This week was not a good week for the NRA - *article*

Status
Not open for further replies.

.cheese.

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
3,808
From: http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/78958.html

Posted on Thu, Apr. 19, 2007

It was not a good week for the NRA
BY FRED GRIMM
[email protected]

The enlightenment that comes with a human massacre prevailed Wednesday in Tallahassee. The so-called guns-at-work bill was voted down in a House of Representatives committee.

A similar bill had faltered Tuesday in Georgia, another state where the legislature usually functions as a franchise of the National Rifle Association. Legislators in either state couldn't bring themselves to parrot the NRA's bizarre arguments about the urgent need of employees to keep guns handy in cars parked at their workplaces. Not this week. Not after 32 gun murders and a suicide on Virginia Tech's campus.

In Georgia, the Senate Rules Committee chairman told The Atlanta Constitution that, given the horrors the morning before, ``This is not the time to take up a bill like that.''

BAD TIMING

A similar sensibility prevailed in the Florida House, knowing that the more-guns-the-better fantasy would sound particularly fatuous just two days after the bloody reality of Virginia Tech.

But the temporary setback of an NRA initiative should not give anyone hope that this latest school killing spree will inspire saner gun laws. The guns-at-work bills were already up against the fierce opposition of business lobbies and powerful corporations in both states.

The Florida Chamber of Commerce released a statewide poll Monday finding that 56 percent of Florida voters opposed the premise behind the guns-at-work bill.

All that, yet it took an unspeakable carnage in Virginia to stave off the NRA charge. And there was some thought in Atlanta that the bill might be resurrected before the legislature adjourns there on Friday. Jennifer Krell Davis of the Florida Chamber of Commerce said she was still worried that someone would similarly sneak a Senate-approved version of the guns-at-work bill into the Florida House amid the last-minute chaos. ''It's still out there,'' she told me Wednesday.

It's as if legislators figure that by Friday, four murdered professors, 28 dead students and a gun-wielding psycho killer will have faded from public consciousness. Just in time to reconcile with the NRA.

JUST GUN SMOKE

Politicians know that talk of tougher gun laws in the U.S. after workplace massacres, school massacres, restaurant massacres dissipate as fast as gun smoke.

They shrugged off the ritual murders of five little Amish school girls in Pennsylvania last October as the price they pay to avoid the enmity of the gun lobby. Why would the slaughter in Virginia this week make them rethink the gun laws? Thirty-two murders in Blacksburg is no worse than Columbine plus inflation.

Other western nations after such mass murders tighten gun laws. Britain, which bans sales of the kind of pistols purchased by that mentally skewed student in Virginia, suffered only 46 gun homicides last year -- a total within easy reach of an industrious mass killer in the U.S. The international press suggested this week that our reckless shoot-first embrace of firearms explained why we leaped, guns-ablazing, into Iraq, another place where the gun culture is in full bloom.

After a couple of minor setbacks, the gun lobby has begun shooting back at its critics with a wild, new logic: The danger evidenced in Virginia was caused by too few guns on campus. If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys, it would be worth the risk that they'd occasionally off one another, their girlfriends or their professors on the off chance that one of them might plug the next campus mass murderer.

Enlightenment didn't last long.
 
After a couple of minor setbacks, the gun lobby has begun shooting back at its critics with a wild, new logic: The danger evidenced in Virginia was caused by too few guns on campus. If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys, it would be worth the risk that they'd occasionally off one another, their girlfriends or their professors on the off chance that one of them might plug the next campus mass murderer.

I'm trying to see things from his narrow-minded, arrogant, and elitist point of view, but unfortunately I just can't seem to get my head that far up my ass. :confused:
 
btw - this was on the front page of one of the sections - maybe the local section of the Miami Herald Today.

I'm tempted to email him.... but I'm not sure it's worth my time. Somebody like him is set in his ideas, and all the logic in the world won't change them.

I, unlike him, was once 100% anti. I was not educated on the subject at all. Once I learned more and more.... well... history speaks for itself. I own 6 guns with the 7th on order and coming in Monday.
 
Every household must own at least 1 gun and problem solved. Not even a meth addict is dumb enough to burglarize someones home with that law in effect :)
 
If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys, it would be worth the risk that they'd occasionally off one another, their girlfriends or their professors on the off chance that one of them might plug the next campus mass murderer.

I wonder how anyone who says this would respond when asked if those same drunken frat boys should be allowed driver licenses, as cars kill more people than firearms in the U.S.
 
In a letter-to-the-editor in my local paper today my argument was for select, well trained teachers and faculty at secondary schools and universities to carry concealed weapons as teachers in Israel do.

While there are many responsible 21 and 22 year olds, I don't think it would be wise to promote CCW by universities for students from a legal standpoint (i.e. drunk student shoots buddy), but faculty is another story and a way to protect innocents from a psychopath with a firearm in a "gun free" school zone.
 
The danger evidenced in Virginia was caused by too few guns on campus. If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys, it would be worth the risk that they'd occasionally off one another, their girlfriends or their professors on the off chance that one of them might plug the next campus mass murderer.

I sense a phenomenon knwon as "projection" here. I sincerely hope he stays rapidly anti-gun so that we never have to worry him acting out his fantasies.
 
I'm tempted to email him.... but I'm not sure it's worth my time. Somebody like him is set in his ideas, and all the logic in the world won't change them.

Write that email!

Send it to the editor of the paper.

Make your voice heard...

pax
 
tell you what... when I finish my paper in the next 3 weeks, I'll take the info and write an op ed piece and send it to the herald.
 
The 'drunken frat boy" scenario doesn't hold water . Doesn't Utah allow CCW on school properties? And exactly how many "drunken frat boys" have gone out shooting people there? Statements like that fall into the" Wild west" and "streets running with blood" phrases . Funny how it never happens when good people are allowed to be armed .


Like to see how he explains this away.

The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that, in 1997, there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms (the statistics do not distinguish firearm use in consummated murders from attempts). With its population of seven million (which includes 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. There were 2,498 robberies (and attempted robberies), of which 546 involved firearms, giving a robbery rate of 36 per 100,000. Almost half of these criminal acts were committed by non-resident foreigners, which is why one hears reference in casual talk to "criminal tourists."

Sometimes, the data sounds too good to be true. In 1993, not a single armed robbery was reported in Geneva.

In a word, Switzerland, which is awash in guns, has substantially lower murder and robbery rates than England, where most guns are banned.
 
I have a solution for this so called writers dilema, move to Britain, and don't carry a gun... Plenty of grassy fields to baa around on there.
 
If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys
Here we go again. The VPC gang take the same line. All college students are drunken, dope-smoking morons.
Dammit, where's Al Sharpton when you need him? The antis are smearing the entire college population of America as being a pack of drunken idiots, and nobody's doing a thing about it. Whatever happened to ditching ignorant stereotypes?
 
Anti-gun fantasy:
Fred Grimm, Miami Herald:beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys
Recent history:
On the fifth anniversity, NET News Service carried an interview
with one of the survivors of the 2002 Appalachian School of Law
shooting in Grundy VA. Tracey McGuire Frisk, law student, and
Kim Boyd, librarian, barricaded themselves in the library office:
"Hearing a struggle outside, the pair fearfully crept to
the window. Peering out Frisk watched as two law students,
former policemen armed with handguns, confronted and
subdued Odighizuwa...."--11 Mar 07 Kingsport Times-News.

Perhaps Fred Grimm thinks all college/university students are "beer-crazed ... frat boys." Many are responsible young adults.
 
Grimm's tone makes me think he ENJOYED the massacre, and his percieved effect in providing setbacks to gun rights.

And that's all I need to say about him.
 
Response sent...
Mr. Grimm,
"After a couple of minor setbacks, the gun lobby has begun shooting back at its critics with a wild, new logic: The danger evidenced in Virginia was caused by too few guns on campus. If we had more beer-crazed pistol-packing frat boys, it would be worth the risk that they'd occasionally off one another, their girlfriends or their professors on the off chance that one of them might plug the next campus mass murderer."

Apparently you don't have a clue about what the NRA wants. And its funny that in the midst of the worst school murder in US history, people are not calling for more gun cntrol, but less. People are finally realizing that desipte all of their reassuring words, the government will NOT always be there to protect them and that self defense should be at least partially the responsibility, and most certailnly the option of the individual.

Nobody at the NRA has suggested issuing fireams to all incoming freshmen as you are trying to suggest. But allowing responsible, law-abiding adults, to exercise a constitutional right that they can exercise in many other public places, could have stopped some if not most of the VT killings and have stopped several other mass murderers in the past, without the terrible consequences you like to imagine.


Thank you.

Mr White
Dogs Reservior, PA

Actually used my real namd and town.
 
Are you serious? Your real name is (Mr.) White and you live in a town called "Dogs Reservoir"?
I wish!
How cool would that be?

Anyway, Here's what I got back...
if only those little amish girls were packing heat . . .

And here's what he got back...
The Subject line I used was: Not a good week for the Antis, either
Not the girls, but if their teacher was...

As you can tell from my email address, I work at a pretty large university. I deal with college kids on a pretty regular basis and I have to agree with you that arming most college students would be a very bad idea. They are still kids. Most of them aren't even 21, the minimum legal age to buy a handgun. And even most of the 21 year olds don't really impress me as being mature or responsible enough to carry a gun.

But you're right. Ban all guns. All of us responsible, law-abiding gun owners will turn ours in on the first day. My guess is that the bad guys will opt to keep theirs. I'm curious to know what your plan is to protect us from the all the well-armed criminals then? "Give them what they want. Wait til they leave. Then call the police." Sounds very nice, but what if 'what they want' is to rape your daughter, or kill you? Interestingly, 30 of the 32 victims at VT were killed AFTER the police became involved in the situation. Even if what they want is to just take your wallet, they don't have the right to your wallet, or my wallet, or anyone's wallet! If they try to rob me at gunpoint and thus are willing to kill you or me for our wallets, they've crossed a very clear line and an honest person has the right to be safe. With that right to be safe comes the right to defend ourselves from persons or things that make us unsafe.

I'm not in lockstep with the NRA on this issue. I agree that there needs to be tighter controls on who can own a gun, but the problem there is that once tighter restrictions are in place, there are those who would use them as a means to deny ownership to more and more law-abiding citizens, until the only folks who are allowed to own a gun are little old ladies, nuns and the politically connected. I believe that the instant check systems should have access to mental health records. Currently, there are questions on the 4473 form asking if you've ever been judged as mentally defective, committed to a mental institution, use drugs, are the actual buyer of the firaarm, are an illegal alien, or have ever renounced your citizenship. Turns out, some people actually lie on those forms. People who have a history of mental illness should not have guns. Anyone convicted of a felony should not have a gun. Drug addicts and dealers should not have guns. Anyone with a record of violent behavior or tendencies should not have a gun. If you check, the NRA believes this too. They are very much FOR these kinds or checks and restrictions. They do NOT sing the 'any gun for anyone at anytime' tune.

I'm 45 years old. I have never been arrested for anything. I have a wife and 2 kids. I go to church. I'm involved in Boy Scouts and Little League. I hunt, I shoot recreationally and competitively. If you lived next door to me and knew me and knew of my gun collection, I can almost guarantee that you wouldn't feel any less safe. You most likely wouldn't have a problem with your kids playing with my kids at my house. In fact, when the next big hurricane hits South Florida and anarchy rules for a few days, you'd probably feel a little better having me as a neighbor. I'm not a Rambo type, or Joe Tactical, but I refuse to be a victim! If you took the time to find out, you'd learn that the most 'gun nuts' are very much like me.

Its probably old hat to South Floridians, but street gangs and their associated crime have finally found my small town. Several homes in the area have been invaded. Shootings are becoming more common in some towns not too far away. I guess I'm just a stupid hick, but I'm just not seeing how being disarmed will make me and my family safer from all of that.

Banning all guns is not the answer nor even an option. Its just not going to happen. You have to concede that point. As long as there are any guns, there will be predators with guns. Mexico has banned civilian ownership of guns. The drug cartels are still armed. England and Australia have essentially banned guns and people there are still getting shot. Addressing the root of the problems is the only way to solve them. Rendering honest people defenseless is most certainly not.

I'll turn in my guns when you turn in your fire extinguishers and smoke alarms. After all, that’s what fire departments are trained to do.

Sincerely,

Mr White
Dogs Reservoir, PA

P.S. Please tell Carl Hiassen that I love his books!
 
I'm trying to see things from his narrow-minded, arrogant, and elitist point of view, but unfortunately I just can't seem to get my head that far up my ass.

Hmmm... Not very High Road! :rolleyes:

Now that you've been thoroughly castigated, let me add...


...My Sentiments Exactly!:evil: :evil: :evil:
 
I'm trying to see things from his narrow-minded, arrogant, and elitist point of view, but unfortunately I just can't seem to get my head that far up my ass.
Great line! I wish I could have figured a way to fit it into my emails to him, but I was hell-bent on keeping them civil this time. But I'm gonna file that away for the next time I'm not hell-bent on being civil.
 
Note I said there are many responsible 21 and 22 year olds. I don't have a problem with student CCW on campuses, but what I have noticed on the news shows is the talking heads really getting down the throats of pro-rights individuals (Larry Pratt did not come across well) about students carrying guns with all their "hormones" and "drinking". Their words - not mine.

My point is that I don't think promoting students carrying concealed will fly with the public, even though I don't have a problem with it. What can fly, IMHO, is select, well trained faculty carrying concealed. I know every faculty member can carry just fine, but if you are selling this to the public, my take is to keep students out of it and refer to select, well trained faculty members. Otherwise, these will remain "gun-free" zones for armed lunatics.
 
But the temporary setback of an NRA initiative should not give anyone hope that this latest school killing spree will inspire saner gun laws.

Is he saying the gun laws in effect right now are not sane?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top