NRA News Conference at 11:00 AM Fri. (TODAY) Will broadcast on NRA website.

This could be a good time for the TSA to expand and justify arming themselves by going into the schools. The police chiefs will not have to worry about man power and the fed gov. can take a little bit more control! The sheep will feel secure again and everything will be good. Until the next insane murderer comes forward!
 
best one i've heard yet:



edit:. oh, this too:

3sajdl.jpg

Ahhh...Philosoraptor...is there nothing he doesn't know?

Seriously, the game is not the problem. I have an 8 year old girl who loves Battlefield 2142. She talks about her score and how many kills she got in a round. I ask her, did you kill anyone for real? She looks at me with that 8 year old girl look (you know the one...'are you stupid"?)

It's up to the parents to teach their kids right and wrong, fact from fiction and fantasy from reality.
 
Did LaPierre not take any Q's? Wish he would and shove their shit back in their face. When you're on the right side, there's nothing to hide, from.
ROTFLMAO!! The funny one would be Wayne. Lordy, what world do you live in? (That's a rhetorical question)[rofl]

- - - Updated - - -

Dummies...been better off saying nothing.[popcorn]
Pipe down, then.
 
I'm right there with you, but it didn't sound like they were advocating the military itself in schools, just retired and inactive reserves/NG as a source of people with firearms training.

That was my interpretation as well, that they were citing these retired soldiers as an excellent pool of experience to hire from, not that they were the ONLY source with the ability to use guns.
 
I'm glad to see the NES denizens are still living in their shrinking world of irrelevant gibberish. Please, please, please, don't change until after November, 2016. Good night and good luck. [wink]
 
So Signation you have been quick to criticize but have yet to offer a solution that I can see just a bunch of taunts.

+1. I keep seeing bullshit rhetorical taunts and namecalling by Signation, but nothing of substance. Come on Sig, since you seem to have this all figured out, and we're all so f'ing stupid, why don't you share your vast insight and enlighten us?
 
This may be a stupid question, but I don't recall how, when, or even why gun free zones were enacted into law. Can someone explain that? Was there an incident that spawned the GFZs?
 
+1. I keep seeing bullshit rhetorical taunts and namecalling by Signation, but nothing of substance. Come on Sig, since you seem to have this all figured out, and we're all so f'ing stupid, why don't you share your vast insight and enlighten us?

Stop feeding the troll man! There will always be people like signation on forums claiming shit and not having the substance to back it up. But he just failed at even a troll level so I seriously doubt that he knows anything about current events. Happy Friday night everyone. [cheers]
 
True, not exactly what he said, but there is always the undertone that only trained, certified "professionals" are acceptable for handling firearms.

I'm just not sure we want to go down this road, look where it got us with airports and the TSA. Do we really want our schools locked down like prisons? Metal detectors, body scanners, guards with submachine guns and body armor? We shouldn't trade liberty for security. I think our society in general needs some improvement, not militarization.

I think the government would love to do that. In fact they would love to have there own agency for public school protection. I think if the NRA gets in first it will be better for all of us. Then eddie eagle for elementary, NRA home firearm safety for middle or high school.
 
+1. I keep seeing bullshit rhetorical taunts and namecalling by Signation, but nothing of substance. Come on Sig, since you seem to have this all figured out, and we're all so f'ing stupid, why don't you share your vast insight and enlighten us?


This.. Insults do not help anyone and will not convince anyone to see your point of view...

Neg rep inbound.... SigNation..
 
My letter to the NRA:
Greetings,
This is my first ever email to the NRA. I am a life member (*******44).

I write as I appreciate the content of the speeches made today that I was able to view when they occurred. I was impressed at to the professionalism that was shown even as ignorant protestors tried to distract form the meaningful words of Wayne.
I am however concerned that the concept of blaming video games and movies was ever presented. This argument is as much of a logical fallacy as blaming murder on a tool that looks “scary.”
I was also disappointed that the fact of up to 2.5 Million violent crimes being thwarted by the armed citizen was not a key component of this speech. Every day the first responder is the average citizen. When that average citizen is a lawful gun owner, the incident of violent crime is demonstrably lower than otherwise.

We need to overcome the indoctrination that guns are bad, and help everyone remember that a defenseless populate is the fertile ground of tyranny and crime. The unalienable right, as guaranteed by the second amend of the Constitution of these United States has nothing to do with hunting, or sporting , but everything to do with protecting the individual and thereby society against crime and tyranny.

Please don’t let this message become lost.


In liberty.
 
I picked up that the expense associated with arming our schools will cost in the neighborhood of 4 Billion. That's a freaking rounding error for our fools in government.
 
Especially when the holes are the ones asking the questions. There is no way the MSM is going to approach the NRA with a fair question. Any question they would have asked LaPierre would have been of the "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" variety. Best thing he could have done is not play that game. When the deck is stacked against you, don't play.

We need some of this in Massachusetts!

I'm right there with you, but it didn't sound like they were advocating the military itself in schools, just retired and inactive reserves/NG as a source of people with firearms training.

He also mentioned "qualified citizens", or something like that; plus training to bring people up to speed (think residents, teachers, custodians, principals...)



Some of the reaction:
Baltimore priest organizes vigil for gun victims, new laws "New Year, New Gun Laws" theme of event on National Mall

The National Rifle Association's response to the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School — that is, placing blame for it on everyone and everything except the NRA and its all-guns-all-the-time credo — was utterly predictable. But this time it won't matter.


N.J. not so keen on NRA's plan for armed guards in schools

Democrats Slam NRA's Response To School Shooting
 
Last edited:
So, who does the NRA represent? You the gun owner? Maybe indirectly. In light of the article quoted in part below, what will happen to the NRA if the gun manufacturers are successfully pressured to abandon the NRA. Discuss rationally, if you can.

.......Granted, if you believe that what LaPierre was trying to do today was to sincerely join in a national conversation over school shootings, or offer a coherent set of preventative policy options, or even just demonstrate some baseline sensitivity for the lives that were lost, it is easy to see why you'd deem LaPierre's press conference to be an ineffective, tone-deaf failure. But what you should remember that the National Rifle Association does not exist to offer sensible public policy or participate in conversations or pretend to be sensitive about tragedies. The National Rifle Association exists to assist the manufacturers of guns and gun-related accoutrements in selling guns and gun-related accoutrements to people. That is their job, summed up, in its entirety.
The NRA are lobbyists who represent a bunch of gun retailers, and this is what lobbyists do -- they help their clients sell their products. And every action that LaPierre took today can and should be viewed through that prism.......
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/nra-wayne-lapierre_n_2348277.html?utm_hp_ref=politics



 
So, who does the NRA represent? You the gun owner? Maybe indirectly. In light of the article quoted in part below, what will happen to the NRA if the gun manufacturers are successfully pressured to abandon the NRA. Discuss rationally, if you can.

.......Granted, if you believe that what LaPierre was trying to do today was to sincerely join in a national conversation over school shootings, or offer a coherent set of preventative policy options, or even just demonstrate some baseline sensitivity for the lives that were lost, it is easy to see why you'd deem LaPierre's press conference to be an ineffective, tone-deaf failure. But what you should remember that the National Rifle Association does not exist to offer sensible public policy or participate in conversations or pretend to be sensitive about tragedies. The National Rifle Association exists to assist the manufacturers of guns and gun-related accoutrements in selling guns and gun-related accoutrements to people. That is their job, summed up, in its entirety.
The NRA are lobbyists who represent a bunch of gun retailers, and this is what lobbyists do -- they help their clients sell their products. And every action that LaPierre took today can and should be viewed through that prism.......
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/nra-wayne-lapierre_n_2348277.html?utm_hp_ref=politics



24607052.jpg

^SigNation gave me a rep point for this. [troll] [pot]
 
Last edited:
I think the government would love to do that. In fact they would love to have there own agency for public school protection. I think if the NRA gets in first it will be better for all of us. Then eddie eagle for elementary, NRA home firearm safety for middle or high school.

The NRA is not going to "get into" our liberal school systems. More likely, the white house would look at this as an opportunity, offered up by the NRA itself. We would have expanded government authority with the "backing of gun owners nationwide".

"Great idea NRA, we'll assign the TSA to every school ASAP, thanks for the idea!"
 
So, who does the NRA represent? You the gun owner? Maybe indirectly. In light of the article quoted in part below, what will happen to the NRA if the gun manufacturers are successfully pressured to abandon the NRA. Discuss rationally, if you can.

.......Granted, if you believe that what LaPierre was trying to do today was to sincerely join in a national conversation over school shootings, or offer a coherent set of preventative policy options, or even just demonstrate some baseline sensitivity for the lives that were lost, it is easy to see why you'd deem LaPierre's press conference to be an ineffective, tone-deaf failure. But what you should remember that the National Rifle Association does not exist to offer sensible public policy or participate in conversations or pretend to be sensitive about tragedies. The National Rifle Association exists to assist the manufacturers of guns and gun-related accoutrements in selling guns and gun-related accoutrements to people. That is their job, summed up, in its entirety.
The NRA are lobbyists who represent a bunch of gun retailers, and this is what lobbyists do -- they help their clients sell their products. And every action that LaPierre took today can and should be viewed through that prism.......
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/nra-wayne-lapierre_n_2348277.html?utm_hp_ref=politics





I trust the NRA to represent "us" on this about as much as I do Blitz1 with Roofies.
 
According to the Huffington Post article, the assigned guard at Columbine was outside the school and the other "guard" was a nearby motorcycle officer. Both shot at Harris from a distance then, when Harris went back inside, they stayed outside, waiting for backup, a policy which is changing.

Lott's comment was that a recognizable (uniformed) officer would be an immediate target. This is true. A uniformed police presence would also require choke points, metal detectors, etc, all aimed at creating an "impermeable" perimeter. (which of course wouldn't be impermeable at all)
The costs would be high, in many cases requiring modifications to the school itself.
There are about 100,000 public schools in the US with a small number of shooting incidents a year. Any locally-funded solution of this sort will quickly be dropped as soon as the cost is balanced against the likelihood of an incident in the first place.

Wayne's most important message has been lost in the outrage over the video game accusation and the armed guard suggestion.
That message was that gun-free zones are a really bad idea and in fact increase the danger.
 
Back
Top Bottom