Is Wayne Lapierre the right guy?


January 31, 2013, 03:09 PM
One has to wonder if Wayne Lapierre the right guy to represent supporters of the Second Amendment?

His recent appearance on The Hill, with his bodyguards, and his failure to get his facts in order seems to exhibit over confidence and a lack of connection with the common man.

Here is a opinion piece from the Washington Post:

If you enjoyed reading about "Is Wayne Lapierre the right guy?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
January 31, 2013, 03:12 PM
He's there to attack, distract and focus the opposition on him. And at times to scare the pants off wavering legislators. In that capacity he does well. But obviously he's not a unifier of the movement in the way Heston was. Those boots have never been filled and may never be.

It would be nice to have a counterpart to Wayne to present a more shall we say family friendly face to the world. Unfortunately the sort of amiable celebrity (for example Tom Selleck or Sam Elliott) who could do this isn't going to because the atmosphere is so vitriolic and charged. Heck, poor Tom who to my knowledge has been quietly living his life and not getting publicly involved in this fracas for over a decade STILL gets brought up by the antis! Lawrence ODonnell recently called him inhuman, which is just unbelievably strange. But does highlight how much the antis are terrified of someone like him taking the helm.

A FEMALE pro-gun celebrity who's too far up the A list to be blacklisted out of Hollywood would be even more terrifying to them. But that's too much to ask anyone, esp. a friend of the movement. They'd be literally putting their lives on the line just by running favorable ads.

January 31, 2013, 03:13 PM
No,,,,no offense but he just doesn't have the communication skills needed for these very serious times

January 31, 2013, 03:18 PM
Hey, that article sounds pretty open-minded!


I'm not going to firmly support or denigrate Mr. LaPierre, but using an article like that to support your point is really, really poor. Kind of like reading what Satan thinks of St. Peter and then asking, "Is this really the right guy to have at the gate?"

January 31, 2013, 03:23 PM
I've thought a lot about this myself since I sent in my application for membership. I've come to the conclusion that, while I am sure Mr. LaPierre is a great guy and an intelligent man, he may not be the best face for us- not because his policies are not in line with ours, but because he just isn't great at public relations. We need someone more cognizant- a better figurehead and public leader. If we could resurrect Mr. Heston, that would be awesome.

But we can't. :(

So, in lieu of that, as soon as the excrement storm has calmed down we need to find someone who is a better face for our cause. We need to find a new Heston, or at least, someone who will follow in his footsteps. Mr. LaPierre needs to concentrate on NRA efforts that do not require him to speak publicly. His written work always seems very well composed, so maybe he needs to focus exclusively on that, while someone else takes the public reigns.

I've been telling my friends about this when they bash the NRA. We simply have an image issue we need to correct.

January 31, 2013, 03:27 PM
I've always assumed that Chris Cox is being groomed to take that role eventually and he would have none of the perceived negative traits being decried.

January 31, 2013, 03:28 PM
as soon as it calms down????? We need someone now. After the storm ends just may be too late.

January 31, 2013, 03:31 PM
Just reliving the moment

Ideally, that's what we need. Biblical eloquence, unimpeachable credentials. Righteous and unyielding in the face of any threat. But they don't make them like that anymore. Or maybe they do and we just haven't met them yet. Maybe they're fighting in the field right now overseas.

The best approach in the end is probably to keep an open mind, and avoid letting the NRA becoming a mere club of industry reps and political insiders. Because as Heston suggests, the call is answered by the humble long before the mighty take notice.

January 31, 2013, 03:40 PM
as soon as it calms down????? We need someone now. After the storm ends just may be too late.Somehow I don't think switching horses right now in the heat of this particular passing wave would really be sending the right message to anyone.

WLP being encouraged to retire or step aside after the ban kerfuffle is over would be fine. Having him seen as fired right in mid-fight would be real, real bad.

January 31, 2013, 03:43 PM
Wayne has got to go.
He's almost a deer in the headlights.
Where are his good advisors?

Cris would be 10 times better.

Even better would be a 30 something woman.

All you need are facts. Those are all in our favor.


January 31, 2013, 03:49 PM
While watching the hearings, I was thinking that Wayne seems impatient and frustrated. Yesterday, he said, he had been doing this over 20 years, always getting promised more enforcement of existing laws and then nothing changes. I understand the frustration, but it is affecting his presentation and could seem a bit condescending which is no way to win friends and influence people. I think burnt-out may be an appropriate description.

Trung Si
January 31, 2013, 03:54 PM
I have been a Life/E Member for many Years now, over 40 and I always thought that Wayne was not the right Man, while I know that no one can fill Charlton Heston's shoes, there has to be someone in our Association that comes across better than Wayne!:confused:

February 1, 2013, 01:33 AM
Sam (see post #9), that's exactly what I meant. We have a hand that we must play right now, and we cannot afford internal strife in these critical moments. Mr. LaPierre will suffice for the time at hand, but there needs to be change as soon as the time is right: when we can afford it.

February 1, 2013, 02:43 AM
Wayne is okay, but the NRA could probably do better. He's on our side, of course. But he's just never been catchy or charming or charismatic.

An organization like the NRA really needs a Tom Selleck. BTW he just came out in the top 10 of TV personalities!

But a change now would be the wrong message.

February 1, 2013, 04:25 AM
I really like Wayne. He doesn't pull any punches, but does tend to 'talk over the heads' of most of the uninitiated. I have been a fan of LaPierre since he set CNN straight: . (short version)
He stood toe to toe with Rebecca Peters of the UN; and in my opinion, won.

February 1, 2013, 09:28 AM
He's the guy, and he will continue in the role, so we'd be better off getting behind him than arguing abut whether he's the right guy.

February 1, 2013, 02:31 PM
I'm sorry SAM1911. I felt that using the link that I did would show the OPINION of one Washington Post columnist's view of Mr. Lapierre's appearance on The Hill. From the responses of many to the thread, they are not entirely supportive of him being the best guy. That, did answer my question: Is Wayne Lapierre the right guy?

I'd enjoy seeing a link to an opinion piece that shows him in a better light where he is calm, factual and polite while under fire.

To be true to this thread, I don't like the guy.

February 1, 2013, 02:40 PM
How do you feel about the links in Post 15?

Carl N. Brown
February 1, 2013, 02:44 PM
Apples and mufflerducking oranges

Dana Milbank, Opinion Writer "At Hill hearing, Wayne LaPierre tries to manhandle facts and logic", Washington Post, 30 Jan 2013.

His reasoning, as always, is that existing gun laws aren’t being enforced — but he seems to have pulled the evidence out of his gun barrel. “Out of more than 76,000 firearms purchases supposedly denied by the federal instant check system, only 62 were referred for prosecution,” LaPierre declared in his opening statement.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) looked up the actual statistic. “In 2012 more than 11,700 defendants were charged with federal gun crimes,” Whitehouse said, “a lot more than 62.”

11,700 defendants charged under all federal gun crimes.

Only 62 were people referred for prosecution after failing a background check under the instant check system. "Lying and buying" is just one of several federal gun crimes, but is the only federal gun crime in violation of the instant check system and germane to the issue being discussed.

February 1, 2013, 02:45 PM
How do you feel about the links in Post 15?
[ The second link from Post #15 ( ] - The look on Ms. Peters' face at 1:59 is great. That look says it all, IMO. She knew she had no leg to stand on. LaPierre did just fine.

I actually just saw these two videos last night for the first time, and I gotta say, I think he's a great representative. Is he perfect? No; he's human.

February 1, 2013, 02:46 PM
And, as a point for discussion, the role of the E.D. is perhaps complicated. It isn't exactly to be the nicest guy around, or the most likable. That may help, or it may not. It isn't exactly to endear himself to Ma and Pa sitting in front of the TV back home, either. It is to fight in the filthy mud of national politics, and to (if necessary) scare the proverbial pants off of legislators who are thinking of voting against us that we can and will lay an election-day beating on them if they do.

I'd love for him to be a more polished orator and lovable public figure, but that's only a portion of his job, and his faults -- such as they may be -- don't necessarily detract from his ability to make political hay.

Sav .250
February 1, 2013, 02:50 PM
How about you taking a crack at it? Not an easy job at the moment plus the pressure he and the NRA are under is enormous.
You go to those hearings and represent the masses. Our elected officials think they see blood in the water and are on full attack. Firing questions one after the other. One against many!
It`s easy to question him or his methods but he and the NRA have been in the trenches from the beginning. With a lot of sucess in keeping the 2nd amen from being
trampled upon. You can thank the NRA..........Their business model seems to be working.

Would really like to see an amateur at those hearings ,under fire. Much different than stting in the living room watching it on TV>

Just a different point of view.

February 1, 2013, 02:53 PM
Post #19, by Carl N. Brown (

I agree, Carl. The only person trying to manhandle facts and logic there is Milbank herself, using a Senator who's either intentionally deceptive or just plain dumb (maybe both) to do it.

February 1, 2013, 03:13 PM
This woman Dana Loesch does a radio program from st. louis and she has been putting Piers Morgan in his place for about a month and I guarantee she would make a very good spokes person.
Sometimes I cringe at the things and how wayne says them.

February 1, 2013, 06:00 PM
Sam1911 : How do you feel about the links in Post 15?
-- Sam

Well, I looked at those and the rest of the UN debate. I can't say I have anything to take exception with in those events. He did seem more poised and armed with facts. Perhaps the day he had on the Hill was just a bad one.
Having said that, I still don' like the man.

February 1, 2013, 06:11 PM
Sam1911 : How do you feel about the links in Post 15?I'd say those are pretty stellar moments and I'd be mighty happy if he was always that good.

February 4, 2013, 11:08 PM
I agree, he has to be replaced......take one for the team.

"Our" NRA has a huge image problem that is severely hurting our cause.

February 5, 2013, 10:04 AM
The NRA has lots of smart people who have been studying these issues for decades. Who among us laypersons out here is in a position to second guess their strategy?

I have wondered also at times why they would say a certain thing or endorse a certain thing (CCW reciprocity comes to mind), but I think we should trust their methodology until we see real evidence that they're off track. On that day, yeah, we scream like ____!

If you enjoyed reading about "Is Wayne Lapierre the right guy?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!