Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Friday, December 21, 2012

What Will the NRA Say Today?

Let's see if the organization will deliver any recommendations that will address the slaughter that happened one week ago today:


The NRA spokesman, Wayne LaPierre, essentially said in his remarks that the country should become an armed police state.  The NRA's solution to the gun culture?  Armed police at all schools--he didn't say how we'd pay for that, estimates are that would cost the government $5.5 billion.  But what about private schools?  Nursery schools?  Daycare centers?  Then what about other unprotected vulnerable venues, say, nursing homes for the elderly? I didn't listen to much else after his insane suggestion, so I don't know if he mentioned anything about any restrictions on gun sales or ammo sales.  What the NRA did show the American people today is that it is an irrational lobby for the gun manufacturers, and they care not one whit for the safety and care of our children.

So what the brilliant minds in the NRA have proposed today is turning this country into an armed government police state.  This coming from the organization that warns its members to arm itself against a possible takeover of the government.  If that isn't a definition of insanity, I don't know what is.  

NYTimes: "Businesses and special-interest groups often cloak their profit motives in the garb of constitutional rights — think Big Tobacco and its opposition to restrictions on smoking in public places and bold warnings on cigarette packages. The Supreme Court has made clear that the right to bear arms is not absolute and is subject to regulations and controls. Yet the N.R.A. clings to its groundless arguments that tough regulations violate the Second Amendment. Many of those arguments serve no purpose other than to increase the sales of guns and bullets."

 USAToday: "In both smoking and drinking, progress has been driven by a blend of changing public attitudes and responsive government policies. Could the same thing happen for guns? The moment is ripe. The slaughter of 20 children ages 6 and 7 was an event so unimaginably awful that it might have created the sort of sustained public pressure that other horrific shootings have somehow never managed to build. Here, too, there's a valuable lesson from America's history of dealing with alcohol.

Even aside from constitutional considerations, attempts to outlaw handguns won't work any better than banning booze did during Prohibition. But sensible gun restrictions seem more possible than at any time since an assault-weapons ban expired in 2004. These include a broadened ban on military-style semiautomatic rifles and high-capacity clips, and background checks on all gun sales."

Chicago Sun-Times:  "When it comes to government action, Obama already knows what to do. The nation has been debating gun-control measures for decades, forever studying and talking, but always failing to take action. 

The top items on the to-do list are ready to go [...] Will new laws wipe out all gun violence? Of course not. But imagine, for a moment, that your child was the one saved because the Newtown shooter had a slightly less powerful gun or 20 fewer rounds of ammunition. Today’s the day to act."

While Congress and the President negotiate our fiscal future, our first concern should be whether or not we will continue on the path we are currently on:  Unending horrendous gun deaths in this country (predictions are that by 2015 gun deaths will outnumber motor vehicle deaths), and accepting, as part of our American culture, the slaughter of more children, women, and men.

Reax to the NRA today:

"I actually fell for it. I actually though the NRA would come out with some concessions - closing the gun show loophole, at the very least. I really should have known better. This morning Wayne LaPierre gave one of the most cynical and cowardly speeches I've ever heard. Blaming everyone and everything other than guns and access to them." 

" After reading the transcript of the NRA’s press conference where they had promised "meaningful contributions" to the discussion after Newtown, I’m surprised that I’m amazed, but I am. This is epistemic closure beyond the inability of the right-wing to believe the reality of last November’s re-election of Obama. For years, the NRA has been stoking fears of "jackbooted thugs" from the Federal government. Now they propose putting an armed government employee in every single school across America."

"You are witnessing the total implosion of the right in the United States: the defeat of Boehner’s ridiculous Plan B and this speech by the NRA."


Silverfiddle said...

Background checks for every transaction would be a nice start. I do not want to see guns getting sold to criminals.

To see where we stand, I have quick quiz, a kind of rorschach test.

Which, if any, of these guns do you think should be banned?

Ruger 10/22

Remington Model 700, Walnut Stock

Remington Model 700, Tactical

This is not a trick question or an attempt at a gotcha, and there are no right or wrong answers.

I just want to see where everyone stands.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Can't answer any of this, since I don't know one kind of gun from another. The only thing I'm sure of is that a disturbed young man got hold of his mother's unsecured firearms and slaughtered children and women.

Dave Miller said...

Silver, I don't personally know alot about guns...

The first one, a 22, shoots a pretty small round... looks like a "normal' rifle to me... it's golden.

the second one would not load... the page that is...

The third, hard to say. Looks menacing, but may just be a single shot weapon.

Again, I guess i come down like this...

If it shoots more than 10 rounds with a reload, or can be easily modified to do so... it's out. As are the clips.

What is the practical use of that class of weapon.

As for the NRA presser today... who is advising these guys? Was it the same folks who told Bush to fly over Katrina in a helo? Seriously, they had a week to study and then flunked an open book test.

Amazingly bad for the NRA and Wayne...

Just my opinions and yes Shaw, we should be insulted by the NRA non response response...

BB-Idaho said...

SF, all three of those listed have been around quite awhile and are
ubiquitous. Since extended magazines for them are either not available or difficult to install, they would not be considered egregious say compared to the Bushmaster. Ruger has recently offered a 25 round banana clip for
the 10/22, even for their 'Boy Scout' model, which might be of concern. I agree, background checks, if they approached 100%, and somehow addressed gun shows
and blackmarket deals, would obviate much of the problem of
possessing high performance weapons by legitimate folks.

Republican Racism said...

"I just want to see where everyone stands."

The NRA says arm the teachers.
Do you agree? This is the best position to fight against guns in school?

Silverfiddle said...

Here is an excellent article from Annenberg about statistics...

KP said...

I was surprised and disappointed by the speech from LaPierre this morning. It smacked of finger wagging. The "tone" was angry and the message blamed the media, Hollywood, Games makers and the uninformed.

Even most passionate and ardent supporters of the second amendment are offering ideas that might be helpful in an effort to find common ground and new legislation. LaPierre seems out of touch after this mornings address. I wouldn't be surprised if he is forced out of office by his own group.

Tip of the hat to Silverfiddle as an example of how most 2nd amendment supporters are feeling. He has been consistently offering ideas, specific firearms knowledge and insight into how we might keep weapons from being purchased by bad people who want to do others harm.

KJS said...

What a pathetic and ridiculous response from the NRA. Since it is their not so brilliant idea, maybe we should make the NRA foot the bill for security guards at every school and for the cost of the training that would be needed. And one wonders what type of gun a security guard would have to carry to prevent the sort of violence that took place last Friday.

Anonymous said...

NRA says put an armed policeman in every school.
I wonder how much that would cost, and Republicans would demand an offset cut somewhere, probably in SS.
You do know that Colombine had an armed policeman on site.
1984 - everyone should have to pass a physiological test. Really? Thought crime? Genetic predisposition?
The NRA deserves every shot they will take for today's idiotic statement.
We should at least have the same kind of laws that regulate cars:
Written and manual tests
Certificate of ownership that transfers to the new owner.
Tax on sales.
A registry of owners of all guns.
Safety laws like gun safes, trigger locks, etc.
Limits on ammunition and types of bullets.
Individuals can still sell cars to anyone, but that sale has to follow laws that ensure ownership, insurance, and a licensed driver.
There is no one answer to stop these killings, but common sense is lacking when it comes to gun ownership.

BB-Idaho said...

Here in Idaho where guns are as common as potatos, there has been
positive feedback from sportswriters and responsible gun owners. So, I thought perhaps the NRA would offer a bit of something
new. very disappointing.
At least LaPierre didn't come up with "The schools are easy targets-
let's close them!" How does that guy sleep at night?

Republican Racism said...

SF has all the answers, issue decided, lets move on.

Dave Miller said...

What is amazing to me regarding the NRA response was essentially a call for more government spending.

I wonder how federally government funded school guards will go over with the conservative movement.

BB-Idaho said...

Interesting article on not only the
expense of the NRA proposal, but why it won't work at Business Insider .

skudrunner said...

Gotta keep the 10/22 with a banana clip. 700 is a great gun but can't see the real need for a tactical.

Anything in the wrong hands is a killing machine even airliners that can be driven into buildings or buses driven off cliffs.

By putting Joe Biden in charge of finding a solution the administration has shown no real desire to find one only to look concerned politically.

Rational Nation USA said...

This is not new, the NRA pitched it in 2007. Not an idea I'm comfortable with.

We definitely need to target the criminal element and the mentally unstable through more extensive background checks. Even if it requires a longer waiting period.

It is hard to justify extended clips or drums as there is no practical purpose for them. While I believe the founders intended the populace to be armed flintlocks were certainly not semi automatic. This I believe changes the equation and certainly the wise founders could not have even envisioned today's realities.

Unless the sides are willing to really and sincerely dialog nothing will change. We have an opportunity to both reaffirm our right to bear arms and improve safety. Surely we are capable, if we try.

Shaw Kenawe said...

BB, that link to the article shows that the NRA did not think through its response today. Or worse, ignored what happened in recent massacres where there were armed guards. The NRA today showed itself as nothing more than a puppet of the firearms industry where it puts profits above America's children.


Jerry Critter said...

Sounds to me like the NRA is a bigger threat to our freedom than the government.

Rational Nation USA said...

Jerry, please, if you will, describe precisely how this is so.

The NRA has issues I agree. However, your statement is over reach IMNHO.

Jerry Critter said...

"Unless the sides are willing to really and sincerely dialog nothing will change."

Money is a big impediment to a sincere dialog. Until the political money comes from the public and not the private sector, private interests will continue to win out over public safety and welfare.

Jerry Critter said...

Is it over reach? Yeah, probably, BUT turning schools into armed camps does nothing to enhance safety or freedom. And having unfettered access to hand held weapons of mass destruction as the NRA supports does not enhance our freedoms at all. The second amendment uses the phrase "well regulated". That is what we need -- well regulated gun ownership.

Shaw Kenawe said...


The NRA has stopped any move to make it unlawful to sell firearms to people on a terrorist watch list and to convicted felons. In Florida, if you've served your times as a convicted felon, you cannot ever vote again, but you CAN buy and own a firearm.

The NRA has tried to stop any and all limits on any sort of firearm ownership, background checks, anything.

They are not an organization that promotes sane gun laws, they promote the firearms industry and its bottom line.

We need to make them an object of contempt.

BB-Idaho said...

Here is a pretty good summary of
the NRA and its overeach.

Rational Nation USA said...

You have an agemda that I can support. If you over reach I assure you you will lose not only my support but the support of numbers more than you know.

Jerry, I appreciate your acknowledgement you may have over reached. The differences we may have are less than the similarities in this issue.

Shaw, take note. For if the left doesn't you might expect a continuation of what we have heretofore been witness to. Think about it is all I am saying. You do want allies right?

KP said...

<< We need to make them an object of contempt. >>

I don't know about that. We just saw an election where Ds and Rs treated eachother as objects of contempt. That sucked big time.

The least helpful talking heads operate like that on TV and radio. It isn't helpful and creates it's own problems (see congress). Appeals to the broadest number of people who are willing to work together for change is the best way to get long lasting political action (see civil rights, see women's rights, see gay rights and now gun control). LaPierre made a fool of himself. I don't think he will survive it.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw, we won't have to... they took the biggest step in that happening today and in the process further sullied whatever was left of the GOP's reputation...

Jennifer Rubin, long a critic of the Dems said it best... the Republican Party is unfit to govern...

I am sure that in the eyes of many, she will become just the latest sane person to be saddled with the RINO label and relegated to pariah status, even though when she was bashing Obama, she was wonderfully accurate and a good Republican soldier...

Shaw Kenawe said...

What I mean by contempt is that neither the American people nor our elected politicians should ever quake before the leadership of that organization.

How else would any reasonable person react to an organization that ignores what its paying member support? That is contemptuous behavior. A majority of the NRA's membership WANT better gun laws, background checks, etc., and the NRA won't have any of it.

The link BB provided gives us more insight on how the NRA does all in its power to promote the firearms industry instead of gun laws.

Sometimes a person has to stand up and say THIS IS WRONG.

"Meaningful action" has been thwarted, largely because of the power and wealth of the National Rifle Association (NRA). One of the key avenues it has used to exert its influence is the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). For decades, the NRA has helped bankroll ALEC operations and even co-chaired ALEC's "Public Safety and Elections Task Force," where it secretly voted on bills alongside elected representatives. At ALEC's annual meeting this summer, the NRA had the biggest booth at the convention in Salt Lake City and also underwrote a shooting event along with one of the largest sellers of assault weapons in the world.

Numerous bills to bar or impede laws that would help protect Americans from gun violence were drafted by the NRA and adopted by ALEC corporations and legislators as "models" for the rest of the country. And, dozens of these special interest bills have become law in states across the country. As a result of the NRA's efforts, a city in Connecticut recently repealed the only ban in the state on carrying a concealed firearm. Allowing "concealed carry" has been a long-standing part of the NRA-ALEC agenda, passing in Wisconsin a year ago at the urging of Governor Scott Walker, who was given an award by the NRA for making this item law along with a version of the controversial ALEC-NRA "Stand Your Ground"/"Castle Doctrine" bill. A concealed carry law also was just passed last week in Michigan, along with the so-called "Right to Work" union-busting bill on ALEC's corporate wish list."

Shaw Kenawe said...


"Here is a review of the NRA-by-way-of-ALEC gun agenda:

The retail sale of machine guns has been barred by federal law since the gangster era but, as uncovered by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), one year ago at ALEC's "policy summit" in Arizona, the NRA obtained unanimous support from the corporate and lawmaker members of ALEC's Task Force for "amending" ALEC's "Consistency in Firearms Regulation Act" to expressly bar cities from banning "machine guns." Other provisions of that bill prevent cities from banning armor-piercing bullets and from banning efforts to alter guns to make them more deadly if the state does not do so. It also bars cities from suing gun manufacturers for gun deaths based on the theory of liability used by governments to sue tobacco manufacturers for smoking deaths."

Awful. Contemptuous!

Silverfiddle said...

@ "Republican Racism said...
"I just want to see where everyone stands."

The NRA says arm the teachers.
Do you agree? This is the best position to fight against guns in school?"

No. Packing heat should not be a prerequisite for teaching our kids. If some teaches want to do it voluntarily, I am not opposed.

Senator Joe Manchin, D-WV has written a sensible article:

Republican Racism said...

You are not opposed to a 1st grade teacher carrying a gun. Thanks for the clarification. That's what the NRA says,

Silverfiddle said...

RR: You asked a question and I answered it.

Have a Merry Christmas