NRA Statement release

[JBrady555]

This is on the homepage of the NRA's website:

NRA NEWS RELEASE

12/18/2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 18, 2012

FOR MORE INFORMATION
NRA Public Affairs 703-267-3820


NRA STATEMENT

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters - and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown.

Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting.

The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

The NRA is planning to hold a major news conference in the Washington, DC area on Friday, December 21.

Details will be released to the media at the appropriate time.


Just thought I would post this if some of your are interested.

 

[jgh4445]

I'm certainly interested in seeing what the "meaningful contributions" are. I hope we aren't about to see any sort compromise on our stand against new bans etc..

 

[JBrady555]

I'm interested in hearing the content of this "Major" news conference.

 

[Phatty]

to help make sure this never happens again.

Ugh. So they are admitting that these types of mass shootings can be prevented.

Wish they would have read this blog post by Professor Eugene Volokh today:
http://www.volokh.com/2012/12/18/why-its-hard-to-prevent-mass-shootings/

 

[mgmorden]

My guess is the contributions will be about the only thing we as a group are willing to go along with: no new laws, merely more vigilant enforcement of existing ones.

 

[Phatty]

So, why didn't the NRA provide meaningful contributions following the Colorado theater shooting or any number of past mass shootings? Did the NRA believe that those shootings were perfectly acceptable so there was no reason to offer contributions to prevent them from ever happening again? Does the NRA not want to prevent theater mass shootings?

Seriously though, treating the most recent mass shooting differently than the others shows a defeatist attitude by the NRA. The gun grabbers are treating this as a "straw that broke the camel's back" moment; as an "enough is enough" moment; as a "this is just so tragic now that we have to finally do something" moment. And the NRA is buying right into that same viewpoint by admitting that now something does need to change.

 

[481]

Perhaps they'll put forth a statement in support of something like this:

http://blog.pennlive.com/high-school-life/2008/08/texas_school_district_allows_t.html

 

[mljdeckard]

I very much agree with post 5. I very mush disagree with post 6.

Feinstein, Emmanuel, et al are behaving like opportunistic GHOULS. I don't think there is anything at all wrong with the NRA waiting until the bodies are in the ground to say something. Just because you are the only one being civil at a given time doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do. This is an opportunity for the NRA to demonstrate that just because the opposition WANTS them to be rude and act desperate, it doesn't mean they HAVE to. It's a question of who is being manipulated by whom.

 

[Skribs]

Phatty, this is creating a bigger storm, I believe, because kids were the target. I think that's why we're getting into a bigger frenzy.

Personally, I think they're all just as heinous, and I always attribute the attack to the evil of the individual. But when kids are involved, it is considered more evil, and inspires greater emotion.

I'll have to watch their press conference. Luckily I'm taking the 21st off due to "potential apocalypse."

 

[Phatty]

But when kids are involved, it is considered more evil, and inspires greater emotion.

Precisely, but why does the NRA have to buy into that same thinking? Can't the NRA be the cool, level-headed person here that doesn't act on emotion?

 

[Skribs]

The NRA chose to step back for a few days and then respond. Because no response would show they've conceded.

If you're at war, and your enemy doubles up their numbers at one of the fronts, do you pretend like nothing has happened, or do you double up on that front to counter the increase in numbers? The NRA has to stay ahead of the issue. If they just press on like nothing happened, the gun control advocates would have the floor all to themselves.

 

[Phatty]

Just because you are the only one being civil at a given time doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do.

I don't believe there was anything wrong with the NRA's stance to stay quiet at first. But, once the gun grabbers turned this into the most politicized tragedy of all time with the biggest organized push for gun control that I've seen in my lifetime, the NRA could have made a statement in response. It's not like the NRA was looking to politicize the tragedy or get anything out of it. It would have simply been defending the very rights that it exists to protect at a moment in time when they were under attack.

 

[heavydluxe]

It's amazing to me that people are really up the NRA's butt re: their initial silence. Is it really so hard to see that, had they spoken out more immediately, NOTHING good would have come of it?

When emotions are ruling the day as they were following the shooting, all the NRA's well-reasoned, RTKBA commentary would've done is to draw more anger and highlight (as some politician would've said) "the unbelievable gall to choose military guns in untrained civilian hands over the lives of innocent children."

While I do wish they had made sympathy statement sooner, their decision not to react until at least some of the fervor has worn off is wise.

Let the storm blow by and the weeping diminish, then step into a calmer climate for discussion.

 

[leadaddict]

Can't the NRA be the cool, level-headed person here that doesn't act on emotion?

I don't see that they have acted on anything yet. Which is probably a good thing since anything they do could be taken as insensitive to the greiving families. There will a time to act and bring good ideas (elimate "feel good zones", etc..) to the table, but waiting for emotions to settle is a good thing. It seems like that IS what the NRA is doing.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Good luck to NRA.

Legal expert Eugene Volokh tried being the sheriff arguing for due process facing a mob with nooses, pitchforks and torches demanding the accused ("gun nuts" who own "assault weapons") for a lynching.

There's four or five threads over at Volokh Conspiracy on this. One with 800+ comments.