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. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    The NRA did push their own plan from the very beginning, as you noted, they pushed an immediate armed response. This is basically the most effective way to stop an active shooter. So effective in fact, that it was adopted by the Administration, even though the same idea was roundly ridiculed in the media filtering the message.

    Yet here we are sitting on a gun board discussing how inadequate the NRA response was? The NRA gave the A+ answer for responding to active shooters - the same answer pushed by all of law enforcement - get a good guy with a gun in there ASAP and confront the shooter. Yet that A+ answer was so effectively filtered by the media, that even after the President adopted it wholesale as part of his own agenda, we are sitting on a gun board complaining about how the NRA response was inadequate and trying to think of better ways to give something to someone who says they want to take all of our guns and will do so when they have the votes?

    The only way the NRA would get a positive response to their plan would be to agree to adopt measures that would serve to make it more difficult for the average joe to legally own firearms - which would kind of defeat the purpose of the NRA.
  2. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    You simply don't know that. I would suggest that more and more people realize that the School Gun Control Act of 1990 is not merely worthless, it's dangerous.

    As far as teachers/administrators CCWing, it would be suicide right now to push that on a national level right now. That's sad too because it might well make a difference.
  3. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    No, it didn't. It gave one element of an "A+ answer" and it has done a horrible job of selling that one element since its introduction.

    The media is able to filter the NRA's message only because the NRA allows it to be filtered -- through incompetenence and/or naivete.
  4. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Untrue. This fight is ultimately going to be won based on public support. It's not a matter of selling Feinstein, it's a matter of selling the American people.
  5. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    You're right. I don't think he always communicates well and I think he carries a great deal of baggage. He might be a tremendous planner and lobbiest but he's not a great spokesman.
  6. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Quite true...

    And I think the pro-gun camp has come to expect getting beat-up in this manner -- as if it cannot be helped and that's just silly.
  7. Sgt_R

    Sgt_R Well-Known Member

  8. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    They got the former Democratic Senator from Chicago and Chairman of the Board of the Joyce Foundation to adopt their idea in his list of executive actions (Items 12 & 18) and you feel they have done a horrible job of selling that element? The President of the United States adopted their idea while all of his allies and his base were lambasting it. If that is horrible, then what do you consider adequate or good?
  9. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Well-Known Member

    And you simply don't know that. I know what I have learned from talking and corresponding with people acroos the country, and that is what I wrote. If it is true that more and more people are realizing gun free zones are a bad idea, it is equally true that more and more people believe they are a good idea.

    The fact is, for the majority of Americans, firearms are not an important part of their lives if they have any part at all. Polls suggest there are 55 million households with guns representing about 80 million individual gun owners. But these are "owners" because when asked if they own a gun, they answered yes. Some of them have never fired the gun they own because it was their fathers, or their grandfathers. They inherited it and it has been in the closet or the attic ever since. Some of them used to hunt, or used to shoot regularly, but that was when they were younger or before they had kids. Life got too busy and with kids in the house, they keep the guns locked up and out of sight and haven't touched them in years. But they are not anti0gun, they just aren't gun enthusiasts or active shooters. When they think about protecting their families or themselves, from "gun violence", they don't think about using a gun to stop the bad guy with the gun, they think about stopping the bad guy from having a gun.

    But a lot of these households have members that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they learned to depend on a weapon for personal defense. Many of these returning vets still feel the need for a weapon for personal defense so the demographic is changing. The number of enthusiasits is increasing, but are still a minority.
  10. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Sorry, but the mental health folks would tell you that there is no good predictive model to foretell who will or won't commit violent acts.

    Further, violent acts by mentally ill people compromises only a small fraction of the violent acts committed in America. Not understanding why focussing on mental health as a solution to stop mass shootings is a failed option will only lead to further recriminations against the gun lobby.

    Truthfully, you cannot stop these events without focus on security. That was and is the message of the NRA. Getting rid of gun free zones and capitalizing security measures as the only practical solutions. The NRA addressed both of these issues in their press conference.
  11. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    You're simply wrong about that. In years past such people were institutionalized after the were adjudicated as being criminally insane. Now they are drugged and too often they live on the streets and too often forget to take their meds.

    Try reading this sort, real world essay on the matter: I am Adam Lanza's mother

    Mass shootings have been almost universally committed by whack-jobs. That's indisputable.

    No, they aren't the "only practical solutions." Many things combine to form at best a partial solution.
  12. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Sure I do, by its very definition...
  13. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    You can disagree with me which is fine, but the evidence is that mental health identification of violent folks is lacking. Here is an article summarizing some of this evidence. If you would like, I will find some more articles on this issue.


    There is indeed a profile of young, white, upper middle class males with mental issues that have caused most of these mass shootings. Yes, that is indeed true. What is also true is that there are a LOT of kids with that description. Sorting out which will or won't commit such an act is a different issue. Perhaps we should just lock up all young, white, upper middle class males with mental issues.

    One researcher disputes the common belief that these kids are all seriously mentally ill.


    Lastly, eliminating gun free zones is the single best action we have that would greatly reduce mass school shootings. Allowing more concealed carry in these areas will also go a long way since one of the traits of many of these mass murderers is committing suicide once they encounter any armed resistance. Lastly, the NRA is correct to focus on school security but I don't believe it should in any manner be conducted at the Federal level.

    If you don't believe this works, just research the solution in Israel, Peru and the Philippines. America is not likely to ever consider those things that work since it appears we have lost our national common sense long ago. Mas Ayoob noted such in a recent article he wrote on what we should do to avert mass school shootings here in the US.

  14. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    Actually you suggest "that mental health identification of violent folks is lacking." Others disagree with you.

    Extremely difficult and ongoing but it needs to begin. Apathy is the killer on this one.

    I agree about the GFZ and the CCW. I didn't include CCW because it simply wouldn't sell right now. **If** any gun controls exist, I would much prefer they be uniform at the federal level.

    There is still plenty we can do. I'm not about to give up on the USA...
  15. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    As a primary care physician for nearly 20 years before retiring due to renal disease, I had many patients who fit the profile of a "mass" murderer: young, white, socially isolated male in their 20's. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, none of them in all those years committed a mass murder.

    Perhaps we are missing the message in just as dramatic a fashion as the anti's are by blaming these examples all on mental illness. Certainly, the Aurora man is indeed in that category as well as the Arizona shooter. But that is not true of many of these creeps. Social isolation and poor communication skills are not reasonable reasons to lock up anyone and in fact the law reflects that. If we focus on mental health and ignore the issue of violence in our society in general, we miss the largest contributor to not only mass killings but all murders in this nation.

    The anti's are likewise focussing on the gun instead of the underlying problem of violence in this nation. That may be the one common factor we have on both sides of the issue. One form of violence in this nation is the bullying problem which according to many accounts is becoming epidemic. Bullying is one common factor of many of these mass murderers.

    In many ways, the violence we tolerate in our daily lives on TV, video games is directly mirrored by what is happening in our streets every day. If we are going to have areas of agreement with the anti's, in reality, the best starting ground is with the issue of violence.

    I have my own solution to the issue, but it seems that this nation kicked God out of our schools over 50 years ago. What is there that can and has restrained violence in the past is now universally rejected by both anti's and pro-gun folks alike. This is a gun forum, so I can't perseverate on the issue, but the reason for the failure of gun control in England is because it does nothing to stem the underlying violence. England is now once again looking at controlling knives and other objects and once again missing the point.


    We should likewise not miss the point as well. Violence is the problem, focussing aggressively on mental health approaches by the admission of mental health professionals will not prevent these events.

    if you have sources that state differently, please feel free to provide them so we can evaluate them for their veracity.
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  16. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    I strongly agree that the focus cannot only be on mental health. If that would happen it would be a big mistake akin to focusing only on gun control. Any "solution" will be multi-faceted and it will obviously not be absolute.

    I also strongly agree that the underlying cause for the entire mess that is today's septic society is the systematic elimination of God from our day-to-day lives by the forces of militant secularism. No question in my mind whatsoever.

    But society has to start somewhere. I believe the NRA would have been doing the country a big favor by offering a well thought-out outline. I think it would also have been the best weapon to use against the current push for worthless and ultimately dangerous gun control.
  17. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Glad to hear we agree more than disagree.

    When the NRA statement came out, I was a bit taken back and felt that they had chosen the wrong approach. Now, I believe that they did tackle it by going after the security issue directly, but perhaps had the wrong spokesperson.

    Shucks, I wish they would have put Allan Gura out there and let him discuss these issues and go over school security. I guess he isn't their spokesperson, but maybe it wasn't so much the message rather it may have been the messenger of the NRA.
  18. radar1972

    radar1972 Well-Known Member

    1. Does mental health need to be addressed? Yes, but as long as the liberal left has the loudest voice (and they do), mental health will not be the focus of ANY plan. Their focus is Control..... whether it be gun control or abc control or xyz control. They want to control every aspect of your life. And if you disagree, you are intolerant.

    2. Does the NRA need a new spokesperson? Yes. Each time I see WLP in any public speaking setting, I cringe.
  19. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    1.) So you say. "Mental health" needs to be a component of any real plan. Slowly but surely it's getting mentioned more and more by the politicos and the popular media.

    2.) WLP should be the NRA's chief lobbiest perhaps but not its CEO. The NRA has outgrown WLP.
  20. Kynoch

    Kynoch member

    WLP is not only a poor spokesman, he's the "face of contention." The "face of much baggage" going back to the jack-booted thug days.

Share This Page