world

NRA chief: We will never surrender our guns

73 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

73 Comments
Login to comment

Both sides are moving towards more extremism. It's become the right to own guns versus the belief that no civilians should be allowed to own guns. Public safety is taking a back seat. And it probably won't have any effect on stopping outrageous multiple shooting tragedies.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

“(You) here in this room are the fighters for freedom. We are the protectors,” Porter said.

To fight tyranny, or civil unrest after pole shifts, or EMPs, or the New Madrid Fault, or asteroid impacts, you really need at least drones. Guns just won't do the job anymore. The government would just bomb your well-protected fortress, destroying your guns and everything else. You should be fearful.... very fearful. Never mind that the only gun bills out there are ineffective ones meant to keep guns from out of the hands of crazies.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

It's become the right to own guns versus the belief that no civilians should be allowed to own guns.

Well, to be honest, I think that the number of people in the US who believe that no civilians should be allowed to own guns is small.

I would frame the opposition right now as "people who believe that no civilans need assault weapons." Some people include Glock pistols and similar weapons under that category, and others don't.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Here are the quates said by other people that tells you guns and bullets are just stupid...

"Guns are evil! And very little good comes from the availability of a bullet designed to kill human beings!" - Mackenzie Astin I agree with this, nothing good comes from a bullet made to kill people.

"Gun control? We need bullet control! I think every bullet should cost 5,000 dollars. Because if a bullet cost five thousand dollar, we wouldn't have any innocent bystanders." - Chris Rock This one solves everything... American people want to have guns ok have your guns but if you want bullets pay 5k$ per bullet than you will think twice before shooting....

And there is one thats my favorite quote i dont remember it exactly but it goes something like " A fool invented a gun an even bigger fool split the atom" We do not need weapons at all. Tell me if literaly every single country lost their guns what would happen? Nothing there would be no way to mass kill people want to argue with naother country argue with diplomacy -.-

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Just as I had predicted yesterday this clown would say to the tinfoil hat crowd - but then, it was all too easy of a prediction. Pathetic.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

65% of all American households don't own a firearm and the number has been increasing year on year. The gun hawks are a minority.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

zichiMay. 05, 2013 - 08:24AM JST 65% of all American households don't own a firearm and the number has been increasing year on year. The gun >hawks are a minority.

Did you count all the illegal guns too?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

The NRA and the gun hawks will blame everyone else, and everything else for the problems created by guns.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

Here's what James Porter had to say last year:

I get so sick and tired of all these people with this fake president that we got who wants to say, ‘Well, you know he hadn’t done anything bad for gun owners. I say, let me tell you something bad that he’s done. His entire administration is anti-gun, anti-freedom, anti-Second Amendment.

Many of these so-called "freedom-loving patriots" are anti-American closet racists.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

OssanAmerica, No I didn't because that figure would be unknown. Only 35% of all American household legally own one or more firearms.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

The NRA chief also refers to the Civil War as the War of Northern Agression," which paints a picture of the guy's mindset. He's going to be on the watch for the Northerners next time.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

OssanAmerica, No I didn't because that figure would be unknown. Only 35% of all American household legally own one or more firearms.

I think you're missing his point. The real number of "guns within households" is in all likelihood far, far greater than 35%.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I would frame the opposition right now as "people who believe that no civilans need assault weapons." Some people include Glock pistols and similar weapons under that category, and others don't.

Agreed. And I'm yet to hear a legitimate reason behind ownership for these types of weapons.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

recent gun control efforts in Congress that he said will “destroy us and every ounce of our freedom.”

Yep, them Australians and Europeans got not one ounce of freedom. Them there live under socialist fascist tyranny, just like our un-American president wants us to.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Calling the Civil War "the war of Northern aggression" makes him an ipso facto traitor.

The NRA is the biggest right-wing front group in the US. It is the enemy within.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Here's another good example of how the NRA is working to relieve the overpopulation problem: A study of 30,000 child deaths involving accidental shootings by the Center for Disease Control showed children between the ages of 5 and 14 years of age were 13 times more likely to be killed in the four U.S. states with the highest gun ownership numbers than the four with the lowest totals.

www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/guns.htm

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Mackenzie Astin I agree with this, nothing good comes from a bullet made to kill people.

I think quite a few law enforcement would disagree that nothing good ever comes from a bullet made to kill people.

Agreed. And I'm yet to hear a legitimate reason behind ownership for these types of weapons.

Target shooting, self defense, hunting, to form a militia......

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

“We will never surrender our guns, never,”

Sorry, which piece of legislation was calling for people to surrender their guns? I suppose you can't whip up that paranoia by saying, "We will never agree to universal background checks on guns."

“The bill wouldn’t have prevented Newtown or Aurora,”

Translation: We've successfully put so many guns on the streets that any kind of enforcement is impossible, and we want more of the same.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

OssanAmerica: Did you count all the illegal guns too?

Don't all illegal guns start out as legal guns? What happened?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

If bullets were to be highly taxed, gun owners would start making their own. Kind of like rolling your own smokes.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Porter has called President Barack Obama a “fake president,” Attorney General Eric Holder “rabidly un-American” and the U.S. Civil War the “War of Northern Aggression.” On Friday, he repeated his call for training every U.S. citizen in the use of standard military firearms, to allow them to defend themselves against tyranny.

Our so called 'un-biased' Media might as well just call him a Klan Member and a Nazi and be done with it.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Here is another thing (from Rolling Stone): "A May 2012 poll conducted by Republican pollster Frank Luntz revealed surprising moderation on behalf of NRA members: Three out of four believed that background checks should be completed before every gun purchase. Nearly two-thirds supported a requirement that gun owners alert police when their firearms are lost or stolen."

<http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-nra-vs-america-20130131#ixzz2SNYvVaWl >

In short, 3/4 of the NRA membership are more rational and more liberal than the arms industry puppets running the NRA.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

sailwind: Our so called 'un-biased' Media might as well just call [LaPierre] a Klan Member and a Nazi and be done with it.

From George HW Bush's resignation letter as a lifetime member of the NRA:

"I was outraged when, even in the wake of the Oklahoma City tragedy, Mr. Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of N.R.A., defended his attack on federal agents as “jack-booted thugs.” To attack Secret Service agents or A.T.F. people or any government law enforcement people as “wearing Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms” wanting to “attack law abiding citizens” is a vicious slander on good people. Al Whicher, who served on my [ United States Secret Service ] detail when I was Vice President and President, was killed in Oklahoma City. He was no Nazi. He was a kind man, a loving parent, a man dedicated to serving his country — and serve it well he did."

LaPierre doesn't seem to mind throwing out the Nazi word. Clearly unstable.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

LaPierre is an idiot, and he's proven it time and again with his words, and had to apologize publicly.

Violent Latino Gangs Are Out To Get You: “Latin American drug gangs have invaded every city of significant size in the United States. Phoenix is already one of the kidnapping capitals of the world, and though the states on the U.S./Mexico border may be the first places in the nation to suffer from cartel violence, by no means are they the last.”

And They’re Streaming Over The Border: “The president flagrantly defies the 2006 federal law ordering the construction of a secure border fence along the entire Mexican border. So the border today remains porous not only to people seeking jobs in the U.S., but to criminals whose jobs are murder, rape, robbery and kidnapping.”

And So Is Al-Qaeda: “Ominously, the border also remains open to agents of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Numerous intelligence sources have confirmed that foreign terrorists have identified the southern U.S. border as their path of entry into the country.”

And Obama Will Use Them As An Excuse To Take Your Guns: “A heinous act of mass murder—either by terrorists or by some psychotic who should have been locked up long ago—will be the pretext to unleash a tsunami of gun control.”

If You Want Gun Safety, You Want Civilization To Collapse: “After Hurricane Sandy, we saw the hellish world that the gun prohibitionists see as their utopia. Looters ran wild in south Brooklyn. There was no food, water or electricity. And if you wanted to walk several miles to get supplies, you better get back before dark, or you might not get home at all.”

Thanks To Obama, There Will Soon Be No Cops: “Meanwhile, President Obama is leading this country to financial ruin, borrowing over a trillion dollars a year for phony “stimulus” spending and other payoffs for his political cronies. Nobody knows if or when the fiscal collapse will come, but if the country is broke, there likely won’t be enough money to pay for police protection. And the American people know it.”

But The NRA Is Totally Not Paranoid: “Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face—not just maybe. It’s not paranoia to buy a gun. It’s survival. It’s responsible behavior, and it’s time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that.”

It’s Just That The Collapse Of Civilization Is Right Around The Corner: “We, the American people, clearly see the daunting forces we will undoubtedly face: terrorists, crime, drug gangs, the possibility of Euro-style debt riots, civil unrest or natural disaster.”

And We Shall Overcome: “We [the NRA] are the largest civil rights organization in the world.”

These are but a few that show what kind of nut this man is, and yet he claims guns are necessary all the same. Tsk tsk to any Americans who buy into it.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Super,

My excerpt is referring to Mr. Porter and not Mr. LaPierre.

James Porter, an Alabama attorney and first vice president of the NRA, assumes the presidency on Monday after the group’s national convention wraps up.

Wayne LaPierre is old news as far as the media efforts to continue to demonize him as Satan incarnate. This article has a new target it wants to set up as the next most horrid human being to walk the planet. He happens to fit the bill almost perfectly as he is white from "the south" and has said disparaging remarks about President Obama and religiously clings to his guns. Our biased media is going to have a field day with Mr. Porter. Of course anybody the NRA would have promoted to the presidency position was going to be vilified irregardless.

I also don't think I am going to insult anybodies intelligence by claiming that the media is ever going to engage in anything close to positive reporting on anything the NRA does and that includes their gun safety courses.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Our so called 'un-biased' Media might as well just call him a Klan Member and a Nazi and be done with it.

Well, certainly he does get a lot of negative press, but not every Alabama lawyer is a Klan member, or a Nazi, and I haven't seen those accusations in any news articles, even the known sensationalist ones. Still, he does provide a lot of memorable quotes:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nutty-new-nra-president-jim-porter-war-guns-article-1.1333864

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wikipedia had stats from 2007 saying, statistically, 88 out of 100 American residents have guns. #1. Nobody else has this. Yet other countries are safer. So it's not the guns, it's the culture. The American culture is stressed on survivial and broken by this distortion on guns. Australia at 15 per 100 residents would be a good example of sudden change, and the sky didn't fall. Th eGuberment didn't come for them. They went through the same rhetoric, and it never happened. Fear changed to success and Australia hawks have become doves. It's a wonderful lesson in change.

If America were willing to consider change it would be okay. For now, sadly, America is not. It's really sad to see a country so utterly controlled by a media and an gun industry

More guns, no metric system, no free healthcare, no low cost education.

How long can America last? No wonder their competitors are winning

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Man, what a silly statement. If gun control tightens and some of those guns need to be taken away...saying "you'll never surrender them" is just stupid. Fine them, arrest them, take their guns and then see how they feel. If they shoot the police trying to take their guns, shoot back. Breaking the law is breaking the law. NOW is the time for debate, not after the fact.

Also, I can't believe they think tighter gun control laws won't prevent mass shootings. Tighten security, make it impossible for obsessive gun collectors to collect armories worth of weapons (defense, yeah right), and make the gun industry a sustainable responsible one!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

sailwind: "I also don't think I am going to insult anybodies intelligence by claiming that the media is ever going to engage in anything close to positive reporting on anything the NRA does and that includes their gun safety courses."

There is nothing positive to report about the NRA, so why would anyone do so? 'gun safety' is an oxymoron.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The only extremism is the government. Their propaganda machine is trying to make them look so good with good intentions but if they were so concerned then they would WANT teachers to be armed to stop any madman. Too many of these mass shootings happen with someone on govenment pay and psychotropic drugs and experiementation.

It is NOT extreme to keep your protection . It is STALIN, HITLER, and other control freaks that demanded confiscation of guns... and then killed and oppressed. The only limit to wanna be dick tators is an armed public... otherwise only criminals , mafia, and authoritarians in gov will have them, and the people .. sheep to be slaughtered

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

We don't need guns. It's that simple. We have police, the county cops, the state cops. Lets see, if I want to protect my family what am I going to do? Leave the safety of my family to some dude who may have paid $140.00 for a gun course, or a professional law man. Gosh, I really have to think about that. In our city, our Newspaper read a months long article about folks who had actually used a gun to protect themselves. They all killed the intruder. Only one out of the 12 or so people, said they would have done it again. Killling another person is not what we should be about. Learning martial arts is a much better investment. You get exercise, peace of mind and you do know how to protect yourself. But this is my opinion.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Leave the safety of my family to some dude who may have paid $140.00 for a gun course, or a professional law man.

Huh? Are you talking about when in public or when someone is breaking into your house? What is the scenario?

There is nothing positive to report about the NRA, so why would anyone do so? 'gun safety' is an oxymoron.

Not true, NRA is actually very big on Gun safety training as well as giving teenagers scholarships to go to colleges. They also train an enormous amount of law enforcement in the US.

Look Smith I'm not a fan of the NRA but to say there isn't one good thing to report about the NRA is just simply not true.

Gun safety being an oxymoron well that is just your personal belief, would you honestly say teaching sport shooters gun safety is an oxymoron?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

as giving teenagers scholarships to go to colleges

That should be: college instead of colleges.

This comment system really needs an edit button.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

many thanks for the comments- very "extreme" in nature, say what you may but you would need to live in the United States and not just in a large city like new york.

you would also need to understand the constitution and bill of rights as well as how laws are created in this land

if the people (including our lawmakers) wished it- they could amend the bill of rights and remove the amendment- then easily add any law they wish.

then again - if the lawyers and lawmakers wished it- they would apply the laws in place and a lot of people would be in jail for breaking current gun laws. However current gun laws are federal - and usually plea bargained away by state and local prosecutors ( check it out it is true)

and the nra is not made of extremists and crazies - just like the republican party is not either- but when there is a wish for politics- everything is slanted a bit to show only the individual with extreme ideas or to take a single Quote from someones 45 minute speech

such a shame

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

sailwind: Wayne LaPierre is old news as far as the media efforts to continue to demonize him as Satan incarnate.

You said the media will probably call Porter a Nazi, not doubt choosing one of the most insulting things you could think of. I pointed out when LaPierre actually called someone a Nazi. But it doesn't seem to register on your radar. As for old news, people could say the same about Perry, Palin, Santorum, etc., but they don't mind dragging them up on stage for the catchphrases. LaPierre probably isn't going anywhere.

Our biased media is going to have a field day with Mr. Porter. Of course anybody the NRA would have promoted to the presidency position was going to be vilified irregardless.

From the article: "Porter has called President Barack Obama a “fake president,” Attorney General Eric Holder “rabidly un-American” and the U.S. Civil War the “War of Northern Aggression.” On Friday, he repeated his call for training every U.S. citizen in the use of standard military firearms, to allow them to defend themselves against tyranny."

Yeah, the media will have to really work overtime to invent ways to demonize this guy.

anything the NRA does and that includes their gun safety courses.

Let me paste this again: "On Friday, [Porter] repeated his call for training every U.S. citizen in the use of standard military firearms". I'm guessing that you personally have a hard time supporting a lot of what comes out of these people's mouths, but instead you want to talk about safety classes.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

praak: if the people (including our lawmakers) wished it- they could amend the bill of rights and remove the amendment

I just imagined a time when the Constitution could be amended, but for some strange reason what follows isn't compliance from some gun owners. I'm guessing that those who stand behind the Constitution would shoot through it in a second if there is a chance they will lose their guns.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

And people wonder why I choose to raise my family in Japan?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I pointed out when LaPierre actually called someone a Nazi. But it doesn't seem to register on your radar.

Because you didn't point out that he also latter formally apologized for the remarks and you also did not point out any context for why it was said in the first place. The remarks were made over twenty years ago after the Branch Dravidian compound raid by the ATF in Waco. Taking politics completely out of this the ATF raid was a complete disaster and afterwards emotions ran high all over the political spectrum from both right and left. There were plenty of remarks that were said afterwards and regretted later all across the political spectrum. LaPierre's remarks was for the way the ATF had conducted the raid and the tactics they used. The government botched the raid with dead ATF agents and subsequently another 76 other people dead including small children before the siege was finally ended in a grotesque version of Armageddon on earth by their cult leader David Koresh.

Excerpt:

The National Rifle Association has apologized for a recent fund-raising letter that described some federal agents as "jack-booted thugs."

"I really feel bad about the fact that the words in that letter have been interpreted to apply to all federal law-enforcement officers," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said in a telephone interview from Phoenix.

"If anyone thought the intention was to paint all federal law-enforcement officials with the same broad brush, I'm sorry, and I apologize," LaPierre said yesterday.

The apology drew cautious approval from Attorney General Janet Reno today.

"I trust that the level of communication now will go forward in a thoughtful and respectful way," she said. But later she said, "They like to call names rather than to pursue matters in a thoughtful and constructive way.

LaPierre insisted that the fund-raising letter was intended to criticize only isolated actions, primarily involving the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19950518&slug=2121718

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

and the nra is not made of extremists and crazies

Praak,

You have to admit, the old president was at least near the fringe, and the new one would have to be labelled extreme.

Whether or not this represents the average NRA member, and I would tend to think it doesn't, it does seem to show a direction in which things might go.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

NoLiving: "Not true, NRA is actually very big on Gun safety training as well as giving teenagers scholarships to go to colleges. "

No disrespect, but it does not change the fact that it's an oxymoron. Think about it: 'gun' and 'safety'. In a society that sees more death by guns than any other nations not at war you cannot ignore the fact that guns do not promote safety but create danger. Hence, the oxymoron.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Sail, seriously, give it up. LaPierre is a man who has said quite a few things that could be considered evidence of psychosis. And I think it's fair to say you've gone to the "biased media" well one too many times. There are websites that list some of his crazier quotes for all to see, no doubt "out of context." Ahmadinejad supporters say the same thing.

Maybe you're able to write off (a couple of dozen) emotional outbursts, but I expect a little more from a person in power. The story was famous because George HW Bush resigned from the NRA because of LaPierre's Nazi comments. I suppose he just didn't get it, either.

You've gotten to the point where you're per-criticizing the media for what you imagine they will do to Porter. I guess it's good to plant the seed early so you can harvest that later on.

I'm guessing that I know you better than most people on here, and I think you don't support some of the crap that comes out the NRA's mouth. You might support gun ownership, but you don't support everything they say.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I'm guessing that I know you better than most people on here, and I think you don't support some of the crap that comes out the NRA's mouth.

The NRA is a one trick pony organization dedicated only to gun owners and to the second amendment legal protections provided to them. It is also an organization that has and will never get anything close to a fair hearing in the main stream media.This is where media bias fails everyone no matter what political side you reside on. A media with a reputation of leveling the playing field in reporting effectively puts the people and organizations being reported on their best behavior and acts as a brake on their worst impulses. It moderates their behavior. The press can and does play a huge role in allowing compromise to actually happen when they do their job the way they are suppose to. A media that will not do this and can be counted on to not level the playing field and in fact try to poison it to slant it to their preferred position has exactly the opposite effect. The NRA knows it will never get good press. It knows it will be vilified no matter what and has ceased even trying to moderate its public statements. The NRA could care less about the press and the media and what it reports anymore. It can't win anything there in promoting their positions. The "crap" coming out of the NRA's mouth is nothing more than the result of a media that craves it to no end gives it free oxygen to survive for days on end and then actually looks foolish at the end the day for reporting the more outrageous nonsense the NRA put out there and acting as there defacto mouthpiece.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

So, here we have the media spin doctors working up both sides just to keep the issue alive even though the Left-controlled Senate killed the bill due to lack of support. There's a better chance of getting Shiites and Sunnis to see eye-to-eye than of getting anti-gunrights tinfoil hatters to agree with pro-2nd-amendment supporters on anything.

" Only 35% of all American household legally own one or more firearms."

That statistic is ridiculously low, unless only urbanites are polled. Thosr urbanites who do have guns don't report owning one.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The press can and does play a huge role in allowing compromise to actually happen when they do their job the way they are suppose to. A media that will not do this and can be counted on to not level the playing field and in fact try to poison it to slant it to their preferred position has exactly the opposite effect. The NRA knows it will never get good press. It knows it will be vilified no matter what and has ceased even trying to moderate its public statements.

Sail, I hope you see the gigantic flaw in your logic here: That, when the NRA "moderate(s) its public statements," it only does so in the name of public relations - that, fundamentally, the NRA is a radical organization that is opposed to even a smidgen of compromise on any front.

The NRA is on record with its radical opposition to positions the vast majority of Americans support; particular NRA individuals are on record with statements that would be sufficient to put many on the Homeland Security terror list. How, pray, should the "mainstream media" portray this, Sail?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Both sides should look at this. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Corrected.

How Many People Have Been Killed by Guns Since Newtown? http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death _tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

You have to like it together to get to the site.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The 4th photo at the bottom is the perfect illustration. The guy on the right, with the pink t-shirt, he is holding his junk for fear that it would be confiscated together with its rifles...

“fake president,”

That's better than compliments when insults come from so low...

The NRA is a one trick pony organization dedicated only to gun owners and to the second amendment

No, I think they are dedicated to gun industry, makers and sellers, and also to the sort of political influence they can have. You can read the speeches. They are too shallow to even try to think about what the Constitution means, and they couldn't care less about the safety and well-being of gun owners... as long as they keep buying the toys. The solution is probably to attack them at the root. Let the law about ownership as it is, just recycle the good old "war against terrorism" to make a law restricting the gun industry (with quotas of productions, imports bans, and huge taxes to make the guns become 5 times more expensive and real ammunitions 20 times, and all that available on order after a long wait). And "enforce the laws" as the NRA asks : investigate every time they go bribing some politicians and finance their campaigns, and sue them. If that was done. I wouldn't give 5 years of life to the NRA as their sponsors would disappear.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I'm just happy to be Australian. Can we buy guns? Yes. Do most buy guns? No. I think that's a better way to be.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

People, why can't a gun owner use his/her guns in a responsible way. The mass murders are a difficult issue the tend to be young Caucasian guys with mental issues. The illegal guns on the street injure and kill scores more, the tend to also be young boys/men perpetrators. Do you think they will go away?

Evil exists, always did and always will.

Irresponsibility, we all display various degrees of that. Cars kill more than guns!

Shooting sports are in both the Summer and Winter Olympics. Those guns don't kill.

.....and the debate continues!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

How many of those gun deaths include justified shootings?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

We will never surrender our guns.

Is that how pathetic the gun nuts have become? Pimping out Palin like that shows Only in America.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I love the NRA. People complain all the time about corporate lobbyists, but here's an organization that lobbies on behalf of ordinary citizens. I guess gun grabbers don't really support democracy though.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Only 35% of all American household legally own one or more firearms.

That number fluctuates constantly and, from year to year. According to the Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, "In 2010, 39% of respondents answered "yes." The figure has been fluctuating between 38% and 42% in polls taken since 2000, and has ranged between 36% and 51% since polling began in 1959."

The Sourcebook also recognizes the fact that up to a quarter of the guns in the US go unreported so the actual number could be anywhere from 45-55%.

I would frame the opposition right now as "people who believe that no civilans need assault weapons." Some people include Glock pistols and similar weapons under that category, and others don't.

Agreed. And I'm yet to hear a legitimate reason behind ownership for these types of weapons.

I've said this a lot in these threads but here we go again. Assault weapon is a designation that deals almost exclusivity with aesthetics and weapon mounted attachments. If I own a semi-automatic rifle that fires 30-06 ammo it is considered a long arm rifle and is totally legal and is not an assault weapon, but if I take that same weapon and add a rail system for sights, add a recoil suppressor, bayonet lugs, or a compound stock it becomes an assault weapon. No difference in lethal or even functionality. I use attachments to reduce recoil because I have arthritis and they make the weapon easier to handle for me. The other popular attachments are laser sights which are used primarily on home defense weapons to cut down on reaction time in the event of a burglary or home invasion.

So there's a couple legitimate uses for 'assault' style weapons.

As for semi-automatic pistols. They are used primarily for personal defense either in the home or for concealed carry. I have a one such firearm for myself that is kept discreetly out of sight unless I require it. The other option would be having people carry around long arm rifles and shotguns and I can assure you that such a practice would not be beneficial to any parties involved. Long arm safety's can be notoriously unreliable. Also, nobody bats an eyelash when I go to the mall to pick up new shoes with my concealed carry, but if I were to carry a rifle with less ammunition that is less powerful than my handgun people would be stumbling over each other for the exits.

How many of those gun deaths include justified shootings?

The better question would be whether it includes suicides and accidents which, after reading the PDF source document, it likely does. Also worth pointing out, the way the US collects data on deaths is a little skewed.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

For the NRA and the gun hawks, problems with guns are created by others, and never them.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

SuperLibMay. 05, 2013 - 10:20AM JST OssanAmerica: Did you count all the illegal guns too? Don't all illegal guns start out as legal guns? What happened?

No they don't. Legal or illegal guns refers to ownership, if their possession and ownership is not in violation of Federal or applicable State Laws, and/or if they are registered, documented. or licensed (pemitted) ib accordance with those laws.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

No disrespect, but it does not change the fact that it's an oxymoron. Think about it: 'gun' and 'safety'. In a society that sees more death by guns than any other nations not at war you cannot ignore the fact that guns do not promote safety but create danger. Hence, the oxymoron.

No disrespect Smith but that doesn't mean it is an oxymoron. That would be like saying civil war is an oxymoron when in fact it is not.

Gun safety is about promoting the safe use of a firearm, those words together are not mutually exclusive. I get that it is a genuine opinion of yours but it is technically not an oxymoron.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

An oxymoron is a paradox that is true. Oxymoron does not mean contradiction.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind: It is also an organization that has and will never get anything close to a fair hearing in the main stream media.This is where media bias fails everyone no matter what political side you reside on.

This is just a distraction. I've read dozens of quotes from LaPierre and I'm able to make up my own mind about him, thanks.

In the meantime, I get your point. The problem isn't what LaPierre says, it's what the media says he says.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

We will never surrender our guns

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me who is taking the guns.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

OssanAmerica: if their possession and ownership is not in violation of Federal or applicable State Laws, and/or if they are registered, documented. or licensed (pemitted) ib accordance with those laws.

Question here.....how did so many illegal guns get into the wrong hands?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Super Lib, example of "who is taking our guns": Look up Hurricane Katrina and Guns. There is a video that shows the reality of a lawful gun owner being taken down by an imported law enforcement person. This happened in New Orleans but the shoulder patch is California Highway Patrol. Subsequent litigation revealed that Mayor Nagin's people had dumped over 2000 privately owned firearms into a damp storage unit. The immediate result was to deprive a couple thousand people of their means of defense during a period of limited police response. More recently, Gov. Cuomo of New York and Jerry Brown of California have announced intention to seize firearms, as reported in the media.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Gun nuts won't budge and anti gun nuts won' budge. Gun nuts are not a real problem. Vast majority law abiding. Anti gun nuts perceive guns as evil. Their a tool used in other ways than to kill. Why not debate abortion? A bigger problem than most of us would like to know about.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Both sides are moving towards more extremism. It's become the right to own guns versus the belief that no civilians should be allowed to own guns. Public safety is taking a back seat. And it probably won't have any effect on stopping outrageous multiple shooting tragedies.

Banning guns outright isn't extremism... it's the right thing to do. America isn't the Wild West any more.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thunderbird2May. 06, 2013 - 06:14AM JST Banning guns outright isn't extremism... it's the right thing to do. America isn't the Wild West any more.

A perfect example of extremism.

SuperLibMay. 06, 2013 - 12:49AM JST "OssanAmerica: if their possession and ownership is not in violation of Federal or applicable State Laws, and/or if they are registered, documented. or licensed (pemitted) ib accordance with those laws. Question here.....how did so many illegal guns get into the wrong hands?

Criminals. But God forbid the NRA ever says anything that might be true.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

MarkG: Gun nuts won't budge and anti gun nuts won' budge. Gun nuts are not a real problem. Vast majority law abiding. Anti gun nuts perceive guns as evil. Their a tool used in other ways than to kill. Why not debate abortion? A bigger problem than most of us would like to know about.

There are a significant number of people on both sides who support some common sense legislation in an effort to reduce gun violence. And that's what the NRA blocked in the most recent vote.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Banning guns outright isn't extremism... it's the right thing to do. America isn't the Wild West any more.

You have never been to the wild west like Wyoming or Montana have you?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

In the meantime, I get your point. The problem isn't what LaPierre says, it's what the media says he says.

It's how the media spins what he says and none of it is ever positive or even neutral . You can't find one example of the media ever putting the NRA in any sort of favorable light or impression it will not be done ever. The media really is nothing but anti-gun advocacy that is just masquerading as journalism, such is the sorry state of the what once was an honorable profession anymore.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So do you agree with some of LaPierre's crazier comments? I could post some if you want and we can go quote by quote. No media, just us.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So do you agree with some of LaPierre's crazier comments? I could post some if you want and we can go quote by quote. No media, just us.

Not sure if it would accomplish much just for the fact that he is just a 1 issue advocate first and foremost. 1 issue advocates pretty much say outlandish things just by the very nature of the job that they do to get press coverage. NRA could care less if its negative press anymore as they've ceded that ground already. Not avoiding the offer but I think another famous quote would be more applicable here with regards to the NRA before going further with it:

"There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary"

Also I just want to point something out that I truly wish someone in a position of national importance would finally grow a pair and point out in the national debate on gun control. If we wish to get spree killers down to about as rare as we are ever going to get in a free society the focus needs to get off gun control by expanded background checks and more on a system that would also include some sort of a character voucher check to go along with it.

Heck, if it were up to me I'd quit with the demonization, stereotyping and shut up the media with their B.S talking points and instead make the NRA step up as a real part of the solution. I would put the NRA in a position as the lead and make them the prime stakeholder in a private citizen / Government partnership effort to improve background and character checks prior to purchasing a firearm. They'll come up with something that would work a heck lot better than what is already dying out there as law proposals if leadership in Washington really wanted to do something that had a real chance of passing and doing right for the American people.... instead of just divisive politics all being done just to try to squeeze enough votes to win an election for either an R or a D in a congressional district in the 2014 mid-terms.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

sailwind:

get spree killers down to about as rare as we are ever going to get in a free society

Are you implying that a high rate of gun deaths is a price worth paying in order to keep America from turning into the Democratic People's Republic of Australia?

make the NRA step up as a real part of the solution

If guns aren't part of the problem (as the NRA insists), they're not part of the solution either. The NRA has shown that it is not serious about having any discussion on the issue.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Are you implying that a high rate of gun deaths is a price worth paying in order to keep America from turning into the Democratic People's Republic of Australia?

I'm implying that the Media has done such an effective job in distorting reality and has a gun control advocating agenda that:

A new Pew Research Center survey (March 14-17) found that 56% of Americans believe the number of crimes involving a gun is higher than it was 20 years ago; only 12% say it is lower and 26% say it stayed the same.

When actual reality is:

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

The power that the Media can wield over the public in shaping opinion is pretty frightening.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Farmboy has a point, these NRA nutcases, calling the US Civil War, "the war of NORTHERN aggression" sure does give us a look into the backwards, stone age mindset these hillbillies still have. Let me guess, hey we need guns to protect ourselves from BLACKS, etc...the same folk who forced Black Africans into SLAVERY to work on the plantations etc..in the deep, deep SOUTH?? Kind of like the joke about the Chicken vs. the Egg?? But in this case, these fools are so WARPED in their twisted ideas that they blame everybody but their own stupidity for the mess the USA is in at this very moment.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites