Front Page  »  

Love letter to the NRA

April 5, 2013

Pete EvansOPINION By PETE EVANS

Recently the United Nations, those black booted thugs the neo cons hate, passed an arms control treaty (opposed by the National Rifle Association and its selfish allies) in an attempt to manage the obscene weapons traffic over international borders. This huge business has brought unimaginable terror, misery and death to countless millions of people. We have a similar situation here at home to contend with.

For 50 years I’ve watched the gun lobby, led by the NRA, undermine Congressional legislation by frantic lobbying in order to make money from the fear it foments. I have watched in horror as first our defenseless people, including lots of children, are murdered by misdirected cowards and have then seen the merciless and fallacious cowardly NRA evade all responsibility and actually blame the sane minds in government and society of attempting to subvert the constitution.

Guns are everywhere. Many guns and bullets are not regulated and much of the feeble regulation in existence is not effective or enforced. “Until 2006, the president had the power to install a director of the firearms bureau without Congressional approval. But under pressure from gun lobbyists, Congress changed the law that year to require Senate confirmation. Since then, the Senate has failed to confirm any nominee by either President Bush or Mr. Obama as senators who support gun rights have used their powers to delay nomination votes; Mr. Jones is the bureau’s fifth acting director since 2006.” This has led to disorganized regulation and crippled law enforcement.

We all know which party is primarily responsible for reducing or eliminating any safety regulation in this country; they are the darlings of the gun lobby. All the biggest (in fact almost all) donations went to right wing republicans like Bachmann and Boner, though plenty of Dems have been stampeded by the virulent NRA as well.

There is only one exact similarity at all the gun crimes, suicides and accidents in this country or any other. Guns. Only guns. Often the gun is a killing machine such as auto loader long gun or hand gun with large magazine. Sometimes the killer is crazed (whatever that means), sometimes crazy (whatever that means), sometimes just frustrated (like the fruitcake that threatened to shoot anyone who came for his guns (his license to carry was promptly revoked)), sometimes the shooter is just emotionally distraught and the opportunity for disaster was nearby in the form of a gun.

We have all heard the tired old evasions from the NRA and it’s minions-“guns don’t kill, people do.” “Only the mentally ill and criminals kill people.”  “The second Amendment is sacred and gives us the right to have any armaments we want.”

What a load of bull. The liars that spew that line of junk are counting on the public to be dupes, and idiots. I challenge any reader: where would you cut off the weapons that civilians should be able to have? .22 single shot rifle, .303 Enfield deer rifle, BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle), bushmaster (semi automatic assault rifle with large magazine), 50 cal machine gun, RPG (rifle propelled grenade launcher- great for bringing down planes), bazooka, small anti tank gun, stinger missile, small helicopter gunship (with a lovely mini/gun of course), F-16 Fighter plane, light destroyer for your bathtub pleasure, aircraft carrier, nuclear sub- what? Where do you cut off the debate on our frantic right to have (thereby lose to theft by stranger or relative) killing machines without any training, license or sense? Wait, I forgot to offer Sherman tanks or Bradley fighting machines. Did I mention a small tactical nuke to take care of that nuisance liberal down the street? How about one of those for the little lady for Xmas? So far I have not heard of anyone on the crazy side who has ever been able, or willing, to answer that simple question, they just want their guns!!!

I think the little people, with perhaps a small appendage they hope to enhance by clinging to a large gun, are just too greedy to listen to any sensible response to a society gone nuts with violence and deadly weapons. All I ever hear is ‘me, me, me’ from the gun nuts when the subject of reasonable gun control is discussed. What a bunch of babies, can’t see beyond their crummy little shortsighted horizons.

What about Gabby Giffords and the others shot to pieces in Tucson? What about all the school kids shot in all those attacks from Columbine to Newtown? The moviegoers in Colorado? What about all the people standing in line in the post offices — former historical favorite place to murder a bunch of innocents? Those who would cling to their guns with ‘their cold, dead hands’ have no conscience; they are sociopaths who have no remorse, shame or guilt.

Like so many other public debates truth has become a stranger, this has degenerated to a simple power struggle between good and evil. I can only hope that for once, good may triumph. We must discover a way to get rid of the avalanche of guns and the idiotic attitudes that have clouded our judgment.

I would like to get in a comment about our sheriff, who has recently licked the ground our local tea party fanatics walk on by pledging to not enforce any federal gun control plan. Good work, top cop! Violate your oath, become a crook in one foolish step, endanger your deputies. It has been my impression that most responsible law enforcement historically favors getting the machine guns and armor piecing ammo) off the streets so that a few more cops will survive any altercations with angry civilians.

“There is no reason that a peaceful society based on the rule of law needs its citizenry armed with 30-round [ammunition] magazines,” states Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck during a March 2, 2011 news conference.” Such magazines transform a gun “into a weapon of mass death rather than a home protection-type device,” Beck notes.) July 13, 2009—After a birthday party shootout involving a semiautomatic AK-47 in which two young people were killed and 10 wounded, Miami Police Chief John Timoney tells ABC News, “For me it’s a no-brainer. These are weapons of war. Under no circumstance do they belong in the cities of America. Now police officers are facing—and citizens are facing—these assault weapons. If we don’t stop it now, what’s it going to look like 10 years from now? Rambo becomes reality.”

I’m so glad I voted for an honest sheriff candidate, a real man, Joe Cortez.

Recently that solidly American terrorist organization, the NRA, suggested in their latest evasion of the slightest responsibility in the carnage that teachers should be trained by the NRA to carry and operate weapons (New rep). What a joke, most teachers do not want that responsibility; they are teachers, not killers. But it led me to dream up a realistic compromise in this dysfunctional debate with mental midgets. What if the NRA (in league with the gummint) trained and licensed every gun owner in the land to safely own, protect and discharge a gun in an attempt to make sure all were mentally competent and emotionally secure enough to actually handle the great responsibility? Combine that with severe penalties for anyone in possession of a gun without said license. What about that, mister hot shot, gun-toting fire breathing gun lobby? Your goods, weapons and bullets, cost us billions each year, while you make billions in profits. Its time for you to get off the corporate welfare line and start paying your way. You are just another fat cat corporate thief feeding at the public trough- pay your way or get out of the way.

The NRA is even against background checks to make sure the absolute fruitcakes/criminals don’t get guns. It opposes ANY attempt to reduce the carnage; it is adamantly against any reform of our nightmare system. It opposes any research into the ramifications of all the unregulated guns in society. The NRA should be outlawed, for it is an outlaw organization. Many NRA members are law abiding, sensible and caring citizens. Many are not. The former should quit that outlaw group and form another with a heart.

I know many respondents will try to kick me into the middle of next week. I urge the sane readers to follow the lack of logic, lack of empathy for victims, and general lunacy of the landslide of vitriol that will spew forth from others. Some will say this message is too angry, too confrontational. Tell that to the parents, children, sisters, brothers and friends of those shot up by guns in our schools, theaters, homes, office buildings and streets. Someone out there come up with answers; I did, where’s yours?


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


328 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Pete, never have shot anyone and I never will shoot anyone unless it is a life and death situation to protect myself or my family. Why should I give up that right because of criminals? They certainly will not follow the law! So many times in history when people are disarmed, tyrants sprout up and prey on the weak aka disarmed law abiding folks. Say all you want, but your arguments are hollow, uninformed, and not based upon facts or sound reasoning.


Where is YOUR outrage at Obama and Holder for gun running with Fast and Furious? 4000 guns to known criminals paid for by tax dollars. Don’t lecture us about reason or the NRA your sick heron have blood on their hands far more than the NRA


0

He’s a devout Democrat (no democrat cause he hasn’t and won’t support). Evans will never be outraged but rather is a big supporter of Obama, Holder, Napolitano and the others trying to make our Country a model state for the United States while destroying America, our Constitution, Bill of Rights, Immigration Laws, Healthcare and Right to own our guns let the criminals and ILLEGALS come from very corner of the world and give them all the rights they need for a happy existence and us taxpayers pick up their bill. Pete Evans has a history of being radical, just Google him and look at his history. This article is the same old insane offered by the democrats. Nothing new here!


0

Agreed. He is more of a DICTATOR’S advocate than anything.


0

Here is my position, Pete:


The federal government should do NOTHING about the massacres that occur. Let the local authorities handle it. The federal government should provide for the common defense, if the massacre is part of an invasion, then the can “do something” – other than that, the LESS the Federal Government does, the better for everyone – even “the children.”


Where do we draw the line for firearm ownership? Nowhere. Anyone can own anything that one can carry as a defensive weapon. A bazooka? YES. A shoulder-fired missile? YES. ANYTHING. Period. Everyone who has their rights as a citizen still intact. I also think we should build our own (I do) and not have to tell anyone what we have (I don’t). I’ve done this for years, and have never committed a crime, with or without weapons.


Why should I not be allowed to keep what I’ve had all these years, then? Because some unstable person did something bad 3,000 miles away? What kind of logic is that?


How about we say liberalism is a mental disorder, because some liberal across the globe went insane and killed people. Should the authorities show up at your door because you have taken liberal positions in the past?


How about we ban the word “fire” – since, while we have freedom of speech, the word “fire” could be used in a crowded theater. So if you say the F-word, you should be locked up – for all our safety (especially if we’re in the aforementioned crowded theater).


Now, I know that “logic” and “facts” rarely are useful for emotionally-charged topics, but this is EXACTLY why we have a representative republic and NOT a democracy. Emotion often clouds judgment. Take a breather. Sleep on it, etc.


0

One of the morons that believes gun control will stop or reduce crime. Oh and blame the NRA too. What we really need is moron control.


0

r0y, you say, “Why should I not be allowed to keep what I’ve had all these years, then?” Who is trying to take what you already have away? Or did you mean “prevent me from buying more?”


0

Lynette, I once thought you capable of thought. If you cannot see down the road that “gun control” leads, then you are either ignorant, a moron, or deceitful at best. You really think that national registries do not lead to confiscation? Have you been reading the press from NY or NJ where guns are being seized for the silliest of reasons? (I’d link some stories, but my last few posts where I do get moderated out).


Search for “gun seizure” or “gun confiscation” and tell me “they aren’t going to take your guns”


Please. A large, centralized, over-controlling government ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT want to take it’s citizen’s guns, nor does it have any wet dreams about confiscation. Sure. I have some swampland I’d like to sell you, too!


0

“Ignorant,” “moron”—gee, thanks for keeping this discussion on a respectful level. If name calling is all that you have…..


I have tried to find out about New York gun confiscation, but I am on page 5 of a Google search and am only finding tea party and far right wing blog entries as sources (angrywhitedude.com is my favorite nutty example so far). So can you point me to a credible news source for what happened in New York?


New Jersey did a buy back program, is that what you mean?


What is your position on putting more money into mental health services?


0

Still waiting…..


0

The NRA is not some separate entity. It is us, gun owners. So when you say “the NRA wants…” you really need to say “gun owners want…” Your emotion has seriously flawed your logic on this. I commend your passion, and it would be great to see you direct that kind of energy into something that actually will matter and help the society at large.


Restrictions to self defense never end well for those restricted. Period. People keep trying, but fail to ultimately factor in the human factor. This whole gun-ban idiocy is an attractant for fools, nothing more.


The Road We’re On, indeed. Scary stuff.


0

Seems to be massive confusion in the pro gun sector. Some of you say the kindly NRA is simply a training group and would support preventing criminals and other undesirables from having guns. Others oppose any registration or screening.


Most are inflamed by my audacity to attempt to illuminate some solutions to the carnage waged against our children.


The article I wrote had some back up sites in it that were removed. Here is one that is particularly important; I hope the reader can follow the obvious political message- follow the money.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2013/01/map_the_gun_lobby_s_campaign_contributions_by_congressional_district.html.


Also, I asked very clearly and have pointed it out again over and over in these posts that I challenged the reader to come up with a workable solution. I even proposed a plan using the NRA. Nothing, none of you have anything to ad but whining about ‘your rights’. What about the children?


None of you have suggested a reasonable cut off point for lethal weapons in the hands of civilians- none of you answered that question either.


So here we are: No NRA fan has any idea what to do other than castigate those who are working on solutions. None of you has any problem with the NRA subverting our democracy by stampeding our elected reps with fear and lies. None of you want to do anything about the slaughter; you just want your guns. I covered that too (must be maddening to have all your arguments and strategy exposed in the article before you could even get to it).


This is exactly what I meant by a classic good vs evil struggle.


0

I have a question. You are pretty upset about law abiding citizens owning guns. Do you get this upset about criminals? I can’t tell from your article or post here. You go on and on in both about people with guns but as you make the assumption that they have no empathy for victums of school shootings, you leave me with the idea that you do have empathy, for criminals in general. I mean what else could I think? You don’t seem to make ANY suggestion ANYPLACE about prosecuting the REAL criminals.


Or in your solutions, do you realize the school shooter in Dec. had only handguns? Rest were in trunk. Your solution wouldn’t have changed a thing.


Or how about Googling the phrase, man uses car as weapon.


There is evil in the world. Always has been, always will be. Punish all the law abiding people as you suggest. It won’t change anything. Evil will still happen.


Or better yet how about getting people that are close to these types to say something. Like the mother of the Dec. shooting. Or how about the parents of the Columbine shooters?


Oh and on the subject of Columbine, did you see how one of the students that was there feels about gun control? He was a speaker someplace in last couple monthes and had some good points, which I’m sure you don’t want to hear.


0

“…None of you have suggested a reasonable cut off point for lethal weapons in the hands of civilians- none of you answered that question either…”


Most elements of the National Firearms Act of 1934. I don’t think that most people should own fully automatic machine guns like an M-16. There is a world of difference between an M-16 which can fully automatically fire in excess of 900 rounds per minute and an AR-15 that might be able to fire 90 rounds per minute if someone had a very fast finger and was trying to shoot for speed rather than accuracy.


On the other hand it’s absolutely nuts to make suppressors (“silencers”) so difficult and expensive to procure which is also part of the NFA. Most foreign countries require the use of suppressors to reduce noise pollution. Only in movies do suppressors make firearms silent — they simply make them less noisy.


0

I appreciate some actual positions, finally. It is from positions that we can negotiate solutions to problems.

I have heard about severe penalties for silencers, and I agree with your assessment about their abilities, noting like the movies. One thing about any weapon that can fire lots of shots quickly, in the hands of criminals or the untrained or the highly emotional or the overly frightened one might ‘spray’ bullets all over, to disastrous results. We don’t see it in the movies but when the good guys and bad guys are having a ball with their assault rifles and automatic pistolas they shoot all over the place, throwing up a wall of lead sometimes. In real life that is often catastrophic for a bystander.


Actually, here is the answer to all our worries. In my plan you can have all the guns and ammo you want. Let’s do this up right. Let’s go back to our roots, partway, anyway. Let’s go back 130 years or so. Six shot revolvers, lever action 30-30s. Maybe some shotguns and hunting rifles of the era. Everyone not certified crazy or a criminal gets an automatic ‘carry’ license. No gatling guns, no cannons. Simple, there it is. We get to relive our glorious past and we reduce the carnage to just a few people close by. I’m serious, I would support that all the way. All the other guns will have to be turned in, an impartial ‘smithie’ will determine value and the owners compensated for all the firepower they have accumulated. Anyone caught with an illegal gun gets the death penalty, no exceptions. Surely no one on your side would worry about the last comment, all we hear is shooting intruders.


0

You last line about the death penalty. How about we apply to REAL criminals. Again you go on and on about gun owners but AGAIN, YOU offer no solutions, except your silly anologies of life.


0

Pete: Well, you finally show your true colors. You want to disarm the American public, i.e. get rid of the 2d Amendment.


0

You’re living in a fantasy land. There is no going back 130 or so years ago to six shot revolvers, lever action 30-30s. Maybe some shotguns and hunting rifles of the era.


Then the only ones with semi-auto firearms would be the gov’t and criminals. No thanks!


A confiscation plan like you wish for would lead to a horrible, bloody situation.


0

Pete: Your generalties (“None of you want to do anything about the slaughter”) is one hell of a starting point for constructive discussion. The shouting from the political left is also drowning out the suggestions for taking reasonable steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of people such as the Newtown and Colorado Theater shootings. So here are two simple suggetions that have been made repeatedly by the NRA:


1. Make it easier to include the mentally disturbed in the lists that are checked when background checks are conducted.


2. Prosecute people who make false statements when filling out the forms for background checks.


The shrill tones from the political left starting with Obama and Biden and extending to folks at the grass roots level such as you indicates that the political left is more interested in having another cause celebre to rant about and use to condemn their fellow, law abiding citizens rather than actually address the problem


0

Chris: How about the Republicans in Congress actually letting President Obama appoint a permanent head to the ATF? If you want the federal government to actually “prosecute people who make false statements when filling out the forms for background checks”, then let’s get the federal agency in charge of that situated in place so the real work of the agency can go forward without worrying about when or IF a permanent head will be allowed to be appointed?


0

It’s the Dept. of Justice (AG Holder) which prosecutes violations of federal criminal law. It would be relatively easy to shift resources at the DoJ from other areas, even with the sequester in place. It’s called shifting resources. Furthermore, such prosecutions should be relatively simple since the evidence is readily available in the form of the false statements on documents. But that would be too sober an approach. Much better to create an atmosphere that generates the type of garbage that passes for political discussion on this issue.


0

Just another diatribe from the founder of Occupy SLO. That turned out to be a great thing for the community.


0

“There is no reason that a peaceful society based on the rule of law needs its citizenry armed with 30-round [ammunition] magazines,

Where is this “peaceful society” place you speak of? Sure isn’t here in America and were the among the most civilized on earth. Perhaps the author if the above wishful thought and Ping dung chewy the manchild of North Korea can sip some tea and discuss a renewal to his Prozac.


0

Pete: Your article is a prime example for the deterioration of political discourse. You label the NRA a “terrorist organization”, but have you ever even taken a few minutes to check out the NRA website at home.nra.org? The NRA supports responsible exercise of the rights guaranteed to us under the 2nd Amendment. Their training programs are excellent and contribute greatly to responsible handling of firearms. If you could calm down for just a moment, you would find that the NRA favors reasonable regulation, yet you act as if the NRA is against all controls on ownership of all weapons (even nukes??!!).


The NRA supports preventing felons and the mentally disturbed from having access to firearms, but contrary to you and the others on the gun control bandwagon, they do not favor curtailing the rights of millions of law abiding citizens when a more limited approach would go a long way to preventing insane people from purchasing weapons. The NRA does not generally oppose background checks, especially if people with mental illnesses are identified and included in the checks. However, the NRA is opposed to using the tool of background checks to, in effect, create a national registry of gun owners. Expressing concern about the details of background checks is admittedly getting a bit into the weeds. It is, of course, intellectually a lot easier to emotionally vent rather than calmly and rationally deal with specifics.


Pete, your piece shows that you are simply against the express freedom contained in the 2d Amendment. You and the others who would like to disarm law abiding citizens should at least have the courage to say that you favor repealing the 2d amendment instead of trying to nibble it out of existence.


0

Love what you said.


Here is the problem. Some people think about how they feel about it. And the rest of us just think.


0

Remember when you were in school chrisinpaso? Maybe it was like when I was in school—some kid messes up and the whole class got punished. How it worked was less kids messed up because they’d get thumped by the other kids. Maybe that is what is missing—community and the censure of the good guys against the mess-up guys. Do you report or talk to careless gun owners?


You say, “The NRA supports preventing felons and the mentally disturbed from having access to firearms,” but do they lobby for monies to be spent on mental health, or support funding that exists or support legislation that does this? I mean we can support that too as individuals, but unless there is action, like money or votes to push the policies forward, it is just more words. The NRA has LOTS of money. What is it doing?


As for felons, HOW do they support keeping guns out of those hands if there are no background checks, say at gun shows?


0

Lynette: Your idea about punishing everyone is diametrically opposed to the rule of law, the mainstay of our country. As ar as careless gun owners go, yes, I have reported instances where neighbors were popping ground squirrels with a 22. I am not an expert on firearms regulation, but I believe that people who sell guns on a commercial basis at gun shows are subject to the same regulations as gun shops and that most of the people selling guns at gun shows are commercial dealers. The 40% figure repeatedly cited by Obama for gun sales without background checks has been debunked by the Washington post at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-continued-use-of-the-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/04/01/002e06ce-9b0f-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_blog.html .


The whole subject is much more coplex than the politicicians would have us believe. As is so often the case, man politicians are promoting measures that would have no material impact on gun violence but are great for making a political splash and demonizing their opponents while failing to address some of the more mundane points that could be changed to make background checks more efficient such as making it easier to include mentallly disturned people on lists searched in background checks.


0

chrisinpaso, I was just making an observation on how human nature works. It doesn’t have to be punishing everyone, just people looking out to keep the renegades in line.


Seems if gun owners were concerned about stopping gun violence, the NRA itself, of all institutions! would have done some politicking of their own to watch out for safety and look out after their own interests so the future of gun support didn’t come down to this painful argument.


Obama’s facts are two decades old because the NRA has stopped monies for research into gun violence for decades!


Cancer gets researched (lots of drug money to be made from cancer drugs), better football helmets gets researched (all the better to keep players healthy, without brain damage and out of the news which causes negative publicity), better ways to use water get researched (because we are running out and construction will stop/has stopped—read less money—if there is no water to support a community), but not gun violence, no research there!


You’d think the NRA would WANT to do a better job of protecting their brand by pouring money into research about violence and how to stop it. You’d think they WANT to back legislation promoting mental health programs for kids. You’d think they’d WANT to fund big programs to train new gun owners for free, like you buy software sometimes and get some free online lessons. They could do so much better.


But they are fat and lazy like the arrogant heads of auto manufacturing before the crash. Sloppy and not on their toes. Or perhaps they just thought they could sail on by with no one noticing and no money or effort spent to head this off at the pass.


Really, you gun guys and gun gals out there ought to be pretty pi$$ed off at this situation you are facing. It really didn’t have to come to this.


0

This post right here shows how little you understand about the subject at hand.


0

You’re simply ignorant.


The NRA spends many millions on gun safety education and training. It would spend even more if people like you were not so intent in keeping the NRA out of our schools.


It begins with their Eddie Eagle gun safety program for kids. This has been going on for years. The NRA trains and certifies gun safety instructors that live in our local communities. It supports gun education for teen and adults alike. The NRA trains law enforcement as well.


The NRA supports the construction and operation of safe gun ranges. It support organized shooting competition. It supports our nation’s Olympic shooters.


The latest program in development is the NRA’s School Shield Program. While it’s certain to be excellent, we’ll see just how many schools adopt the plan. The NRA does more than anyone (including the US Gov’t) in trying to make gun ownership and use as safe as possible.


0

If that is the case, “The NRA does more than anyone (including the US Gov’t) in trying to make gun ownership and use as safe as possible” as you say, why has it blocked gun research since the mid-90s? Can you answer that please?


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=0


0

FWIW, the NRA is hardly “fat and lazy like the arrogant heads of auto manufacturing before the crash. Sloppy and not on their toes.” as you suggest.


Given the NRA’s size and very model budget (it has neither gun manufactures as big donors not does it have members like Mike Bloomberg willing to write $12M checks like the gun banners do) it is remarkably efficient and effective.


You need to stop making things up as you write. You need to do some research and you need to begin THINKING else you’ll continue to post crap that simply does not pass the smell test.


0

I mean sloppy on their toes that they have not been able to protect their brand. Had they been actively promoting gun research and funding for mental health programs, then this might be a non-discussion. Read what I read:


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/nra-koch-brothers-karl-rove


0

I wish what you said about the NRA was true, I don’t doubt your sincerity, I do doubt their intentions.


0

Why? Do you have any actual information to share or are you just popping off?


0

Pete, here’s a suggestion. Make sure you find out who has a gun in your neighborhood. If a thug breaks into your house or someone tries to rob you, call your neighbor and ask if they will come over to protect you. Nerf guns or small talk will not convince the perp to just walk out the door. They do understand lead poisoning though.


0

Apparently you did not read the part where Pete mentions that he does actually own a few weapons? Look at some of his comments here on the thread and you should see where he mentions that he has owned and shot various firearms; does that really make a difference?


0

Mr. Evans,

Many years ago when my husband and I lived in Los Angeles a very dear friend of ours was murdered in his home executions style. This man went on to kill two other people that night, and also raped a woman.

The gun he used he had bought on the street. He was not a member of the NRA. He was not a republican. He was not insane. He had been in trouble since he was nine years old. This man while serving time in jail on a previous crime had caused the death of an inmate. A very violent man with total disregard for life. His defense did not blame the gun, but the fact that he had a very bad childhood with no father in his life.

There are so many young African American kids killing one another on the streets of Chicago every day , I am sure they are not NRA member. In a gun controlled city, why aren’t you in an uproar over this situation. Where is the news media, why aren’t people in an uproar over these children.

We have security in our malls, banks, airports, events, why not in our schools. During a trip to Hawaii I was told in the airport that the security there were mainly ex military , sounds good to me..


0

Good points, and I’m sorry for your real life experience. Most of us don’t have that to draw on. But the main point in the story is ‘where did the gun come from’ that he got on the street? The more guns, the more available they are. There is no quick fix, no perfect solution. And I never said all, or many, or any, NRA members did any actual killing. In fact I am not against the members, I am against the leadership. The NRA was formed over 150 years ago to promote accuracy and safety. Then it evolved into a pro hunting thing and now it is an arm of the arms industry, promoting unlimited and ghastly over arming of everyone. It has opposed reasonable security checks (thereby allowing criminals and the known insane to get guns by normal purchase).

We still have drunk drivers, we still have racism, we still have child abuse. But we have taken steps to reduce those crimes and bad attitudes. How does one measure the lack of crime due to a single step? Can’t. Those who keep spewing that we have tried gun control and it doesn’t work are just trying to find anything to hide behind. they are not credible or honest.


0
1 2 3 4 5 6 … 10