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...
KimM

Two simple questions? Forgive me. I know I’m stupid. I counted 13 question marks in Pete’s article. Of the following questions, how are we to determine which of these are “simple” and, once that determination has been made, how are we to determine which two we are supposed to answer?


1) “where would you cut off the weapons that civilians should be able to have?”


2) “.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?”


3) “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?”


4) “Did I mention a small tactical nuke to take care of that nuisance liberal down the street?”


5) “How about one of those for the little lady for Xmas?”


6) “What about Gabby Giffords and the others shot to pieces in Tucson?”


7) “What about all the school kids shot in all those attacks from Columbine to Newtown?”


8) “The moviegoers in Colorado?”


9) “What about all the people standing in line in the post offices — former historical favorite place to murder a bunch of innocents?”


10) “‘If we don’t stop it now, what’s it going to look like 10 years from now?'”


11) “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?”


12) “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?”


13) “Someone out there come up with answers; I did, where’s yours?”


This article is long and rambly with many changes of subject. Some of the “solutions” are presented as questions, rather than statements. It is too much for me. How can I wade through all this vitriol and make sense of it? Am I seriously supposed to answer facetious and/or rhetorical questions? And why am I limited to only two? Why am I limited at all? Who set the parameters for this debate anyway? “The NRA is the cause of all of America’s gun woes, therefore we should implement Pete’s ‘solutions’ immediately?” This is a non sequitur. It does not follow. How am I supposed to intellectually grapple with this mess?


First, there is the presumption that the NRA is The Problem, which has not been proved to my satisfaction. Gun violence in America is directly caused by the NRA? Where is the hard evidence for this? People representing the NRA picked up guns and went into Columbine and killed children? (The shooters were NRA leaders?) They shot Gabby Giffords? (The shooter was an NRA leader?) They went into Sandy Hook and shot more children? (The shooter was an NRA leader? I thought he wasn’t even a legal gun owner? Didn’t he steal those guns?) And, if true, then why hasn’t the NRA been disbanded and the leaders of this conspiracy been indicted and put in prison?


Second, there is an illogical leap away from the NRA (The Problem) to solutions that have nothing whatsoever to do with dealing with the NRA (remember, they are The Problem). If the NRA is truly The Problem, then let us brainstorm solutions for dealing with the NRA. But first let’s prove that these people are really guilty. After all, we here in America don’t want to mistakenly convict the innocent.


So it appears there are actually two distinctly different things being discussed in the article:


1) The NRA is the CAUSE of all of America’s gun violence.


2) Passing legislation that affects only individual gun owners (and not the NRA, a non-profit corporation) is the SOLUTION to America’s gun violence.


As I stated before, this is an illogical non sequitur. It does not follow. And it is not possible to respond logically to an illogical premise.


Pete

So what do you want? There is a simple question that anyone could understand.


KimM

Forgive me. I am just a low-quality scumbag who posts here on CalCoastNews. Now that we have my intellectual inferiority established, I would like (in all humbleness, fully aware of my innate limitations) to ask some questions.


If I understand it right (and apparently I’m unable to grasp even the simplest things), Pete’s premise is that the NRA is the cause of all of America’s gun woes?


Yet, a perusal of the NRA’s history would show otherwise:


The NRA once supported gun control

salon.com/2013/01/14/the_nra_once_supported_gun_control


Today I have learned that it’s the height of intellectual honesty to say things like, “that link is stupid” and to call authors/broadcasters “fat bastards” and “nut jobs,” so now I know how wrong it is of me to try and provide information as a jumping-off point for further investigation. So please disregard any links I might post in the future. They are all written by fat bastards and nut jobs. Nothing to see or learn there. They are all as stupid as I am. Forgive me.


r0y

You might just make it in a liberal utopia, KimM! ;-)


justme

Sumbuddy help me out here. Where does the NRA get all that money to pay off Congress? It’s dues from all the animal Thrill Killers couldn’t amount to squat. Gotta be money direct from Colt, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, etc.

Or from the big weapons pimps, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc.


Pete

Still waiting for only two answers to my simple questions in the article. Where would you cut off the arms civilians should be able to have (such as what type-pistol, machine gun, grenade launcher, tank etc)? And what do you propose to reduce the gun carnage?

So far we have 273 comments, my two simple questions have not attracted one credible response.

See what I mean about the quality of those who post here?


choprzrul

Your 2 questions are easily answered when we look to originalist intent.


1. Any weapon issued and used by a modern company of U.S. Army infantry should be available for purchase/ownership for law abiding citizens ( $$ are the limiting factor here I would suspect ). When we look at revolutionary history, the Patriots used ‘Arms’ already owned by citizens to take on the world’s super power. Civilian owned cannons were mounted on merchant ships for example. ‘Arms’ also included swords, knives, clubs, etc that could be used to defend oneself. These are the types of weapons that the founding fathers were familiar with when they penned ‘Arms’ in the Constitution.


2. Remove the regulatory barriers for law abiding citizens to ‘Bear’ arms. The ‘…gun carnage…’ you are referring to above is a product of 50 years of limiting the law abiding citizen’s capability to ‘Bear’ arms in public. This leads to criminal confidence as they know that they are the only ones that will be armed. The founders fully expected law abiding citizens to go armed at all times so as to be able to defend themselves and defend others.


You see, the concept of using police to provide for public security was surely known to the founders as France & Britain both started using police in the mid to latter 1600’s. Had this, or using the military for security, been the intent of the founders, they surely would have never penned the 2nd Amendment like they did.


Pete

Not a bad start but the NRA has opposed any measures to determine who ‘law abiding citizens’ are. That is a key point and the object of much of the proposed legislation. I’m not comfortable knowing an angry neighbor has grenades to resolve the argument about the fence or barking dog.


The gun carnage in most cases would not have been stopped by untrained, un prepared and scared civilians blasting away. Many law enforcement types have opposed this thinking, fearing the result could have been worse in the heat of the moment.


r0y

Not a bad start? You were crying for someone to answer your two “simple questions” – of which choprzrul (and others previously) did. Surprise! Its just not good enough for you Pete. That is why most everyone has left, rolling their eyes at your diatribes.


Apparantly, when it’s not the answer you want, it is not an answer.


Pete

A large number of fair minded Republicans helped kill the filibuster against discussing legislation dealing with our gun violence. Good for them. The least we can do as a civilized society is talk about our problems.


choprzrul

Gun violence? My guns must all be defective as I have never once seen one get violent.


The ‘violence’ is a human thing. Focusing on inanimate objects will serve nothing but to shift the focus away from the ‘human’ source of the violence.


Gun rights ARE civil rights. Fundamental, individual civil rights.


Why are you so anti civil rights?


KimM

More people are killed every year from bee stings and bathtub drownings than gun terrorism, Pete. What do you say to that?


Report: More People Killed By Bees, Drowning In Bath Than From Terrorism

prisonplanet.com/report-more-people-killed-by-bees-drowning-in-bath-than-from-terrorism.html


O, if only all the stoopid right-wing fascists would shut up, stop changing the subject and admit that Pete has the only viable solution as presented to him all wrapped up in a pretty bow by MSNBC.


Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective

fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-military-industrial-media-complex


Pete

Let me be delicate with you, however undeserved. The site you quote is from Alex Jones, the craziest nut job after that fat bastard Limbag. And the article you reference is not about guns, it is about terrorism in the UK. Nice (no, not nice, pretty shabby and stupid) attempt to change the subject with utter trash.


Anyone out there with a brain I can talk with? The rubbish you folks throw around is insultingly simple to debunk. Damn, give me a bit of a challenge… If my adversaries are from SLO county what a sad commentary on the intelligence of our little villages-or at least about some of the weirdos that comment here.


KimM

I feel you, Pete. It’s hard being a Giant in a world filled with intellectual midgets, isn’t it? I bow to your superiority. You win.


r0y

Yeah, Pete, who would think to throw out rubbish facts and try to change the subject with “utter trash” – pshaw! Some people…


(put the mirror down now)


kettle

KimM says:

“More people are killed every year from bee stings and bathtub drownings than gun terrorism, Pete. What do you say to that?”


I say that link sucks, More people are killed every year from bee stings and bathtub drownings than gun terrorism IN England in 2010 (one year) not America.


Talk about cherry picking and spinning facts to fit your desire. And you criticise others?


r0y

True, the link and articles are weak and not wisely chosen. However, one could have just easily said that of all the weapons being banned, how many deaths per year are caused by AR-15’s (or whichever “bannable” weapon) vs. handguns… or knives… or cars… or drowning.


It does not take much to understand where KimM was going with the point, albeit the provided data was not the best.


unclebeerman

Pete..

The fact you use the phrase “Get rid of the fascist NRA ” shows alot about you. Look up the words fascist & facism. They both have to do with dictatorships. The NRA is the peoples voice in regards to the 2nd amendment of our Constitution. The fact it exists to protects the “peoples” rights makes it about as far from fascist as can be.

You are entitled to your opinion. Honestly although you seem passionate about your views it appears you are set in your ways & have no interest in being objective.

I have found in life it doesn’t make much sense to argue with sheep.


Lynette_Tornatzky

So argue with this guy instead unclebeerman, the NRA sounds a lot more like the gun industry’s voice:


http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/09/opinion/la-oe-mulvaney-nra-school-guards-20130409


KimM

Nobody’s arguing with “unclebeerman.” I AGREE WITH “UNCLEBEERMAN.”


The NRA once supported gun control


It may seem hard to believe, but for decades the organization helped write federal laws restricting gun use


salon.com/2013/01/14/the_nra_once_supported_gun_control


KimM

Cry Uncle, LOL. Almost everything he says is word-for-word verbatum from the MSM. Not one single original/questioning thought. (sigh) Pure regurgitation of someone else’s ideas passionately promoted by one Pete.


Pete

No, The NRA is a money grubbing, fascist group of crooks that do not represent you or any other decent folks. It represents the greedy gun industry and its dupes, to make more money off the fear and deceit it spreads like pollen in a high wind.

Your 2A rights are of no concern to La Pierre and the other bums making money off our struggles.


south

No Pete – you are the close minded, small thinking liberal who will be squealing for someone to come protect you when needed. Keep watching MSNBC. I’m sure Bashir will come to your aid you useful tool.


r0y

I would ALMOST agree with you here, Pete. You’re actually close. Yes, the NRA is a money-grubbing group (not fascist, nor crooks); and I would even argue they probably represent the gun industry more than just me… but you know what? I am OK with that. It’s called having values ALIGNED with them. Yes, they are always asking for money, but I will challenge you to find me a national charity that doesn’t always ask for money or sell your name to others, etc.


Would it kill you to know that I support the NRA (financially, morally, etc) as well as the Monterey Bay Aquarium? I’ve donated to the World Wildlife Fund, and am a member of the California Rifle & Pistol Association. Gasp! I’ve also supported republicans (ick) and democrats (puke) – usually when I have no other good alternative.


If the NRA “makes money off (my) struggles” while also fighting against lame-brained legislation that is so typical of the “don’t think, just act NOW to do ANYTHING” party, then more power (and money) to them!


I’ll send them $50 in your name, Pete.


easymoney

253 responses to a pure opinion piece?

Short of name calling and accusations, where is this solution “I did, where’s yours?” that deals the real crux of the problem, violence in public (guns or not), where is any discussion of the growing mental illness issue, where is the outrage about the attack on 14 students on a gun free campus, with the use of a knife not a gun?


Pete

What with all the subject changes (drunk drivers, knife stabbers, endless bleating about 2 A ‘rights’), phony Jefferson quotes (drudged up from any of the hundreds of right wing websites) no wonder none of my many fans reading all this can come up with any viable solution.

It is because the NRA has destroyed any rational national debate we have so many guns. And historically handguns have been the most problematic (easier to get, conceal and use-intentionally and accidentally). Our relatively recent passion for ghastly military firepower has brought assault guns and related stuff in the limelight.


And then the obvious, duh! We have a mental health issue that we have pretty much ignored for many decades. We have parenting issues, school issues, bullying issues, communication issues. Even if we had the will, the money and expertise to deal with any or all of those issues it would take many decades to have any significant effect on our increasingly frequency of slaughters. And we don’t, do we. We won’t pay for it, we won’t substitute any resources from other areas to any of those, and we often don’t know what the hell we are doing.


There is only one way to reduce gun violence in the near future: reduce the number of guns and ammo. And we could screen and train ALL gun owners like I said in the article. We could increase our gun ‘literacy’ and try to swing our culture back to ‘Life With Father’ instead of Rambo. We could increase penalties for unregistered guns/people. All that would allow for the hunting, defending and personal ‘rights’ of responsible citizens. We could begin to worship life instead of death.


KimM

“endless bleating about 2 A ‘rights’”


Why is rights in quotes, Pete?


What phony Jefferson quotes?


I thought your solution was to get rid of the NRA, Pete?


You watch too much TV, Pete. Gun violence is down. Crime overall is down. Where do you get your information, Pete? So you watch endless coverage of all the Sandy Hooks and Columbines and conclude that “guns are everywhere” and people are dropping like flies en masse due to guns? Who runs the mass media, Pete? A: The same six mega-holding companies directly tied into the military industrial complex. Qui bono, Pete?


According to the FBI (sorry I don’t have a dumbed-down pop-culture reference for you – I don’t watch TV; I don’t watch Rambo movies) there are over 200 MILLION privately-owned guns in America. Using your logic (guns are everywhere, shooting everyone all the time, because everyone knows all gun owners are irresponsible) then there should be at least 200 million mass shootings per year, because, after all, this is what gun ownership does to people: Own a gun, go crazy. Isn’t that right, Pete? And it’s all the NRA’s fault. O, if we could only get rid of the NRA. O, if we could only get rid of right-wingers – those fascists! O, if we could only get rid of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. O, everything is so straight-forward and simple in your world, Pete. Everything is just as it seems, just as reported by the Nightly News. No one would ever engage in political sleight-of-hand to trick you. No one would ever co-opt a crisis to control you. No one would ever use twisted logic and emotional suspension-of-disbelief to manipulate you. All is well in the world.


infowars.com/democrats-republicans-and-nra-work-together-on-gun-confiscation


Pete

I don’t like a lot of the antics of our big business (companies, media and even sometimes unions). They herd us around like cattle sometime.

I believe in our rights, we should have lots of them. But perhaps if we cannot handle those rights by being nut cases then they get slowly eroded. It is a tough call and the bitch of democracy, its not clean or easy.

Yup, I blame the NRA for much of our dysfunctional gun ness. The NRA is a tool of the gun industry and could care less how much carnage their product causes.

What does the reader think about us having car insurance, driver’s licenses, car safety regulations (car seats, good tires, less smog, more mileage, parts that work and last etc)? All designed to promote safety since the manufacturers cannot be trusted to do it, all because just any old driver isn’t good enough, all because we simply don’t know what the other person is doing and we expect a certain degree of competency (with consequences for failure). Our purchases and gas are taxed like mad to pay for the consequences of our infatuation with cars, why not the same for guns? Why not?

Still waiting for some viable solutions to the problem, anyone out there have anything worth reading?


almostgone

Pete or is it peter the shower shark,”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.” We have been regulated heavily mainly by people who we elect and later find to be clueless.They have solved nothing as is their intent.Problems are their bread and butter not solutions,what ever sounds good at the moment.We already have background checks and a ten day”cooling off period”.You couldn’t read all the gun related laws we already have in a day and I doubt you’ve even attempted to do so.I’ll give you a hint most writers of these are big city politicans who are clueless to the real world and do not even go so far as to see if what they write is enforceable to start with.It is look what I did and on to the next drama.All this and not a mention Of Hollywood’s glorifying all that is wrong in society.Get yourself a sign peter,ah pete.