NRA Leader Wayne LaPierre's Much-Criticized Sandy Hook Speech Was Actually Quite Effective

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That's easy. He's not up for re-election in 2016.

So say he actually moves on gun control. What are the odds of him getting anything meaningful through Congress? Confiscating guns? Really? Anyone who takes that seriously needs to stock up on tin foil. Lots and lots of tin foil.

[Karee 4,191]

So say he actually moves on gun control. What are the odds of him getting anything meaningful through Congress? Confiscating guns? Really? Anyone who takes that seriously needs to stock up on tin foil. Lots and lots of tin foil.

I doubt he's going to get anything through congress since they are all up for re-election in 2016. I think he'll try though, especially after what happened in Connecticut. Not sure what it has to do with tin foil. It's a political reality.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

This is why: From Feinsteins web site:

Summary of 2013 legislation

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:

120 specifically-named firearms

Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic

Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 roundsStrengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:

Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test

Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test

Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans

Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.

Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:

Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment Except - see below!!!

Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and

Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:

Background check of owner and any transferee;

Type and serial number of the firearm;

Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;

Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and

Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

And that changes the reality of nothing going through the House how?

I mean these are good, common sense measures that are being proposed. Think Sen. Feinstein and others have had these on the shelf for almost a decade now. They do not equate in any way to a confiscation effort or violate the right to keep and bear arms in any way. But again, despite these being good, common sense measures, the odds of these actually passing the House are virtually nil. So I ask again, what's the panic?

I doubt he's going to get anything through congress since they are all up for re-election in 2016. I think he'll try though, especially after what happened in Connecticut. Not sure what it has to do with tin foil. It's a political reality.

It is a political reality that Obama will make efforts to confiscate guns?

[Karee 4,191]

And that changes the reality of nothing going through the House how?

I mean these are good, common sense measures that are being proposed. Think Sen. Feinstein and others have had these on the shelf for almost a decade now. They do not equate in any way to a confiscation effort or violate the right to keep and bear arms in any way. But again, despite these being good, common sense measures, the odds of these actually passing the House are virtually nil. So I ask again, what's the panic?

It is a political reality that Obama will make efforts to confiscate guns?

I'd bet if the democrats were a majority in the house, it still wouldn't pass.

And that changes the reality of nothing going through the House how?

I mean these are good, common sense measures that are being proposed. Think Sen. Feinstein and others have had these on the shelf for almost a decade now. They do not equate in any way to a confiscation effort or violate the right to keep and bear arms in any way. But again, despite these being good, common sense measures, the odds of these actually passing the House are virtually nil. So I ask again, what's the panic?

It is a political reality that Obama will make efforts to confiscate guns?

You lost me there. Not sure where I said Obama is going to confiscate guns.

[himher 634]

Among the survey’s key findings:

87 percent of NRA members agree that support for Second Amendment rights goes hand-in-hand with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

There is very strong support for criminal background checks among NRA members and gun owners:

•74 percent of NRA members and 87 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring criminal background checks of anyone purchasing a gun. Yeah, that's why they supported the background check law

•79 percent of NRA members and 80 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring gun retailers to perform background checks on all employees – a measure recently endorsed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry.

NRA members strongly support allowing states – not the Federal government – to set basic eligibility requirements for people who want to carry concealed, loaded guns in public places, with 91 percent of NRA members stating states should decide.

By contrast, the NRA leadership’s top Federal legislative priority – national reciprocity for concealed carry permits – would effectively eliminate these requirements by forcing every state to allow non-residents to carry concealed guns even if they would not qualify for a local permit.

NRA members support many common state eligibility rules for concealed carrying:

•75 percent of NRA members believe concealed carry permits should only be granted to applicants who have not committed any violent misdemeanors, including assault. that's already law dude have you ever read a permit application? http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/index.htm

•74 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who have completed gun safety training. already law LOL

•68 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who do not have prior ?arrests? for domestic violence. change arrests to convictions and I would agree but after being actually convicted of as opposed to "accused of" domestic violence "gasp" you're done and it's already the law

•63 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants 21 years of age or older. law already applies to handguns. why the fck would you issue a permit to someone who isn't supposed to own a handgun SO its also already the law (LOL)

The NRA rank and file also supports barring people on terror watch lists from buying guns (71 percent) and believe the law should require gun owners to alert police to lost and stolen guns (64 percent). The NRA’s Washington office strongly opposes both measures. That's because the gvt was loose on their definition of who should be on the "terror watch list" and there is a concern that the "terror watch list" is a bit arbitrary

I thought - wrongly as it turned out - that you would have looked that source up real quick or better yet, that would have been aware of the survey Republican pollster Frank Luntz conducted among gun owners - both NRA members and non-NRA members - earlier this year. You know, just so you would know what you are actually talking about. See, unlike the membership dues for the NRA which nobody gives a rats ####### about, this research was actually widely reported in the media following the massacres in Colorado and at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, CT.

Edited December 27, 2012 by himher

[himher 634]

Who's in a panic? LOL It wasnt gun owners who got right on TV demanding "action" "action" "within days or weeks" in a panic in order not to lose the opportunity to take political and financial advantage of a tragedy before it drops off the news.

And that changes the reality of nothing going through the House how?

I mean these are good, common sense measures that are being proposed. Think Sen. Feinstein and others have had these on the shelf for almost a decade now. They do not equate in any way to a confiscation effort or violate the right to keep and bear arms in any way. But again, despite these being good, common sense measures, the odds of these actually passing the House are virtually nil. So I ask again, what's the panic?

It is a political reality that Obama will make efforts to confiscate guns?

Edited December 27, 2012 by himher

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You lost me there. Not sure where I said Obama is going to confiscate guns.

Look at the exchange. I said people that believe Obama is going to confiscate guns (those are the conspiracy theories out there in the right wing echo chamber that generate all this gun buying panic) needs lots of tin foil. You responded that you don't see what tin foil has do with it but that it's political reality. Misunderstanding perhaps?

So say he actually moves on gun control. What are the odds of him getting anything meaningful through Congress? Confiscating guns? Really? Anyone who takes that seriously needs to stock up on tin foil. Lots and lots of tin foil.

I doubt he's going to get anything through congress since they are all up for re-election in 2016. I think he'll try though, especially after what happened in Connecticut. Not sure what it has to do with tin foil. It's a political reality.

Who's in a panic?

The nutters that have been storming into the gun and ammo shops buying up every last piece of either. What would you call that if not a panic?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

You act like a normal person would give a ** what the annual NRA membership fee is.

Joining the NRA makes you abnormal.. Dropping the F-bomb in a public group makes you cool and justifies your losing argument. PRICELESS

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Joining the NRA makes you abnormal.

I don't think I said that. What I said is that a normal person (as in: your average Joe) doesn't care what the NRA membership fee is. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people in this country are not associated with the NRA and do not know and do not care to know what annual dues are to be paid for a membership in an organization that they do not wish to be a member of. The NRA is NOT a mainstream organization. Why is that so hard to accept?

[james&olya 1,121]

Not sure what it has to do with tin foil. It's a political reality.

Exaggeration is one thing. Substituting "It's a political reality." for "It's nothing but paranoid speculation." is quite another!

[himher 634]

I call that pissed off at lack of effective government protection for children and making a $1,000,000,000 statement / sending a message about it.

You REALLY think Texas is worried about federal gun confiscation? Hell the federal government can't even remove the illegals from standing out freely in front of Home Depot or the ones that are already caught and sitting in the Harris County jail enjoying visits from the local consulates

Look at the exchange. I said people that believe Obama is going to confiscate guns (those are the conspiracy theories out there in the right wing echo chamber that generate all this gun buying panic) needs lots of tin foil. You responded that you don't see what tin foil has do with it but that it's political reality. Misunderstanding perhaps?

The nutters that have been storming into the gun and ammo shops buying up every last piece of either. What would you call that if not a panic?

Edited December 28, 2012 by himher

[himher 634]

I was thinking that even one of the dimmer lights on the street, when offering discussion or ideas as to where NRA money comes from, would have taken the time to check. It's all published and readily available, some by the NRA itself and the rest by the anti-gun lobby. Hell you checked neither dude (laughing)

It's good to maybe check your facts. Some facts that you appear to not have checked (this is the short list):

Founder's intent of the second ammendment

NRA funding

Actual number of annual deaths by assault rifle

It's actually quite amusing to discuss something with someone who has a lot of opinions but no factual information. It's like shooting skeet. Just pull the lever and smoke the little clay disks outa the sky

I don't think I said that. What I said is that a normal person (as in: your average Joe) doesn't care what the NRA membership fee is. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people in this country are not associated with the NRA and do not know and do not care to know what annual dues are to be paid for a membership in an organization that they do not wish to be a member of. The NRA is NOT a mainstream organization. Why is that so hard to accept?

Edited December 28, 2012 by himher

[himher 634]

It's already started. It's time we protected our own kids.

"I just bought a bra holster," said Jessica Fiveash, a 32-year-old Utah teacher and wife of a retired Army sergeant who grew up shooting and said she had no hesitation packing a gun at school. "Women can't really carry a gun on their hip."

Utah is among few states that let people carry licensed concealed weapons into public schools without exception, the National Conference of State Legislatures says in a 2012 compendium of state gun laws.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You REALLY think Texas is worried about federal gun confiscation?

No, not at all. Nobody in Texas would ever take the Feds seriuously. Say, how's your famous gun nut David doing these days? Still chilling in Waco? Oh, that's right, he ain't around no more. And neither is his Texas stockpile of weapons. He showed them, though, didn't he?

[himher 634]

Perhaps this isn't the best example of federal action as they killed 19 children to get a man who was accused of abusing (2)

the point is: if the feds want you dead or want your guns, they're gonna get em. anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.