NRA Press Conference 11am Live From Whinington Dc (Transcript/Video pg 1 & 8)

Some people lie but numbers not

Country_______________Civilian Firearms____________Total____
______________________per 100 Persons)___________________
_______________________________________________________
1___United States_______88.8___________________270,000,000

2___Yemen_____________54.8____________________11,500,000

3___Switzerland_________45.7_____________________3,400,000

4___Finland_____________45.3_____________________2,400,000

5___Serbia______________37.8_____________________3,050,000
.....

39__Thailand____________15.6____________________10,000,000
.....

79__Israel_______________7.3_______________________500,000

No, a security guard would be an easy target for anyone trying to ambush a school. They need to have various teachers secretly trained and holding. That way anyone trying to do what has happened in the past would think twice because they would not know who the protectors of the school are.

Dude, unless you are being funny, that is exactly what the NRA guy is saying in a subliminal way, guns, nor any of the other things you mentioned killed anyone, it was the person.

So he is saying that it is stupid to erase the 2nd or any other amendment, or chip away at any of the amendments for the sake of protection. Like the anti gun people are trying to make us think we should.

Put a policeman in all schools...Listen to Mr LaPeirre's warning. Nobody get's into the White House, the English Royal Palace or No. 10 Down-syndrome Street because they have armed trained policeman protecting politicians lives who are less important than 20 murdered children...

So the NRA wants police in every school ... ALL DAY LONG.

Average school size here is about 240 kids with about 9 teachers, so that is 1 police officer on the payroll per every 9 teachers around here, ie: you just cut the teaching budget by about 12%, or INCREASED school labor costs by about 10%.

Say ... lets just tack that "security charge" onto every taxpayer's property tax bill. Since teachers costs make up about 70% of a typical school district's costs, we will just increase school taxes, WITHOUT A VOTE, by 7%!!

Yep ... the taxpayers will LOVE that kind of thing, a "Security Charge" added to their property tax bill for all the new police officers that will need to be hired!!

Listening to and reading the reports about the conference and the 'interpretation' and 'breakdown
is just maddening. It makes my head hurt. TH immense size of the ignorance and stupidity and the lengths the media will stretch the story by selective discourse to sway the public opinion is so huge, it makes me tired just thinking about how fruitless it would be to attempt to explain the actual logic and position of gun owners.
"basically what the NRA wants is to put more guns into the schools" explain to me hos logic and ho stopping to promote gun-free-zones is practical?" "The NRA basically said they are not changing their position and they want federal money" "Everyone expected them to be a bit more conciliatory"


Perfectly sensible viable argument, we have ARMED GUARDS for so many places and group gatherings, yet our schools are void of such. Yet, the headlines...one reads "NRA wants more guns in school" It makes my head hurt!

Quote:
Actually what he is saying is kinda brilliant.

He is showing how asinine it is to blame a thing instead of the person that did it. Like the gun haters do every time. He's just saying if the guns are the culprits then so are the video games, movies and TV shows, so we have to start banning them too, or at least you have to start looking at regulating video games, TV shows, movies etc.

Which is as stupid as banning guns.

Though I have to agree with Phen and the rest about the National Mentally Ill list, any one can be considered mentally ill these days.

Reaction:
What is the use of calling someone (and that are a lot of people lately) questioning current gunposession policies a 'gunhater'?

Why is it always with these kind of discussions that many tend to use polarising words that do no justice to the situation, and that often tend to 'kill' (whats in a word.. lol) the actual discussion?

It's of course a matter of children's logic to say: when we ban guns, whe should ban cars and videogames too. Cars and videogames aren't designed in the first place to kill / offer defence, but to offer a form of transportation and to offer entertainment.

The main issue is: its in your constitution that you are allowed to use arms to defend yourself and your loved ones.
But many people seem to extrapolate that to a level of: we need the same weapons as the government does, in case there comes a next civil war or something. The fact: you will never be able to obtain tanks and jetfighets as a civilian, so that argument is flawed.
For selfdefence simple pistols and (hunting) rifles are to a certain point sufficient (yes, i know some of you want a bazooka for that, but you will not get it...lol).
The people promoting 'gun control' are mostly on that same path: they wont take away your handguns, they are simply questioning the absurdity of peoples desires to possess (semi-) automatic weapons.

The people who some of you label 'gun haters' mostly are questioning if one freedom in its current form (the right to bear arms) isnt endangering another freedom in your country (i assume its in your legislation?) to severely: to protect the safety of innocent people, especially children. With freedom comes responsibility.

Where I am from, where I grew up firearms where just there. It was part of life. When someone went hunting it was for food. Children went to the rifle range at early ages with their parents. A rifle is kept near the front door. We aren't/weren't gun freaks, we are people who live their lives and we respect firearms. Most people who scream and yell to ban firearms have never really been exposed to them.

Just watched David Scamoran on TV now trying to Justify why it's selling arms to his fucking Saudi buddies...It's is quite amazing how Corporate Gun-Runner Camoran actually gets away with his Lanza-like activities...giving guns to the guys that did 9/11...it is fucking insane...this world

More likely, have never even touched one.

adam lambert - mad world

[link to www.youtube.com]

"They only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"...I suppose most allied soldiers from the two world wars would concur when it comes down to surviving...and protecting democracy and those who love it.

I'm out

This is true, though I think they need back up conceal carry teachers in case a wackado gets through the policeman.

No, I am sure they never have. The fear of the unknown. The unknown is scary to these people. I know evil exists, yet these people want to blame an object not a person. Also if they looked at the big pharm companies they would have to question whether drugging little Johnny (parenting made easier)is a good idea. These are the people that will stand and watch a TSA agent violate their children so they can go on vacation.

Lovely person,

The only people that raise their voice dislike guns, and people having guns, I don't see anywhere that I used polarizing language. I could have used other wording which is polorizing.

And I don't see anywhere where I said that we need the same weapons as police, if you look at our laws we already do not have the same weapons as law enforcement.

Kind person, thank you for not even responding to what I said. And trying to take value away from the things that I truly said.

If you are willing to talk about the ideas of what was said this is a conversation, though if you try to make a out of left field point about polarization from what I said, you might want to look in the mirror because you are projecting my friend.

Question:
Where I am from, where I grew up firearms where just there. It was part of life. When someone went hunting it was for food. Children went to the rifle range at early ages with their parents. A rifle is kept near the front door. We aren't/weren't gun freaks, we are people who live their lives and we respect firearms. Most people who scream and yell to ban firearms have never really been exposed to them.

Reaction:
Don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying that everyone who did grew up with firearms is automatically some kind of danger to society, or a gun-fanatic.

The thing is: when it's so easy to obtain a firearm for peopele in general(which it is, in the USA) its easier for mentally unstable persons to obtain one too. Getting all mentally unstable persons under control and prevent them from getting firearmsis some kind an utopia (and should be handled in a nuanced way anyway IMO), but at least you could check people (and as Newton shows: families) more thoroughbly, before you license some people the right to own firearms.

Next to that: i still question why civilians should be able to posess (semi-) automatic weapons? The argument some here seem to use, that you need to be able to defend yourself from a rogue government or civil war (to a certain point) is invalid IMO: as a civilian you aint allowed to possess tanks, jet-fighters or nuclear bombs... lol

In terms of self-defence and hunting: what is wrong with limitating the possession of fire-arms to non-automatic handguns and huntingriffles? You would still be able to defend yourself and your loved ones to a certain point, if necessary, and you can hunt in area's where its prohibited.

Next to that: when a school-shooting or mall-shooting might occur again (and it probably will) it will probably lead to less civilian victims, and the victimizer will be more easy to be taken out by special forces.

Finally: bringing 'the right to bear arms' down to the right to possess 'simple' firearms, can give out a cultural signal: to show that the right to bear arms is there for selfdefence in the first place, not as a sign to show 'machismo' with all kind of semi-automatic riffles, not as a way to intidimate and to glorify millitia or gang-violence.

With that i also try to fight the flawed argument that gun control leads to an uneven situation: the idea that criminals will keep obtaining these more sophisticated (automatic) fire-arms no matter what regulations: Criminals might be stupid in lots of their actions, but to a certain point they are 'calculated': they will obtain a weapon that its just as stronger as that of the 'average folks'. For what? for trying to succeed with their theft and robbery, but also to try to minimize civilian victims and their possible time in jail. That may sound naive / hippy-dippy / liberal whatever to the more conservative people, but its a matter of facts: in countries with more severe gun control, criminals carry less brutal weapons (if they carry one at all) and it shows in the statistics of the dead causes of burglaries and robberies.

For all the anti-gun rhetoric being dished out by media and others, I have yet to hear anyone articulate how gang-bangers, drug cartels, flash mobs, and other criminals will be disarmed or what we law abiding citizens are to do if confronted by such people after we have turned in our weapons. Not one anti-gunner has elaborated on this fact. They also will not address the logic that if we law abiding citizens are disarmed these criminals can now exercise free reign over all of us just as they did in the gun free zone in Newton. How will these people be stopped? Would Lanza have gone to that school if he believed he could be shot before carrying out his evil plan. How many mass shootings occur at Police stations or gun ranges.

I am having a difficult time grasping the logic of the anti-gun crowd. Do they really believe that people who commit crimes and plan evil deeds are going to magically get religion and turn in all their weapons because some bureaucrats say they must? Criminals are not allowed to posess firearms now! Why haven't the anti-gun politicians done something about that instead of trying to turn myself and my family into helpless victims like those poor babies last Friday.

Quote:
Lovely person,

The only people that raise their voice dislike guns, and people having guns, I don't see anywhere that I used polarizing language. I could have used other wording which is polorizing.

And I don't see anywhere where I said that we need the same weapons as police, if you look at our laws we already do not have the same weapons as law enforcement.

Kind person, thank you for not even responding to what I said. And trying to take value away from the things that I truly said.

If you are willing to talk about the ideas of what was said this is a conversation, though if you try to make a out of left field point about polarization from what I said, you might want to look in the mirror because you are projecting my friend.

Reaction:
Okay: my reaction on this NRA's guys idea's is, they are IMO bezerk, counter-productive.

They will only lead to more and heavier school-schootings and more needless victims.

Giving mentally instable people the freedom to posess semi-automatic weapons and reacting by saying that even more people should be given the right to carry these kind of weapons, so they could withold these people from possible actions is totally absurd. Its a matter of fighting (and even escalating) the symptoms, instead of reacting on the root of the problem.

And what about given little children the idea it's normal to have armed guards at their primary school? It has nothing to do with left or right, but with common sense.

So now your schools will become prisons with armed guards. Congratulations America your society, culture and general way of life is really fucked up.

I tried to have a conversation with a Adult Co-worker ( 40-50 in age ) at my job today on lunch break in the staff room about gun control and the government and what not, this man was bat shit crazy.. and 100% believed he was a fucking genius.

This guy starts telling the ENTIRE staff that were enjoying there lunch sitting around the tables probably 4 people that basically there is no reason to ever fear the government and that the American Constitution is complete and utter bullshit and that NO ONE except The police(law) should have guns thru-out the ENTIRE world .. not just America.

I honestly couldn't believe my ears... he then began to spill bullshit about how the Muslims caused 9/11 and the war on terrorism is a really great thing. LOLLLLLLLLLLL

Oh god..never again will i speak to these sheep

u know once there was a time that we had an idea
and at the head of this idea we had a leader that believed in this idea

not how can make the most money off of the sheep

its your god given right to stand up for u believe in damit

Right To Be Let Alone

6. In one sense, such freedom to choose involves Man's right to be let alone, which is possessed by The Individual in keeping with the Declaration and Constitution as against government: in enjoyment of his unalienable rights, while respecting the equal rights of others and just laws (as defined in Paragraph 5 above). This right to be let alone is the most comprehensive of rights and the right most prized by civilized men. This right is, of course, also possessed as against all other Individuals, all obligated to act strictly within the limits of their own equal rights. Consequently any infringement of any Individual's rights is precluded.

[link to lexrex.com]

I hear what you are saying, and though I respect what you are saying I can't agree. If you look at conceal carry states and places you will see less crime than in places where legal gun ownership is controlled.

He said nothing about mentally Ill people owning guns, he actually said there might be a need for a national list so that "risky people" could not legally purchase guns.

I agree about not having armed guards, I believe they should have a few school workers/teachers secretly trained and armed. That will make anyone second guess doing anything like this, and the children will be protected without having security guards feel normal.

Though we haven't talked about the main topic that you responded to, which is that it is silly to blame any "thing" ie. video games, movies, TV shows, guns, knives, machetes, railroad ties, etc. for something like this, we should look at the individual.

what do u think will happen after invading 15 countries in 27 years?

Quote:
I am having a difficult time grasping the logic of the anti-gun crowd. Do they really believe that people who commit crimes and plan evil deeds are going to magically get religion and turn in all their weapons because some bureaucrats say they must? Criminals are not allowed to posess firearms now! Why haven't the anti-gun politicians done something about that instead of trying to turn myself and my family into helpless victims like those poor babies last Friday.

Reaction:
For fuck sake, DON'T let these criminals get religious, because it's mostly the conservative religious crowd who is defending unlimitated gun-possession as some sort of 'freedom'.

Keep whining about these poor babies please, it appears pathetic. These poor babies in Christown were first of all the results of the kind of policies the likes of you keep defending (sorry to be so harsh, but it is the truth).

There IS a difference about having the right to posess a certain type of fire-arm and actually using it (look at the stats in Canada and Switzerland for example).

Maybe in those countries people deal with their weapons a bit more level-heaved? Maybe a bit too much people in the USA use their right to posess such a weapon as a way to show off / for 'machismo' / or are often using their fear or disdain for the federal government / the liberal parts of the country as some sort of 'excuse' for it.

And if you relationship with your fire-arms is a bit 'wonky' psychologically, maybe you think the same applies to all other people who posess these kind of weapons.

Often i have the idea that evangelical, rightwing, midwesterners / southerners (at least, they think they are) try to protect their values, including the gun thing, out of some sort of minority complex. And its probably more easy for them to maintain their victim role, then to admit: yeah, me and my folks might have become a bit needlessly stubborn.
They seem to label the right to carry fire-arms as part of their 'identity' and everyone who questions that, gets slagged. In short: sentiments / insecurities are placed above common sense among that group of people: out of kindness you can give them the benefit of the doubt for some time, but at certain point its a matter of: enough is enough.

In Afghanistan until June

lets see, some cursing, attempt of knowledge, and then shrouded insults...Shillbot is here

The right to own a firearm, is based on the right to self-defense, i.e., the right to those means to defend oneself against those who wish to destroy one’s life. The right to self-defense is itself is a corollary of the right to life (a corollary is here defined as a self-evident implication of a general principle).

It would be absurd to say one has the right to life, but does not have the right to the means necessary to protect that life. It would be like saying one has the right to life, but not the right to purchase food. Yet, this is what opponents to the right to own a gun are really against: the right to life.

Unfortunately, it is the right to life, that is ignored in the debate over the right to bear arms, both by its opponents, and by its so-called defenders!

The field of battle on which gun control should be fought is exactly on this issue: man’s rights. Statistical arguments on gun control are a red herring — as the leftists’ appeals to hungry children or the environmentalists’ appeals to clean parks are also meant to distract their opponents from the fundamental issues at stake. While the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other defenders of the right to bear arms argue over statistics and interpreting the Constitution, the real issues remain untouched and are sacrificed to the enemies of our freedom.

You seem to believe that guns are only available through gun stores. Illegal firearms are as available as drugs. It won't matter one iota if they confiscate my weapons, which were legally purchased. I can get anything I want off the grid almost as easily. Taking my legally purchased firearms solves nothing. This isn't about some sort of ego trip. This is about protecting my family from those who might seek to do harm. But as usual, my question to the anti-gun crowd goes unaddressed. My God, our own government is supplying Mexican drug cartels.

Quote:
Though we haven't talked about the main topic that you responded to, which is that it is silly to blame any "thing" ie. video games, movies, TV shows, guns, knives, machetes, railroad ties, etc. for something like this, we should look at the individual.

Reaction:
Maybe we should specify it then, right?

I have mentioned it a few times before: with freedom comes responsibility.

Next to that: the general 'american dream' seems to be, 'you can make it if you try': I personally agree with that motto, but at least with the notion that:
- You cant make it alone, you need all kind of people: it isnt so individualistic as some of you make it out to be.
- Individualism is somewhat overrated in the USA. I agree with the idea that every individual should be able to be succesfull, no matter what his skincolour, race, background or religion is. But individual succes also leads to consequences, it influences other people (in good, bad or neutral ways): even with individual succes you owe for a large part to people you have dealt with.

To give some answers:
- You say that the USA offers a lot of opportunities for individuals: i tend to doubt it. Maybe on a commercial / business level, but as this site shows you get a lot of jesusfreaks / conspiracy-monkey's / way too political correct people on your back. All rather ignorant and shallow: like that fake prodent smile and botox cheeks many of your actors show.
- Why do some people when you question their gun possesion get so 'spasmatic'? Because they are plain ignorant: they simple want to shoot beercans with their semi-automatic riffle, because 'that is their freedom', they want to kill deers because that appears tough, cool and manly, and because that is 'their freedom'.

They seem to forget that they are part of some society, instead of simply being a bunch of individuals. They seem to ignore that twisted ones 'abuse that kind of freedom' to kill innocent school kids.

Is it really worth to schow how redneck, right-wing or millitia-like you are, when some fucker kills innocent school-children because you want to maintain the right to carry semi-automatic weapons?

Murders do not obey the law, so the answer cannot be new laws, or even stricter enforcement of laws.

How about this:

Life is dangerous, get over it or get out of it, the choice is yours.