2A believers to the gun owners who are in favor of an AWB.

That message needed to be crafted for non-gun owners to show that the NRA understood the issue, and would work with those in power to do what is best for the country. They didn't have to mean it, but they had a chance to reach an audience they don't usually speak to. Market yourself. Don't draw a line in the sand and cling to your guns, painting the perfect picture for the media to show. The headlines were overwhelmingly critical, and it was as much the NRAs fault as it was the mainstream media hype
 
gaseousclay, so now you are more worried about saliva than about paying attention to subject matter and content?

This does not lend itself to taking you seriously as a defender of RKBA.

Disagreement on tactics is one thing. You are going over the top.

well, I didn't think much of LaPierre's take on how to respond to gun violence, as some NRA members will attest to, so subject matter and content clearly didn't work in his favor. I disliked his approach to reducing gun violence in schools which to me is another red herring. how does he propose we pay for all of these armed guards? taxpayers? I thought less government was a good thing but now he's proposing more government? if LaPierre is the best the NRA has then good luck with that.
 
Wayne looked disheveled and out of sorts to me.

I don't think the NRA's non-conciliatory tone helped matters at all and in my mind this was a public relations failure.
 
Wayne looked disheveled and out of sorts to me.

Yes, the NRA Leadership is under a lot of pressure and really with a lot of folks are dammed if they do dammed if they don’t.

We really do need a charismatic articulate speaker to sort of be the public face of this debate. LaPierre is an administrator and fundraiser, but not sure he is right for this job. Keep in mind we are up against a very articulate and persuasive President who has long championed increased gun control.
 
I agree with bigjim945, we need to focus on non gun owners. I don't believe the mantra of "get more good guys with guns" will sell. The NRA needs to help look for viable, believeable, sportable positions. This incident is like no other that preceded it. It has people talking that typically do not pay attention to these discussions. Non gun owners who are neither opponents or proponents will look for rational solutions that isit keeping w the 2nd amendment If the NRA can appear sincere and impartial (from what I saw I do not believe they came across that way), they will be much more successful. If they appear to oppose any gun legislation they will appear heartless and lose this. They need real solutions, creative and thoughtful. Leo's in every school is not practical. How many Leo's per school will you have? 1 at every door? There is no easy answer here.
 
I work with a FUDD at work, its extremely irritating to hear him say " You don't need and AR-15, you can't hunt with it!" He doesn't believe in hi-cap mags either.

As long as he gets to keep his 30-06 and hunt Elk, he doesn't care about any bans. The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting and its not about need. FUDD's are a serious threat to our 2nd Ammendment rights.
 
As many of you know, I hunt predators and take care of nuiesence animals. I use a mini14 for this, including wild pigs. While not an AR, in essence functionally equivalent. Not gonna debate the comparisons here. I'm sure that there are many other shepherd types tha use an AR for the same purpose. I can't imagine trying to do this task with a 3-5 rd 30-06.

Granted many occasions call for one shot. But some occasions I regretted only bringing the 5rd mag.

I loved the look of the wood stock, but I had actually developed some painful tendinitis due to the shape of the stock and holding it in position for extended periods. I switched to a tactical stock with an ergonomic grip and problem solved.

The panel on George stephanopolis show this morning seemed to be more concerned with background checks and mag capacity instead of banning the rifles. I have no problem with background checks, as I already go through them. I'm nuetral on mag capacity...to a point
 
The NRA needs a different spokesman. LaPierre is not a particularly good speaker and has little charisma. The issue now is not getting NRA members and shooters support, it's getting to the antis in a positve way. LaPierres words failed miserably on that.
 
Personally, I take issue with the 100 round ammo drums...that's ridiculous.

You seem to me to miss the point... We always start out with the horse with the nose in the tent, then a leg, then two legs and the upper body and then the whole dang thing... Our legislators seem to always do it this way. So as much as I personally don't need a 100 round mag I will stand up and fight financially and with my words and actions against any proposal to restrict things more than they already are.

Also what is the practical difference between a 100 round mag and a 30 round mag... I can drop a thirty round mag and put it a fresh one with hardly a pause... The real heart of the matter is we can't outlaw evil in anyway that will actually stop it. I can think of lots of ways that would produce horrible results without the use of a firearm... Unless were going to outlaw all kinds of stuff there is no way to stop mayhem and death except to have a lawfully used firearm. We need to get real, the antis have put the focus on guns but any real solution needs to focus on stopping evil and identifying the truly mentally ill. Take away guns and we are taking away the solution...
 
Back
Top