NRA Press Release Re: Newtown

[OldCannon]

My speculation is that the NRA has already quietly mobilized their lobbying staff to understand the positions of politicians and to make an assessment of the situation. I'd rather they do that than waste their breath on hoplophobes.

[TexasCajun]

Anybody ever try shouting into a hurricane? Even with a bullhorn, your voice gets drowned out by the volume of wind & rain. If you want to be heard, wait until the storm dies down. That's essentially what the NRA is doing right now. Plus, like Charles said, it adds a ton of class to not be jumping into heated debate while 20 families are trying to plan funerals for 6 year olds. Thankfully, all the knee-jerk reaction is only just that, reaction. Because Washington DC is so inefficient (and even ineffectual some would say), nothing will be done immediately. There's a time to respond. Then there'll be a time to act.

[brainman]

Any talk of an assault weapons ban by politicians is either pandering from people too stupid to understand the situation or a scheme to lead us into banning weapons entirely. Evidence: Connecticut already has had an assault weapons ban for years; one that is modeled after the federal ban.

[RPB]

Anybody ever try shouting into a hurricane? Even with a bullhorn, your voice gets drowned out by the volume of wind & rain. If you want to be heard, wait until the storm dies down. That's essentially what the NRA is doing right now. Plus, like Charles said, it adds a ton of class to not be jumping into heated debate while 20 families are trying to plan funerals for 6 year olds. Thankfully, all the knee-jerk reaction is only just that, reaction. Because Washington DC is so inefficient (and even ineffectual some would say), nothing will be done immediately. There's a time to respond. Then there'll be a time to act.

My kids (well, some I raised) behaved and minded when I spoke quietly, ... like a low volume growl from a dog is serious, better listen, a loud bark means it isn't about to bite; they ignored their screaming yelling mom though.

Any talk of an assault weapons ban by politicians is either pandering from people too stupid to understand the situation or a scheme to lead us into banning weapons entirely. Evidence: Connecticut already has had an assault weapons ban for years; one that is modeled after the federal ban.

Doesn't Massssssseeeeewchuuuuusetts too? I thought I read Robamaney passed one there.

[srothstein]

We need different answers instead of guns don't kill people.

I agree with you that we need to slightly change our answers. One of the things I have done is ask people what law they think would have stopped this particular shooting. Usually, they come up with just a total ban on assault weapons. That lets me get into a discussion of what is dangerous about that weapon, and usually ends up with an agreement that it is no more dangerous than any other gun.

Sometimes, they focus on the high capacity magazines. One person actually pointed out that Lochner was stopped in Arizona by being tackled while reloading and said if we forced them to reload more often, then we might be able to lessen the deaths. I showed him the video of Jerry Miculek reloading a revolver. I admitted that this is the outlier and showed him how many training videos there are on speed reloading with magazines. It made him admit that Lochner was the outlier also.

I like to ask them why almost all mass shootings occur in locations where guns are banned, either by law or by owner postings. A follow-up is to ask them when the last mass shooting they heard of in a gun store occurred. When someone does point out the Ft. Hood shooting, I point out that the soldiers were all disarmed by regulations and ask them if they thought it would have been so bad if the soldiers had been armed themselves.

My final argument is to ask if they would hire armed guards for their expensive diamond jewelry if they had it. That is almost always a yes, so I ask why they would not demand armed guards for the children, much more valuable than any possession.

I think our best hope is to get them thinking instead of reacting emotionally. Most people really can think and come to decent answers. They prefer to react based on their emotions, which is usually to our detriment. If they get to thinking about the problem, I think we all come out ahead.

[The Annoyed Man]

1. Inform them that they're not Military Assault Weapons, being semi auto only. They are not military weapons, they are not heavy weapons, and they are not machine guns.

Referencing the part in red..... I tell people ALL those things, and then I add that they are not particularly "high-powered" either. I've taken to carrying a spent 5.56 case, a spent .308 case, and a spent .375 H&H magnum case in my pants pocket. When the subject comes up, I take out the .375 H&H case and I say "THIS is a spent case from a high-powered rifle caliber commonly used to hunt large dangerous game, such as rhinos and lions and bears (oh my)." Then I take out the .308 case and I say "THIS is a spent case from a medium caliber rifle cartridge that is used in all kinds of applications from hunting medium sized game such as deer or feral hogs, competitive target shooting, and also happens to be used in light machine guns." Then I take out the 5.56 case and I say, "THIS is a spent case from the tiny small-bore rifle cartridge which is used in hunting rifles used for hunting prairie dogs and other small varmints, as well as being the cartridge used in the civilian semi-automatic version of the military M4 carbine. As you can see, it is NOT high-powered when compared to even common hunting calibers." Then I address the difference between semi-automatic and rock and roll. When they want to know why I feel it is necessary to be able to fire one round each time I pull the trigger, without having to cycle a bolt, I say, "I infer from your question that you think revolvers should be outlawed too, and only well-placed democrats and the extremely wealthy should be allowed to own one?"

[cheezit]

why did the military move to the .223/5.56 anyway?
simple question, simple awnser the caliber was made to be less leathel. the goal was to wound and not kill thus reqireing personal to move the injured from the fields of battle. getting 2-3 people tied up at one time was deemed more effective then littering the zones with bodies.

[Heartland Patriot]

why did the military move to the .223/5.56 anyway?
simple question, simple awnser the caliber was made to be less leathel. the goal was to wound and not kill thus reqireing personal to move the injured from the fields of battle. getting 2-3 people tied up at one time was deemed more effective then littering the zones with bodies.

A larger, heavier round is certainly more lethal or injurious; look at how terrible the Civil War was with those big round lead balls and Minie bullets.

[ghostrider]

So far I think the NRA has handled this correctly... no need to get in a shouting match with the anti's at this time; let the families and the nation mourn the victims. But there is a lot at stake... so I hope and pray that they handle this with the utmost professionalism on Friday's press conf.

I agree. I'm just not sure what the organization can offer. Eliminating the 'victim-rich environments' is clearly the first easy step, but that won't sit well with those that just hate guns or those who are too emotional to process facts.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I think our best hope is to get them thinking instead of reacting emotionally. Most people really can think and come to decent answers. They prefer to react based on their emotions, which is usually to our detriment. If they get to thinking about the problem, I think we all come out ahead.

Very well said Steve! We need to turn down the rhetoric and talk. Unfortunately, too many on our side think talking means conceding rather than convincing.

Chas.

[TexasCajun]

I've started seeing news reports that are asking questions about gun free zones. Of course those are usually placed after reports & soundbites from those advocating a new AWB or total gun ban. But at least the discussion seems to be starting.

[ac-mech]

Why ban guns and magazine that are commonly millions out there?...dos not make any sense...
Why our tax dollars are not keeping a police officer in every school?
Just my opinion...

[RPBrown]

I think our best hope is to get them thinking instead of reacting emotionally. Most people really can think and come to decent answers. They prefer to react based on their emotions, which is usually to our detriment. If they get to thinking about the problem, I think we all come out ahead.

Very well said Steve! We need to turn down the rhetoric and talk. Unfortunately, too many on our side think talking means conceding rather than convincing.

Chas.

I agree. I think that the NRA showed a lot of class in stepping back and not commenting until now. The respect that has been shown toward the families by the NRA will help in the long run.
Unlike the gun grabbers coming out vertually hours after the attack an started hollering AWB. That was about as classless as I think you can get. They didn't care about the families or victems, just their own agenda.

Now, what scares me is folder Holder stated this morning that Nobama was thinking of using his executive powers to bypass congress and create a stringent ban.

[AEA]

If he does, I believe that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and we will be "All In".

[KC5AV]

If he does that, I believe appeals to Executive Order go straight to the Supreme Court.

Pray for the health of the conservatives on SCOTUS.