NRA News Conference

[fr0sty]

I am pretty sure at the first press conference Obama said that now is not the time to have a discussion on gun control. I agree with him at that time. As the days pass and those kids are buried, we need to look at ourselves and start a discussion on what can be done.

One thing I wish both sides could at least consider is that each believes what they do because they think it's the right thing to do. I hate it when the left stereotypes gun owners and whack job doomsday prepper/militia types and when the right thinks that they left wants to take their guns away so they can enslave the population.

The big thing we need to address is how we deal with mental illness. Sure, some of the people who commit mass murder are sane, but many are not.

Look, everyone wants to prevent these tragedies from happening again. We need to come together as a nation and see if we can find a way forward.

Oh and for the record, if the absolute first thing you thought of after hearing the news was "oh shit, they are going to take away my guns" and not about the horror those student, teachers and families went through, then you do have a problem.

But if you ask me, when the first reaction by Obama/Liberals is to use these tragic shootings as a springboard for shoving their gun control agendas through Congress shows that their priorities as human beings are the equivalent of black holes of suckage...

[Sierra]

My first reaction was to cry. Yes, I cried. I have kids, as most of us here do I imagine, an immediately the thought is for those poor babies and their parents. How their families will forge ahead, I do not know.

But I do have a problem with the guns blame game. Let's react to a crime committed using stolen guns by enacting more laws that the next person who steals guns will ignore. And I was disappointed that the NRA closed their Facebook page, because I felt that we members should have had a forum to discuss this tragedy for all other NRA members to see. Not because I was so terribly concerned that tomorrow I wouldn't be able to buy a gun. I felt it was correct to not issue a statement, but cowardly to remove our ability to come together as gun owners after this horrific act.

Just my opinion.

[Woods Walker]

".....and when the right thinks that they left wants to take their guns away...."

Umm.....that's because THEY DO! And that's not a paranoid fantasy on my part either because I been watching them attempting to
do that exact thing for over 4 decades. It will not be an all out ban. They are smart enough to know that wouldn't fly. No, it will and IS being done little by little. Incrementalism. Sneaky. Like an anti-gun rider attached to a bill that has NOTHING to do with guns or crime that get voted on at the last minute in the middle of the night. That's how the dishonest work when they know they can't tell the TRUTH about what they want.

I cannot vouch for their motives. Most of them I believe are truly good hearted, concerned people who just don't want to see anymore people hurt. Unfortunately they also know NOTHING about firearms and the reality of what having them in the hands of good, decent Americans does to INCREASE public and personal safety. On the other side, yes, I DO think there are some on the left who want a disarmed America so that they can rule us with massive, centralized, totalitarian government.

What disgusts me more than anything is that the bodies of these slaughtered children weren't even cold yet and the liberal left was already trotting out the same old ineffective, FAILED anti-gun laws that have never worked anywhere or anytime they've been tried in America and coming out with just flat out LIES about firearms.

Just today Obama made a speech calling for...guess what...AN ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN! Who'da thunk it? And then out of the other side of his mouth he states that he's all for the individual American right to keep and bear arms. ????? WTH???? You can't have it both ways!

What he's NOT saying is that HE wants to get to define what "ARMS" are, and what THE GOVERNMENT will "LET US" have!!! He also made the statement that American is seeing an "epidemic of gun violence" which is a complete lie. Gun violence is at a 10 to 20 year LOW, and this is after the Clinton era assault weapons ban expired, AND 49 of 50 states have some form of concealed carry. I know for the people of Sandy Hook gun violence can get no worse than this, but the fact still remains and Obama lied about it.....again...

Points to consider:

9 out of 10 people couldn't accurately define what an "assault rifle" even IS.

The exact same politicians that want to limit OUR ability to bear arms and defend ourselves have a cadre of ARMED SECURITY for themselves and their families AT OUR EXPENSE! Can you say, HYPOCRITE?

The "assault weapon" used in the Sandy Hook tragedy would have been LEGAL TO OWN IN CONNECTICUT even under the old expired assault weapons ban. If they do pass a law that would INCLUDE this weapon, then most all of the semi-auto and detachable clip rifles and shotguns used for deer hunting will be banned too. (Not that the 2A has anything to do with hunting...)

When the story first broke, it was reported that the shooter used 2 semi-auto handguns. Had this been the case they'd be calling for a handgun ban right now and not an assault weapon ban.

What REALLY needs to be considered is what Lt. Col. Dave Grossman says about this very topic.....and he said this in 2010.
http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter ... is-denial/


And just for the record, as a father of a grown daughter, my first reaction when I heard what happened were tears also. I could not and cannot even now even begin to put myself in the shoes of those parents.

[kellory]

There's never a good time to implement the types of gun control our liberal administration would like to see.

I know it's been said many times, but passing laws limiting access to guns absolutely will not curb any violence. If a person is going to buy a gun with the sole intention of committing a crime, they are going to find one whether it's purchased legally or not. If they can't get a gun, they'll use something else.

The only type of gun control that can help to prevent/minimize these types of occurrences is to put guns INTO the hands of responsible and sane people, then teach them how to properly control that weapon with training not only on the range, but also in combat skills.

It is impossible to prevent these types of things from happening. There is evil in the world. Evil will do whatever it can to destroy that which is good in the world. The only way to minimize the effect of these attacks is to be ready for when they happen and be able to respond in a manner that will end the threat.

download (5).gif (1.22 KiB) Viewed 139 times

Well said, and IMHO, true. or to paraphrase, for evil to gain a foothold, good men need do nothing.

[Woods Walker]

I second the applause!

What's doubly tragic about this is that this kind of horrific attack on innocent children in a school is NOT new, and with the way the world has been since 9-11 we should have expected something like this to happen at a school sooner or later. If it wasn't some unhinged individual then it would very well could have been some Islamo-Loonie or some other militant nut-case out to make some rediculous "point". We should have increased security and developed defensive strategies for schools a long time ago.

In fact when this sad story first broke, it was reported that there may have been TWO shooters, one was dead, and the other was being searched for. My initial thought to that was "terrorist attack". Obviously it wasn't, and to the deceased and their familes it doesn't make any difference, but it's STILL a scenario we need to prepare for because it's coming. That's the world we now live in.

[kellory]

I second the applause!

What's doubly tragic about this is that this kind of horrific attack on innocent children in a school is NOT new, and with the way the world has been since 9-11 we should have expected something like this to happen at a school sooner or later. If it wasn't some unhinged individual then it would very well could have been some Islamo-Loonie or some other militant nut-case out to make some rediculous "point". We should have increased security and developed defensive strategies for schools a long time ago.

In fact when this sad story first broke, it was reported that there may have been TWO shooters, one was dead, and the other was being searched for. My initial thought to that was "terrorist attack". Obviously it wasn't, and to the deceased and their familes it doesn't make any difference, but it's STILL a scenario we need to prepare for because it's coming. That's the world we now live in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... W6b-voc-Ds

[luvhuntin]

There is one simple fact I have hours worth of opinions on I`m 44 I was born a year before we walked on the moon in 1969. I lived in a small town 15 to 20k was the population

Now on any given day on any school year if you wanted to go to war on the undefended you had at least 12 different vehicles that had weapons in them proudly displayed in the BACK WINDOW with all the ammo you wanted. How did we get to this point at this time in history? to hear a left leaning politician talk about those days society was so much less enlightened full of the worst kinds of people! HUH? REALLY?

Alot of these politicians are the same age or way older than I am and their answer for this is to curtail or eliminate the 2 A? even Joe Lieberman has flipped completely on this issue he of all politicians should know better. I do! I`m 100% German! You ever hear stories told about what it was like to be German in the late 30`s and 40`s in America? Did`nt matter that your family was here way before WW I. So maybe my heritage is part of the reason i hold ALL of the constitution so dearly and why I cried so hard the night of the shooting The 2 Amendment is the only thing that has`nt changed Since it was written! But yet we blame it.............sad.

[fr0sty]

Serious question, do you think there should be a limit to what rate of fire should be allowed to the general public? That is a combination of semi auto and how large the magazine is, I suppose. Limits, no limits?

Is it worth it to limit how many rounds a person with malicious intent can put out, or is that too much of an infringement on the second amendment?

Here is a link to some interesting history on mass shootings. http://news.discovery.com/history/mass- ... 21220.html

[Woods Walker]

Do you really think that this incident wouldn't have occured if the shooter's clip held less rounds? Really?

During the last assault weapons ban the max clip anyone could have was limited to 10 rounds, thereby making the 14 shot clips I have on my S&W 39 illegal to buy (but NOT to possess, BTW...). So if I were bent on mayhem I could either think,

"Oh no! I can't murder as many as I can with a 14 shot clip! I guess I won't do it afterall."

Or...

"Oh no! I can only use a 10 shot clip instead of the 14 to murder people with. I'll have to bring TWO of my 10 shot clips!"

And what about the fact that the rifle used in the recent shootings would have been LEGAL even under the old expired assault weapons ban? So we have to make the new ban even more restrictive? The old ban didn't make any difference in crime and this one won't either unless you make everyone turn in the banned weapons they would now have (which AIN'T gonna happen....)

Anytime you start limiting the 2A by restricting or limiting what "arms" people can have then you are setting the stage for that definition to include everything but a slingshot. First you make it 10 shot clips. When they continue to kill with that then it will be 5 shot clips. When that doesn't work then what, single shots? As soon as you hear an anti-gun person start using words like, "reasonable", "sane", or (and this for me is the scariest), "why do you NEED such and such....", RUN THE OTHER WAY!!!! "Need?" Why do I need? Who in the heck are THEY tell tell me or anyone else what we "need"????

I understand that you want to do something. We all do. But believe me, the BEST thing we can do is increase the security in our schools, and begin to make SOME provision for having ARMED security in schools. Just like they do in courthouses. I find that sad and depressing, but that's our world.

My grown daughter and I were discussing this yesterday (she's the one who sent me the David Grossman article), and made the comment that,

"Gee, Dad, when I was in school I was much safer then in our home which was full of guns than at school."

I never thought of that, but she's right.

[JPH]

I've waited to comment on this topic because I think both sides are all too quick to argue over the dead, and advance their agenda instead of act in the interest of humanity. It sickens me, but Frosty is asking some great questions.

Let me be clear that I believe the ultimate answer to the evil lurking is our society is mass conversion. Unless we as individuals hunger for an increase in faith, hope and charity in our own hearts, our homes, our communities and our world, evil will continue to increase. As long as our culture thrives on materialism, pornography, and violence, no one should be surprised by such horror. That being said, we must slow the bleeding in the meantime.

I do think it is time to explore reasonable limitations on the amount of firepower an individual can bring to bear. My suggestion is a nation wide limitation on magazine capacity. My law would limit any and all civilian firearms to a capacity of 6 rounds before being forced to stop and reload. First an immediate ban on the sale of any mag/gun that does not comply. Second, we offer an 18 month period in which anyone in possession of a magazine with a capacity of 5 or a revolver with a capacity over 6 to have their mag/gun permanently altered to meet the new limits at government expense. From that point forward, the possession of any mag/gun in violation is a felony.

Let's be honest, five in the well and one in the chamber is an ample amount of firepower for any legitimate civilian use and it would slow down a mass shooter considerably. It's not THE solution but it is, in my opinion, a reasonable measure. Coupled with creating defensive barriers in public spaces and enhancing local police officers ability to engage these types of killers, we can save lives and continue to maintain gun ownership.