Analysis of NRA on Meet the Press?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally, as much as a stiff middle finger approach to calls for serious gun control, I think it would backfire massively. Therefore, proactively conceding "low-hanging fruit" issues that makes sense anyhow, like non-background check firearm transactions between private citizens, would seem like a reasonabel approach.
Click to expand...

like i said before, they arent going to walk away once they have the "gun show loophole".....they are going to take it and ask for more.....

i say we make it as hard as possible for them to get even one finger our cookie jar.
 
Video games: I rolled my eyes when I read that part (couldn't watch live). It sounds to me like a hat tip to the "Get off my lawn!" and "Darn kids! Slow down!" crowd. (sorry, adding more stereotypes...) BTW: I am 30, remember playing the original "Wolfenstein" when it was new and have never played anything newer than the original "Doom". Haven't been into video games or played one for years nor do I have many friends who do outside of the brief Wii/Rock Band console craze.

Seriously though, these same video games are also responsible for getting a lot of good people into gun ownership and the shooting sports. Just like gun owners, 99.9% of video game players do not kill anyone either. Now, an unstable, isolated person playing these games may be a problem, but unstable isolated people are a problem with or without the games.
Yeah, wish they had deleted that whole part about video games and promoted marksmanship, sportsmanship and self defense with that time.
Click to expand...

This I completely agree with. I myself grew up a gamer, and I still regularly play games. Games don't make me want to kil anymore than owning an AR-15 makes me want to shoot up a school.

Mr. Lapierre also managed to stir up a great deal of hate in the video game community, as they tend to treat attacks on their favorite hobby the same way us gun people treat them. Now you are going to end up with gamers blaming the NRA, when everyone should be united against these ridiculous attacks from politicians who are trying to use this terrible event to further their own agendas.
 
Well, like I stated, I think given the massive sentiment for gun controls, conceding nothing would be a mistake. And closing non-background check firearms transactions makes sense. But hey, we can disagree...
 
I do not advocate any new gun control laws, but there is a proposal that could be made regarding the so-called gun show loophole.

Instruct the ATF to set up booths at gun shows (or major gun shows) and conduct free NICS checks for any individuals who voluntarily wanted NICS checks for private transactions.
 
I don't agree with Bikepharmer about gun shows being "commercial events". Every one I have ever been to has vendors who are FFL dealers and vendors who are private citizens. I have purchased firearms from both groups.

Now, if the promoter wants to limit table rental for firearms sales to FFL dealers only, I have no problem with that because it's HIS venue. But controlling private sales of any legal product or service in my view is just wrong ... and Unconstitutional.

I'm on the side of not giving up anything to anyone. If you walk into a negotiation prepared to give up x, y, and z ... you've already lost any leverage you might have had. Public opinion aside (which I don't believe is as anti-gun as some may conclude), this time around, if the antis drag us to the table, I want the antis to do some "giving up". That, and making it crystal clear to our representatives that if they don't stand with us to preserve our rights ... we won't stand with them when they want our votes. Be polite ... but BE FIRM!

GC70 ... your operative words, free and voluntary ... not a bad idea.
 
I would make one concession to the histrionic cries for change... require that a potential buyer of a handgun get a signed letter of eligibility from his/her local law enforcement agency or court to purchase a handgun from a private seller. The buyer would pay, say a $25.00 fee, and the document would be good for 3 working days of eligibility. The buyer would present this copy to a selller, who would retain a copy of same for his/her records once a transaction has been made.
 
Alnamvet68 said:
... require that a potential buyer of a handgun get a signed letter of eligibility from his/her local law enforcement agency or court to purchase a handgun from a private seller. The buyer would pay, say a $25.00 fee, and the document would be good for 3 working days of eligibility.
Click to expand...

You have been underbid by the State of North Carolina, which requires Pistol Purchase Permits that only cost $5 and are good for 5 years.

Folks in North Carolina do not like the Pistol Purchase Permits one bit.
 
I think Wayne LaPierre in general does a pretty good job with articulating the message, but I do think the NRA needs to get more women as front people for our cause. I know they have some very good women spokesmen, but I think it would be very disarming (pun intended) to have a very articulate female tell the story, especially with the likes of Chucky Schummer on the other side. Just my $.02.
 
Some thoughts in the highlighted Blue ...

bikepharmer said:
My suggestions--
  • NRA needs to push harder for back ground checks, and arrests of persons who are trying to obtain guns illegally.
    While background checks of all persons wishing to buy a firearm would help screen out those who persons who are prohibited, or should be prohibited, from owning/possessing a firearm, the breadth of the database available can probably be improved. That quickly involves states, as that's where the bulk of the info is generated (state level input). Let's consider for a moment the persons who should be prohibited from possessing firearms due to mental health issues. That's going to mean some standardization of determining those persons who shouldn't possess a firearm due to mental health issues, and then the issues of who does the input, how it's done and how frequently it's done will likely require some serious attention.


  • They need to concede closing the gun show loophole, but still keep private party sales
    As has been previously mentioned, the "gun show loophole" is just another way of saying "private party sales". In order to "close this loophole", it would pretty much require prohibiting all private party sales, meaning they'd have to be done through a licensed FFL dealer. That's what's done in CA, although there's a way firearms which aren't considered "assault weapons" may be passed along to certain types of family members, and then that "gift" is registered with the state DOJ (for a fee).


  • They need to promote the sporting aspects (3 gun, marksmanship, etc).
    The NRA has been involved in supporting such responsible firearms activities, but remember that emphasis on "sporting use" has been used to create restrictions on firearms, especially at the federal level.


  • The capacity of mags is tougher. People who know guns will say that we can change a mag really quick...which if we are not careful could back fire in two ways. First, if it doesn't matter, then why are we so worried about it, and two, the left may say then magazines should be gone altogether.
    I believe 6 states have already enacted their own larger capacity magazine restrictions, and it's not hard to see how this is something that may again occur at the federal level, if not at the state level in more states, at some point.

    As far as educating how quickly a skilled user can reload a semiauto pistols, revolver or even a shotgun which uses a tube magazine? Well, I remember several years ago when someone used a standard pump shotgun with a 4-round tube magazine to shoot some people, and he reloaded it very quickly indeed. The news reporting made mention of how quickly the "legal" 4-shot pump shotgun had been able to be reloaded by the shooter during his crime. The fact that it was essentially a sporting firearm that was used to shoot the victims, and didn't involve the use of an "assault weapon" or high capacity magazines, probably didn't assuage public concerns.


  • The rhetoric is going to escalate, and has excited as the Pro2A group is, the Anti 2A are just as motivated, and they have a horrible event to exploit.
Polarization of opinions and editorializing is unsurprising.

Even though it may be true, the video game/hollywood argument is not resonating with folks. It is coming across as a diversionary tactic.
This subject has been studied for a while, and while even experts are not always in agreement, there's been enough studies and learned opinions to warrant further research. It's probably not prudent to consider it just a diversionary tactic. I'd expect more emphasis on this aspect of a possible "solution", in the greater scope of dealing with violence as a society, as time passes.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...DtAThKC-yyqRlxUe3Ry1Q&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE

http://www.killology.com/book_stop_summary.htm

What other talking points do you think would help the NRA? I think they need our help now more than ever.
It's probably time to stop skirting the subject of unauthorized persons (especially those with mental health issues) being able to gain access to firearms within their own home, or that of a relative or friend.

Perhaps something similar to California's safe storage law (Based upon the Children's Firearm Accident Prevention Act of 1991) holding the firearm owner responsible if a child gains access to a firearm and then commits a crime (including shooting themselves). It's not hard to see this sort of law someday being revised to perhaps include someone suffering a mental health issue gaining unauthorized access to unsecured firearms.

The state's synopsis of the safe storage law in lay person language can be found in their California Firearms Laws Summary Booklet, on the state AG website (page 48). http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
i say we concede nothing.......if they want it, i say we make them take if from us kicking and screaming.

where the hell did this defeatist attitude come from all of a sudden?
Click to expand...

IDK, but I also see a lot of 2A "supporters" that must use a different definition of what it means to support the 2A to you and I. It disgusts me to see all of the "I'm a 2A supporter, but I think we should ban mags/need licensing from the state to buy/references to buy/need to lock up our guns in our house/outlaw private sales" type stuff.
 
It is disturbing how readily limp wrist-ed you people are becoming. Really we should concede something? How much did our for fathers who fought for the freedom we enjoy now concede? they gave up nothing, they fought for their rights and took them. All you whiners should just role over belly up and let them have your guns, you don't deserve them.


There is nothing in the constitution about what some one might think is reasonable. The whole idea of reasonable and sporting is just some justification thought up by the socialist thinking leftists in this country that are hell bent on turning us into some form of a carbon copy of Europe.

So pull your heads out and stand up for what is rightfully ours and quit being a bunch of wieners.

These vary politicians are the reason the 2nd amendment was put in the constitution.
 
They need to concede closing the gun show loophole, but still keep private party sales.

That does not make sense. There is no gunshow loophole. Either we have private party sales or we don't.
Click to expand...

I agree that we gun owners and citizens should NOT give up any of our rights.

I heard a Fox News guest state that 40% of all gun transactions occur without the back ground check being done. Where that factoid came from I don't know.

I think the NRA needs to be the NRA and stick to "its guns" so to speak. The NRA is more than just a political lobbying organization.

Schumer has said that "we" need to meet the NRA half way prior to the Meet the Press interview. Well.... I dissagree.

Laws are not going to change anything other than restrict honest citizens from gun owership and enjoying their sport.
 
David Gregory came off as a rude, whiny weasel and looked very unprofessional. The kind of people the left loves. I love it when he bragged he is one of the knowledgeable, and said this magazine holds 30 "bullets"....yeah I know.

Wayne looked like blow-back material. I know games and the media are not at all good for borderline personality types, but just leave it alone. It has nothing to do with the 2nd and law abiding gun ownership. I wish he had not started down the school protection stuff road, but it does have some good bits. We need younger sharper spokespeople. Quick on their feet. It's pretty obvious our country lacks real leadership, in many aspects.....

Just stick with NO CONCESSIONS. Period.

When clowns like David Gregory bring up private transactions or gun shows, just ask what it has to do with this case. 30 round magazines? VT. Etc..
 
You know what they always say, "Never let a good crisis go unused." It looks like a "perfect storm" of sorts has come about and is being used to undermine the Second Ammendment. I honeslty don't know what you can do to reason with people. They like to talk about "having an open mind" yet block out any argument you bring forth. No matter how much we point out that dissarming law abiding citizens won't lower crime rates, how a few armed people could have reduced or stopped this and other shootings, or the statistics that show how you are more likely to be killed via pool than a gun, nothing changes their mind.
 
Did David Gregory violate DC law by holding up a "high-capacity" magazine on his show?

Meet the Press is taped in Washington DC, where it is illegal to possess a high-capacity ammunition magazine.
 
Allowances or access to the NIC system or that state version could be granted to private citizens versus only FFL dealers for face to face transactions. It could be made into an app that is available to smart phone users. It does place more responsibility on the buyer and seller however. But it comes down to you can either do it or you can't in terms of private transactions.

The background check has been a common challenge by anti-gun supporters. It relates to the infamous "gun show loophole" which from a media perspective is in fact a loophole at gunshows where guns are bought and sold. Some states or cities already require that private firearm transactions be funneled thorugh a FFL dealer.

This and the 10-round magazine limit are the two most referenced items by gun control advocates. I think Lanza could have done just as much damage with 10-round magazines. You just carry more mags. No law is going to stop a determined killer.

The next item is probably the mental health issue and I think current law takes care of that. But the states need to be forthcoming in providing the correct information to the ATF. But taking it any further than current law allows would be an infringement.

Again I say, No Concessions. Support the National Rifle Association both through their ILA and the regular core NRA programs.
 
How about this:

Mandated reciprocity on all carry permits, and zero gun-free zones which do not provide their own LEO and/or military armed security, and which are only accessable by xray/metal detectors.

In exchange for not having private sales at a 'gun show'.

You can however, have a meet and greet, and do your business outside the 'gun show.
 
Re: Closing the "gun show loophole"

There is no gun show loophole, and we can't concede something that doesn't exist. Period.

Further, as far the "private party loophole," well, that's just dumb. Who here thinks the bad guys are going to run background checks on each other when selling and buying guns with other bad guys? Anyone? Forcing private sales to require background checks only serves to make private sales more expensive and more onerous, and to make criminals out of more people who aren't doing anything wrong. Private individuals have -- and should have -- the complete right to sell their personal legally owned items to other private individuals.
 
k_dawg said:
How about this:

Mandated reciprocity on all carry permits, and zero gun-free zones which do not provide their own LEO and/or military armed security, and which are only accessable by xray/metal detectors.

In exchange for not having private sales at a 'gun show'.
Click to expand...

How about this:

Mandated reciprocity on all carry permits, and zero gun-free zones

In exchange for their continued 1st Amendment right to blather on endlessly while spewing willful lies.
 
I'm completely unimpressed with the NRA period. I'm a member, and the media had an absolute field day with Wayne's suggestion of armed-guards in all the schools...although this would be more effective than banning flash hiders and pistol grips on rifles, it's a PR disaster, and entirely impractical.

The NRA had it right when they simple **** and waited. If they wanted to make a statement they should have said something to the effect of treating mental illness in this country and shouldn't have mentioned guns at all. They can deal with possible "gun bans" when and if they come up, but now really isn't the time to blunder.
 
My suggestions--
NRA needs to push harder for back ground checks, and arrests of persons who are trying to obtain guns illegally.
Click to expand...

Ok, but are you saying that a background check didn't stop Lanza and that it would have stopped him from getting his mother's guns?

They need to concede closing the gun show loophole, but still keep private party sales
Click to expand...
"The Gunshow Loophole" is Anti talk for private party sales. Also, Lanza didn't go to a gunshow or a private party and purchase a firearm, he shot his mother in the face 5 times and stole her guns and car.

They need to promote the sporting aspects (3 gun, marksmanship, etc).
Click to expand...
Nancy Lanza took her son to the range shooting to bond and teach responsibility. That's didn't help stop him from shooting her in the face 5 times, stealing her guns and car and ...

The capacity of mags is tougher. People who know guns will say that we can change a mag really quick...which if we are not careful could back fire in two ways. First, if it doesn't matter, then why are we so worried about it, and two, the left may say then magazines should be gone altogether.
Click to expand...
Cho used 10 round magazines to kill scores of adults. In OR and CO those high capacity magazines jammed and the shooters had to discontinue using the AR

The rhetoric is going to escalate, and has excited as the Pro2A group is, the Anti 2A are just as motivated, and they have a horrible event to exploit.
 
I have a problem with Mr. LaPierre that I have communicated to the NRA.
In a press conference or talk show format, he lets the opposition INTERRUPT him. He needs to learn that he must DEMAND the time to offer his full reply to a question before being torpedoed (interrupted) with another! He must insist that the practice of interruption is not fair or consistant with the truth. He must be given the time to respond or refuse to go on with the interview.
The anti's just won't let the answer be known because they deny us the TIME to reply.
The shortening of Mr. Lapierre's lenghty oration concerning what is wrong with this country was shortened to about 10 seconds with what the media wanted the public to hear.
Heads up again NRA.
ps- I am the NRA too.
 
Last edited:
I wish they would look at the specifics of the last few incidents and find common problems. Then propose solutions to those problems.

None of the people in the last few shootings were prohibited persons, so a back ground check (gun show loophole) would do nothing. But getting those with mental issues into the check system would be a start. I'm not sure how to handle those with mental issues -- perhaps have a longer list of requirements, such as personal references from people before they can buy (like CWP rules in the states that don't have shall issue).

A common item in 2 recent shootings was obtaining weapons of others. So safe storage would be someplace to begin. The gun grabbers here tried to go a bit too far with a safe storage bill here in WA a few years back and it failed. It is difficult to balance everyone's situation -- those who need fast response to a home invasion -vs- those who just want to store/collect things. Personally, all my guns are in 2 safes. I don't feel the need for instant access. But I acknowledge that some people will want that. Best way for instant access is to wear it and not leave it laying around.

I don't see a way to deal with magazine capacity. Just about any repeating firearm can be reloaded quickly enough to cause a lot of mayhem. Tube fed can be topped off. Magazines can be quick changed or fed/topped with stripper clips. We'd have to give up all repeating firearms, and I'm not willing to do that. Even then, a single shot shotgun can take out multiple people with one shot (#4 buck with a spreader load)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

hps1
  • Locked
Alert! NRA Annual Meeting Cancelled
Replies
0
Views
228
hps1
hps1
D
  • Locked
My Letter to Wayne LaPierre on the AWB sunset
Replies
3
Views
562
Monkeyleg
M
M
  • Locked
Nra On The Ground In Louisiana
Replies
0
Views
332
MudPuppy
M
S
  • Locked
Anyone going to TSRA Meeting this weekend?
Replies
3
Views
494
Drizzt
D
L
  • Locked
Why so many anti-NRA?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
150
Views
6K
Sam1911
S
Back
Top