NRA Statement

[Hasselhoss]

After reading some of the posts in this thread, it is a wonder we have enjoyed the 2nd Amendment for this long.

Fact A mental health check would not have prevented this latest shooting.
Fact Connecticut is one of the strictest gun control states in the country.
Fact The worst mass murder in US history was done by a bombing.
Fact The current President is supported by the members of the Weather Underground, former unrepentant terrorist bombers.
Fact The current administration illegaly sold firearms through Fast & Furious that resulted in the deaths of an American Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry, hundreds of Mexicans, including children, and who knows how many other Americans. Yet to this day no one has been prosecuted.

And all we do is sit here on these forums and moan and complain or go out and panic buy instead of spending a little of that money and our time in EXPANDING our rights - forget about defending them.

How are you not on the phone every day demanding people in this administration be prosecuted for Fast & Furious and the president impeached???

Fact Only 3% of the people actually fought in the Revolutionary War. The rest were either cowards, traitors, or just did not care. I would be surprised if we could even get to 3% in today's America...

Who specifically are you calling every day and what are you saying to them?

 

[Bryan]

the right to bear arms
not so you can hunt with an ar,sks,m1,or ak
it is for our protection
the US will not be invaded as long as most households have guns
the horror that this gutless punk did would have been worse with a 12 gauge with buck shot
or a can of gas and a match
or a car in the parking lot
it was not the gun.
how many die from car wrecks? do we ban cars?
do we talk of banning cars when a drunk kills with a car? no.we blame the drunk.not the car
so why when a piece of crap kills with a gun,we blame the gun?
take the guns
take the freedom

i hear the old "if they want my gun i will give them the bullets first"
but you know it will be 20 of them and one of us.
we won't need the 2nd amendment until they try and take it
then we WILL need it

115 a day die in automobiles.

 

[shadowman3861]

Ya know this nut job could have done the same amount of sick damage, in just about the same amount of time with a stihl chainsaw, so then what?

 

[poopdaddy]

115
lets all walk

 

[T-Roy]

Who will come take them? LEOS out there, if they called you and said "Bring in all your personal weapons for confiscation and then we'll go door to door and get the rest." what would you do? Soldiers? You took an oath to protect the constitution, not to obey all orders, even unconstitutional orders. I don't see confiscation ever being viable.

 

[Rommel]

Don't get your panties in a bunch folks. Despite their misgivings they have been one of the oldest and strongest proponents of the second amendment.

So when a state that has some of the strictest gun laws fails to protect their citizens and their children, it is a true reflection of just how the laws fail.

An effective response is allowing school staff to be armed if not mandating it but really that is a states right. The feds could do it through the "commerce clause". Yeah I know WTF does commerce have to do with guns in schools? Look up the "no guns in school zones" act of 1990 that was re-worded in 1995 and prevents guns within 1000 (ft.?/yds.?) of a school zone. The Supreme Court upheld the illegal act but it's their interpretation and opens the door to unlimited "regulation" no matter how far the stretch.

They will likely address mental health awareness and better screening. If they did their homework it should also include mental health screening for at risk youths as early as middle school.

They will more than likely point out that regulation, restriction, prohibition and outright bans do not serve the public well or even work. We all benefit from the legal responsible ownership of firearms and that is far too often ignored or outright rejected.

If anyone has our voice tomorrow it will be the NRA.

X2. Thank you sir.

 

[Rommel]

It's a shame that the actions of a few are used as an excuse to control the masses.

A "Protective" Government at it's finest. Hand over your rights and all will be well. Free phones. Free Healthcare.

 

[Rommel]

Those posting "I wouldn't mind or I wouldn't oppose" this or that being required by "them" don't have a clue as to the door you're opening.

It's sad to read some of this on a pro firearm site. If you give an inch you're sunk. It ain't pretty guys, it is the truth though.

This is exactly what baffles me as well. I can't believe what I've been seeing as I've been watching "pro" 2nd Amendment rights representatives say this over and over. Even Bill O'Reilly whom I will admit I tune into to get his take on events is waffling. I mean even tonight the man totally disagreed that the 2nd Amendment was put into place to ward off a Tyrannical Government. Mean while his hooter gals where giving their take on AR-15's and their "telescope devices" (referring to collapsable butt-stocks).

 

[Bryan]

Who will come take them? LEOS out there, if they called you and said "Bring in all your personal weapons for confiscation and then we'll go door to door and get the rest." what would you do? Soldiers? You took an oath to protect the constitution, not to obey all orders, even unconstitutional orders. I don't see confiscation ever being viable.

You forget it is the government via the Supreme Court who gets to say what is constitutional. If Kennedy the swing vote or any other conservative justice retires or dies it could be real bad. If the Democrats win in 2016 the odds are even better they get to replace a conservative.

As to LEO's following confiscation orders, do you think they will quit their job, loose their pensions and put their families futures at risk? Somebody collected the guns in Australia. Some one collected the guns in Britain. Some one collected the guns in every country where guns were banned.

 

[mkdhotrod]

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.