Guess what? Wayne LaPierre made his first public appearance since Friday’s total debacle of a press conference and yeah, he’s not going to give an inch on any sort of gun control or restrictions. Meet the Press‘ David Gregory actually seemed irritated by LaPierre’s stubbornness, getting into it with the NRA head over regulating high-capacity magazines.
Also, if you were wondering if LaPierre recognizes the cognitive dissonance of claiming that armed guards would stop school shootings even though Columbine had one on duty in 1999…nope, he’s not bending on that either. Sigh.
This article appears in Dec 20-26, 2012.
He has a reason to pimp his garbage. $$$. Anyone else that believes this argument is a moron.
Wayne LaPierre will do anything in his power to shift the blame from any of these tragic events away from high-powered fully or semi automatic weapons. The simple facts remains that without these weapons the likelihood of mass shootings occurring would drop significantly, if not completely.
I don’t dispute firearm ownership, my issue is that no one besides military or law enforcement should have access to these weapons that are used in mass killings. I understand that a black-market would arise if these wonders of murder technology were deemed unlawful for the average person to possess. The fix to that issue is the powers that be adjust the laws to reflect that if you possess such an item you become automatically charged with an attempt of premeditated mass-murder, with ZERO tolerance. Much like the same laws you would be subject to if you were convicted of manufacturing or possessing a lethal high-powered bomb. What else are these weapons good for?
Target practice? Get a b.b. gun. Hunting? Get a double-barrel shotgun.
If you’re the type of person that believes these killings would continue without access to high-powered assault weapons, you could be right. It would definitely slow their roll though, with these items now having an automatic premeditated mass-murder charge attached to possessing them. Also, when was the last time you heard of a mass killing (my definition meaning over 10 people) performed with swords, knives, standard rifles and/or low caliber firearms? Post a story or link to anything that kills my argument and I’ve learned something new; I already know this isn’t going to happen though.
If you want an example of how to stop mass murders here in the land of the free, search out the firearm laws enacted in Australia after their last mass shooting in April of 1996. Yes, 1996! These laws may sound a bit extreme to those of you who sleep with a glock under your pillow at night but, once again, 1996.
Do we blame the beer, wine and liquor industry for the many senseless deaths and injuries caused by drunk drivers? No, we expect responsible behavior from those who purchase and use these products. The same is true of guns and there are more than enough rules and regulations that govern firearms.
While I do not own a gun and have no desire to own one, I support the right of all to own guns for whatever reasonable and legal use. The NRA is a good group in my view and it is not responsible for any deaths by standing on the basic principles granted by our Founding Fathers.
I have had the opportunity to live in more than a dozen countries and those which restrict the right to bear arms are generally more dangerous and certainly more dictatorial.
Keep the faith Wayne and keep up the good work.
Bisbee Boy, lol. What country did you think about visiting/ think about living at some point? Cuz you never ever went there. Totally stupid unless you lived in…oops cant think of that one. Nice lookin internet chick tho. A fantasy.
Is I see it, what our founding fathers intended about guns has little to do with auto/semi auto weapons, as they didn’t exist in any capacity for over another century….
So you people that is so set against guns just what would you do if some nut job comes charging through your door wanting to rob you? Myself I would shoot them. I will protect myself, family, and property.
Meet The Press softball bunt:
“WAYNE LAPIERRE:
And I think, I’ll tell you this, I have people all over the country calling me saying, “Wayne, I went to bed safer last night because I have a firearm. Don’t let the media try to make this a gun issue.”
DAVID GREGORY:
But that’s argument, that’s not fact. So let’s–
WAYNE LAPIERRE:
No, it is fact.
DAVID GREGORY:
Well, a feeling is not fact. A feeling is a sense of reassurance. That’s not evidence. And I know that’s not what you’re presenting. But let’s talk more specifically about what you’re talking about, armed guards in schools. Because I know there are successful examples.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50283245/ns/me…
OK, I’ll call him crazy. I left the NRA in the early 80s when LaPierre started spouting his crazy line. It has paid off for him. I expected sane gun-owners would follow me. He bet on the crazies and won.
Banning the future sell of assault style weapons is one thing. Trying to take them away from people who already own them kind of a problem. Wait we could have a war on guns. Or would that be a war with guns? The NRA is full of a lot of nut jobs and right wingers who are never going to budge even if you put a gun to their face that’s why I never joined
There are extremists on both sides of this issue. Whether you consider any individual a “bad” extremist depends on your point of view. The idea that simply owning a large ammunition clip could be equal to being guilty of premeditated murder is interesting but you know it would never fly because it moves from one extreme to the other. A strong majority of people would support reasonable laws to get rid of specific weapons designed only for killing. Emphasis on “reasonable.”
Well D. Gregory is just another tipical marxist liberal of the media. As for the commit on Columbine, the security guard(s) had instructions to do nothing less it happened inside the school building and then only to call the police. Again stupid school security failed our children. Let’s put ex-military personnel or retired police officers at our schools with instructions to shoot first ask questions later.
Again it’s not the gun, nor multi bullet magiznes, it is the nut and failure of our schools to have a proper security system. Don’t punish me and others just cause of some crazy idiot. Hey why don’t we ban milk & coffee & tea for breakfast; you can only drink water.
I am glad the shooter wasn’t Hispanic otherwise the whole illegal immigration crap would be back in the news. Let’s send Joe Arpaio Sheriffs in to schools to start profiling skinny weird looking whites kids for a change. Strange that all of the crazy shooters have been white.
People like Hadenough are allowed to carrys guns. What more needs to be said? You need a thought son.
Hadenough needs to understand how wide the gap is between a liberal and a Marxist. If he’s going to lecture us on the history of failed school security, he should get it right. Jefferson County Deputy Sheriff, Neil Gardener, the school security officer at Columbine, exchanged fire with the killers and did so outside the school buildings. Let’s not forget, for that matter, that Virginia Tech had it’s own police force, or that the shooting at Fort Hood took place on a military base. As always, the real problem is the ease with which guns are available in America–to the mentally ill, to criminals, and to those who otherwise lack the competence or stability necessary to posses deadly weapons.
The real issue it is NOT about the 2nd amendment to the NRA. Its about manufacturing and selling guns for a huge profit. They care less about the 2nd. That amendment has been so stretched with interpretations we can use it for anything now.
I’ve hunted and owned guns. I’m old enough to remember when the N.R.A. was an advocacy group for gun safety and markmanship. Those days are long past.
The N.R.A. has morphed into a single issue political front group for the international firearms industry. The firearms industry is opposed to any “reasonable” gun control measures for a simple reason – $$$$.
Wayne LaPierre is simply a lobbyist for the gun industry who is very well paid for his services. His opposition is no different than the opposition of the tobacco lobbyists who fought against control of advertising and distribution of cigarettes.
No one needs a high-capacity magazine or clip for hunting or home defense. No one needs a military derivative semi-automatic .223 rifle with a banana magazine or 100-round rotary magazine for hunting or home defense. The best weapon for home defense, if it is needed, is a 12 gauge tactical shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot.
The international firearms industry has profited very well from the gun culture that exists in the U.S. The military style firearms they sell (AR-15 type, Glock, Sig-Sauer) are an enormously profitable “cash cow” and the N.R.A. will continue to support the industry against any gun controls.
Why do I need an assault rifle you ask? I don’t need it for hunting. I don’t need it for home protection from a single invader, or even two. So I echo the sentiment of many gun control advocates; Why do I need an assault rifle, with a high capacity clip no less?
Here is why. I need an assault rifle because I live under the rule of a government who thinks it has the right to take away my assault rifle; a government who dictates who I can marry, what I can eat, drink, and smoke; a government who uses force to take my money away from me, who charges me rent (property tax) to live in my own home: a government who commits acts of war without the consent of the people, who murders its own citizens without probable cause or due process; a government who has monopolized the currency with which I can trade my goods and services, then devalued that currency through inflation and taxation; a government which uses the tyranny of democracy rather than the freedom of a republic.
To put it bluntly, I need an assault rifle in the event that I might have to declare my independence from a tyrannical government. I’m statistically unlikely to ever shoot an intruder in my home. I’m statistically unlikely to ever be in the position to stop one of these rare mass killings at a school, as these things happen far less often than the media would have you believe. However, whether you are Democrat or Republican, you can easily find countless instances of the government stepping all over your rights, whether it be on social issues (marriage, gay rights, religious rights, etc.) or fiscal issues (taxation, property rights, business regulations, etc.)
So, how likely is it you will use your assault rifle to prevent a school shooting? Not very likely at all. However, how likely is it that you will need your assault rifle for the purpose of protecting your rights from a tyrannical government? Well, the fact that we are having this conversation not only shows that it is increasingly likely, but it also clearly demonstrates the reason why the right to bear arms is unalienable.
When a tyrannical government uses it’s assault rifles to take away my rights, it would be beyond immoral to expect me to defend those rights with my grandpa’s shotgun. That is why I need an assault rifle.
The US has the largest gun ownership and more officers than any other developed country, yet gun related violence is higher than all of them.
According to the latest statistics of 2011, 19.5 higher. It was the last years before maintaining statistics by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobbacco, Firearms and Explosives was prohibited by a law introduced by the gun lobby.
66.9% of homocides in the US are gun related.
Gun related homocides are 6.9 time higher than any other country.
Among those between 15 and 24 years is 42.7 times higher.
Bisbee boy, in your oft repeated and specious argument, among those comparisons the only thing with a specific purpose to kill is a gun.
How odd that an instrument designed to kill should also save so many lives, Mr. Leibensperger. Perhaps that’s because guns can be used for both purposes and have personally saved my life or spared me from road rage on more than one occasion. And, oddly, not one “homocide” occurred…was I using them wrong?
@Fletcher
“When a tyrannical government uses it’s assault rifles to take away my rights, it would be beyond immoral to expect me to defend those rights with my grandpa’s shotgun. That is why I need an assault rifle.”
Dude, Breaking News: The Govt. has Drones, Missiles, and Tanks.
@Mujer, it also has people who carry assault weapons, which would be the likely method for rounding up dissidents. And if our govt. becomes one which utilizes the weapons you mentioned against its own people instead of innocent civilians overseas (90% of the body count according to the DOD’s own estimates), I’d wager plenty of people would seek defense rifles or “assault weapons”, as the label is now applied in order to eliminate those seeking to do them harm. Thank you for underscoring my point.
It always seems to me that the people who claim to love America are always the ones who actually hate everything about America. Fletch being only the latest example. Fletch, what DO you like about this country? Curious.
I wave no flags, Mr. Fleming, merely point out what should be obvious to the observant and intelligent. Since you inhabit neither category, your response is to accuse me of hating our nation in the place of a cogent argument or even a point. If and when you acquire either one, I’ll be here.
In the meantime, feel free to tell me and everybody else here how you like the indefinite detention bill passed by Congress last week. Remember, all the police and military will be enforcing its provisions with assault rifles. Do YOU like that fact about our country? Curious.
Fletch, you have said nothing. Nothing at all. Continue. Thanks.
…spake the pot to the kettle. I’ve said my piece, feel free to continue with your jingoism, Mr. Fleming.
We Don’t Have a Gun Problem
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/12…
Wayne LaPierre is French.. & Fried!
As Julia Child once remarked: “If no one’s in the kitchen, who’s to see it?”
Or: “Soufflés don’t kill people; bad soufflés kill people.”
Apparently LaPierre thought appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” would be like using a new dry cleaner, but all that resulted was steam. Listening closely as LaPierre dodged every question shot at him, he deftly ducked behind a stack of 50 year old copies of the National Review, the Women’s Wear Daily of the gun lobby.
No, like Pontius Pilates, LaPierre stood his ground while seated. He faced down the hard questions with the soft sell. In a nutshell, here is his three-point wide stance.
1) More drug dealers need to be sent to prison. An excellent point as we need more drugs in prison. It is, like prisons themselves, a growth market.
2) Violent movies such as “Natural Born Killers” are corrupting our youth. Yes, that 20th Anniversary DVD edition must have somehow tainted a VHS-less generation into mass slaughter. If only Oliver Stone had been stopped earlier by a more aggressively marketed Betamax, things like this (and JFK) wouldn’t have happened.
3) Armed guards at schools. OK, Wayne forgot that 1/3rd of all schools already have guards, or that there were armed guards at Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc. Let’s give this hero some slack; he’s only one man with 3,742 guns under his bed.
My 2013 resolution, no more fried… anything.
Danny Alias
WhenDannyMetSally.com