1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What if the NRA has responded to the Newtown Massacre in this manner?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Kynoch, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. tomrkba

    tomrkba Well-Known Member

    I do not agree that mental health needs to be fixed with laws.
  2. gossamer

    gossamer Well-Known Member

    First this one:

    "Firm guidelines" for Media established with the hand of the Government is called censorship. No.

    I give as much stock to the NRA's position on mental health as I do the American Psychiatric Association's position on self defense. Zilch.
    The NRA is not a mental health organization, the leadership knows jack squat about mental health and should stay out of it.
  3. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    They should have offered as much as possible -- all that made sense to counter the "let's ban guns" mantra.
  4. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Who said anything about emotion? Laying out a proposed outline would have been one helluva lot better than WLP grimmacing followed by him being tongue-tied.
  5. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    It's sad that most didn't comprehend my posting...

    I didn't seek critique about the outline I posted. It's nothing more than a construct to aid discussion. I thought my comment "(feel free to add, subtract or change items as you wish)" would make that clear.

    I was curious about what would have happened had the NRA laid-out a honest-to-goodness outline of what it felt needed to happen AND THEN continue to reference that outline every time the antis made a comment like "so you feel there is nothing we can do about gun-related violence?"

    Maybe this thread is a good example of why the NRA is not doing a better job right now?
  6. gossamer

    gossamer Well-Known Member

    Good point. Since you put it that way, I would subtract No's 1 & 9.

    Everything else seems to be rational.
  7. Grey_Mana

    Grey_Mana Well-Known Member

    What is the rationale for making the NICS semi-confidential? If the information is FOIA-able, and belongs to the public, then put it on a public website. Let anybody check anybody for any reason, without needing to submit information to the government. Let everybody see their records without needing to submit to the appeals process.

    There is no integral need to tell the FBI or BATF that somebody is trying to buy a gun, in order for the FBI to share their database. Giving the government an opportunity to retain information wasn't the stated intent of NICS. The only reason to give FBI information should be to get their help if there is confusion about who is who in the database.
  8. Fishbed77

    Fishbed77 Well-Known Member

    Almost none of the proposals offered by politicians in recent weeks even remotely address the issues of gun-related crime.

    What Skribs is proposing makes perfect sense, because he if offering actual points of compromise.
  9. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    #1 is by far the most important point of them all. It's also the most difficult to define, the most difficult to implement, the most expensive, etc. Any plan that does not address mental health is a loser.
  10. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Absolutely not.

    If Skribs' point about opening the NFA registry was actually offered by the NRA, the entire game would be over. 90%+ of the US would conclude the NRA is a whack-job organization. The other side would be flooded by a mandate of support to slam though everything on their list.
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  11. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    My point is that your appear to be assuming the nation is having a rational conversation about gun control. We are not having that on the national scale. Instead we are seeing a concerted propaganda effort to push more gun restrictions on law-abiding gun owners in an effort to reduce the number of gun owners over time through increased red tape and reduce their political power.

    In that environment, proposing actual solutions is a moot point because your opponents do not care about actual solutions. They have already acknowledged these proposals will not reduce crime or stop active shooters. None of the proposals would have stopped Newtown and the only proposal supported by the NRA (increased money to better report mental health to NICS) is the only thing that might have made a difference in Aurora, Giffords, and VA Tech.

    If you live in California and don't understand it by now, I don't know how to explain it more clearly. Offering reasonable solutions won't change the response because your opponents don't want solutions and are not reasonable. They think that getting rid of guns is the only way to go and they aren't interested in solutions that don't advance that goal.

    Several of your points are useful, not because they provide a solution or would change the dialogue; but because they would force the antis to acknowledge their hypocrisy by opposing non-controversial things like gun safety and actually preventing future tragedies. However, unless you can get that through the incredibly hostile media filter, pointing out the hypocrisy isn't all that useful. Look at the recent Senate hearings - if you watched that on CNN or MSNBC, you'd never see the great pro-2A testimony. You'd see a highlight reel of Wayne LaPierre's biggest flubs, every piece of anti-gun testimony, and then a cut to montages of past shootings while Dave Kopel testifies.

    So when you ask "What would the response be?", I say "It would be the same because the other side isn't interested in possible solutions that don't further a reduction in legal gun ownership."
  12. gossamer

    gossamer Well-Known Member

    That may be true, but the NRA has not business dealing with it. They have no expertise in mental health. Period.
  13. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Incorrect, "period."

    The topic is stopping/reducing gun-related violence -- particularly gun-related massacres. Being violently whacko is the #1 reason these things happen. That means it belongs at the top of any outline -- prepared by the NRA or anyone else, "period."
  14. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    I don't care how rational or irrational the debate may be, pushing their own plan from the very outset would be serving NRA members far better than WLP's grimmaces and tongue-twisted retorts.

    It's probably true that WLP couldn't sell a plan if his life depended upon it. There are other people that can and perhaps one of them should be doing the job he is currently paid to do.
  15. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Well-Known Member

    Arming teachers and not designating schools as gun free zones will not fly. Before it can, a substantially large majority of the general public must believe that it is OK for children to be around guns and that just is not the case right now. Adults, maybe but children? :what: HORRORS!!! :eek:

    Over the past 50 years, there has been a steady reeducation program—a propaganda program—not blatant, but subtly reinforcing the idea that guns must, must be kept away from children. "Children are too curious." "Children are too irresponsible." "Children don't know it isn't a toy." All of this is so ingrained that for a great many people, it is just a given. They don't stop to question it and can only be led to do so with great difficulty. Children can be taught the proper respect for firearms, but before that can happen, the parents fears have to be overcome and that means undoing 50 years of programming. But it is necessary if there is to be any hope of parents feeling their children are safe around guns.
  16. J-Bar

    J-Bar Well-Known Member

    I think the NRA has failed miserably in providing the general public with a true image of itself.

    I wish there had been some NRA sponsored ads during the Super Bowl; about five seconds long each:

    ...A photo of a respected physician and his family--"NRA Members", followed by a mug shot of a felon--"Not An NRA Member".

    ...then another photo of a respected community member, followed by a mugshot of a felon, same captions.

    Do twenty or thirty different ones. Fox News would probably air some. There would be enough liberal howling to get them discussed on the liberal media as fallout.

    The general public sees Mr. LaPierre as the "gun lobby". The NRA is missing a bet by not publicizing all of Wayne's friends. The liberals are the weirdos, not NRA members. We are the solid citizens. But who knew?

    And I am a Patron Life Member and I sent the NRA a check the same day Mr. LaPierre made his televised response to the Newtown tragedy.
  17. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Well-Known Member

    I think the NRA has failed miserably in providing the membership with a true image of itself. Based on the mailings and emails I receive and have received for more years than I can count, the NRA is a lobbying organization.

    90% of my NRA initiated contact is either asking for money or is from the NRA-ILA. Oh, and life insurance offers. Can't forget those.

    I support the NRA (I am a life member) because it supports the 2A, but it would be nice to know what else it is doing without having to dig for it.
  18. avs11054

    avs11054 Well-Known Member

    DiFi and Co., dont want a plan to reduce gun violence. They want a plan to reduce guns. No logical plan offered would have changed anything.
  19. EBK

    EBK Well-Known Member

    "4.) Prosecute those who legitimately fail (felons, insane, etc.) the NICS during the process of attempting to purchase a firearm."

    So if I put the wrong adress (used old adress out of habit after I moved) or forget my apt # and get denied would I be prosecuted for that? I have been denied before for those reasons.

    Or is it only if I get denied for criminal history or sanity reasons?
  20. J-Bar

    J-Bar Well-Known Member

    "the NRA is a lobbying organization."

    Of course they are a lobbying organization. I want them to be a lobbying organization. That's how the game is played.

    My complaint is they are doing a lousy job of showing who they represent.

    The antis have done a terrific job of painting gun owners and NRA members as lunatics. The NRA has not successfully countered that image.

    Woe to us.

Share This Page