LaPIERRE ON MEET THE PRESS

V

vicvanb

Guest
Points he made:

The NRA will not support any new restrictions on guns or high capacity magazines.

The NRA will not support any expansion of background checks.

The NRA will not work with the Biden Commission to investigate the causes of gun-related violence and offer solutions.

The NRA will not support re-enacting the assault rifle ban.

The "media" tells only lies about the type of firearms used in these mass killings.

The armed guards at Columbine School weren't effective.

The only thing that will work to reduce mass shootings at schools is putting an armed guard in every school.

"The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Is this effective leadership from the NRA??
 
Liberals think that if you have a flat tire you need to overhaul the carburetor to fix the problem.

NRA----------draw a line in the sand.........give no quarter...................

Later
Dave


vicvanb said:
Points he made:

The NRA will not support any new restrictions on guns or high capacity magazines.

The NRA will not support any expansion of background checks.

The NRA will not work with the Biden Commission to investigate the causes of gun-related violence and offer solutions.

The NRA will not support re-enacting the assault rifle ban.

The "media" tells only lies about the type of firearms used in these mass killings.

The armed guards at Columbine School weren't effective.

The only thing that will work to reduce mass shootings at schools is putting an armed guard in every school.

"The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Is this effective leadership from the NRA??
Click to expand...
 
i woulld say yes it is....
they have bent over and compromised in the past....
i think they get the message..you want our money do your job...support, not bend the second ammendment.

or since they are just politicians it maybe posturing for a compromise....

mike in co
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I Googled and searched for a long time and I can't find this anywhere....When this Pres. was first erected, one of the first things done was the NRA made some concession with the administration ......something about giving up the right to sue in exchange for the administration not pushing more legislation. The other 2nd amend. groups-CRKBA, GOA, and others would not enter in the agreement. Anyone remember?
 
Expansion of background checks? What does that mean, expansion into person to person sales? If so, the only way for them to make sure that no guns were transferred without government approval would be to register the ownership of all guns. Anyone who follows history knows that is the immediate precursor of confiscation.
 
The first thing that has to happen is a an establishment of the absolute facts. I happened to have the TV on while eating breakfast the day the tragedy took place. There is perfectly credible evidence of police radio communications of the possibility of more than one shooter; police first announced they had found two handguns inside the building and an "AR-15 type" rifle in the trunk of the car. I saw that on live TV. Now they say all the shooting was done with the "AR-15 type" rifle. We need much more info that has so far been forthcoming.
 
vicvanb said:
Points he made:

The NRA will not support any new restrictions on guns or high capacity magazines.

The NRA will not support any expansion of background checks.

The NRA will not work with the Biden Commission to investigate the causes of gun-related violence and offer solutions.

The NRA will not support re-enacting the assault rifle ban.

The "media" tells only lies about the type of firearms used in these mass killings.

The armed guards at Columbine School weren't effective.

The only thing that will work to reduce mass shootings at schools is putting an armed guard in every school.

"The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Is this effective leadership from the NRA??
Click to expand...

cool....FINALLY they're actually taking a stand. WEAK, but a stand.

maybe now I'll send them some more money.

vic, you don't deserve to live here
al-AMERICAN-inwa

(BTW vic, that's not an "attack," it's my opinion)
 
Vic, I'm not sure what you expect them to do. Do you want LaPierre to roll over on his back and ask Glorious Leader, Feinstein, Schemer, Loudenburg (and yes I know how to spell the moron's name), et al to kick him to death? Pretty much everything he said is the God's honest truth. There's no way to get a fair shake from the media, and the last "assault weapon" ban was a total failure just like the NRA and anyone else with the brains to walk by themselves knew it would be. This one would be just the same. The guns didn't belong to the shooter, they were stolen after he killed his mother. Everyone who knew him knew that he was at least half a bubble off, but we can't say that because that offends the rights of the mentally unstable/deranged. We need to greatly ease involuntary commitment laws so that people who like all mass murderers are not right in the head are locked away for everyone else's safety. Of course the ACLU and Amnesty International would have fits, but that's too bad. The idea that a tool is somehow bad because it's improperly used is total insanity and stupidity. Ask the carpenter who whacks his thumb instead of the nail if the hammer is to blame, it's not. Neither is the gun to blame if it's misused.

Of course the modern leftist logic (or patent lack thereof) doesn't want to blame people unless they happen to disagree with their policies or ideas. It's guns or SUV's or whatever else that's unpopular that gets the blame.

If someone wants to commit mass murder there are ways that are a lot more efficient than shooting unless you happen to be the Nazis or Soviets or Red Chinese and are the only ones with guns. And what do all these folks have in common? They're all Socialists or Communists, but saying that isn't PC either although it's the absolute truth.

Maybe Al's wrong you deserve to live in NY State with Andy Cuomo who thinks that maybe confiscating all guns would be a great idea.

Finally if you think that banning AR's, AK's, and any other semi-auto rifle would be great wait until someone kills someone with a scoped hunting rifle, then they'll want to ban all those evil "sniper rifles". That's already been suggested by the true believers on the left.
 
Guy's, don't go with someone's interpetation of what was said today on Meet The Press, listen to the 20+minutes for the truth. Lapierre sounded a lot different to me than how post number 1 above stated. The original post here sounded more like the commentator of Meet The Press to me.

Later
Dave
 
Last edited:
vicvanb,

Dude murdered his own mother!!

He's DERANGED! Can you wrap your head around that fact? He killed his own momma to get these few guns....

And you want to use this guy as a springboard to curtail our rights. You "feel sorry for" those kids so you'll make it worse by not only perpetuating and supporting the very mindset that brought this on us, you'll speak out in favor of making it WORSE! You and yours MADE the situation that allows this sort of crime. Back when you and yours voted for "gun free zones" we told you this would happen, it's inevitable. Make safe havens for mindsick people to operate in and IT WILL HAPPEN! Look at those poor kids on the island where Breivik made his little statement......mourn over them. And please explain to me how they were "made safe" by gun laws....BYW, read "The Breivik Manifesto" for a nice view into the reality you promote.

NO vicvanb I didn't call you out "for summarizing what Wayne LaPierre said" I called you out because YOU stand for what I DO NOT!!! People like you spit on our Founding Fathers and on our Constitution, calling it a "living document" to be twisted and malformed as you see fit, to match your view of the world. People like you think you're "smarter" than this nation's Founders.

I called you out because I DO NOT agree that you and our current president are smarter than the folks who wrote and signed The Constitution Of These United States.

Is that CLEAR?

I don't believe people like you deserve to live here because you don't appreciate that blood has been shed to give you the right to believe the way you do. I'm not kicking you out, I'm just sharing my feelings. I FEEL it when people disrespect the Second Amendment.

I don't believe our president deserves this, the best job he'll ever have, either.

Again, I'm not "attacking you" I'm stating clearly HOW and WHY and WHERE we disagree.... I'm disagreeing with you.

Because you brought it up.

al
 
Vic, you're welcome to live here as far as I'm concerned and according to the Constitution that we are supposedly in support of. That being said, your question about effective leadership from the NRA seems to hint that maybe the response doesn't meet your idea. The NRA (and all gun-using citizens) are in a tough spot where any defense of our rights is immediately distorted in the media to make it look like we are unAmerican, hate motherhood and disparage apple pie. Hopefully, calm heads will prevail once the anguish and shock have subsided and we can focus on the facts.

I cannot think of single law that could be passed to stop a probably unstable young man from killing his mother, stealing her guns and car, and wreaking unfathomable havoc on a community. The one aspect of the NRA's point of view I support is that these misfits, terrorists or whatever they are, always pick a defenseless place with the greatest shock value to make their statement. A way to limit that is to not have any "undefended" areas. Through concealed (or open) carry most areas of our country would have someone in about any public facility with a firearm.

Armed officers in schools sounds like something that shouldn't be happening in the America I grew up in. That America doesn't exist anymore. Right here in my hometown of 3,500 in a rural area, the elementary school is under constant lock-down because of the continuing incidents resulting from split relationships and fathers and mothers fighting over the children -- a mess. Probably, at least during a period of considering other options, we need to look at armed personnel at public schools.

If the mother had owned a Model 700 instead of an AR, they would be clamoring for limitations on "sniper rifles" as mentioned above. The firearm isn't/wasn't/never is the culprit, it just seems to those who don't like or understand firearms that it is the quickest and easiest fix.

The original intent of a "militia" in the 2nd Amendment was a group of armed citizens who would be capable of defending their community -- nothing similar to the current National Guard and not a group of vigilantes. Perhaps we need to look into a trained and armed citizen militia to take back the safety of our schools, streets and malls.

These issues need lots of discussion, lots of input from varying sources and a prevailing of level-headedness. These truly are difficult times.
 
ReedG,

be careful there regarding the reason for a militia. Our forebears wrote in the right to bear arms as much to protect us from our own government as from anyone else. They knew perfectly well that we're no "better than" anyone else, that power corrupts and that only an armed populace is safe from tyranny.
 
OK...Al you have indicated that anyone that doesn't share your exact position on the Second Amendment should be deported...what is your solution to keeping the crazy "wackos" from getting their hands on high capacity semi-auto weapons ..???...not just a broad statement but a realistic solution.????
Show us how you would do it not how to attack another gun owner with a different opinion..!

Eddie in Texas
 
My observation on the difference between high capacity semi-auto weapons and low capacity semi-auto weapons is a FEW SECONDS to reload. The first to go is the high capacity, and then when some idiot shoots a bunch more innocent people, the low capacity will be next. Then the bolt action, then the single shot, then.....................
 
Last edited:
alinwa said:
vicvanb,

Dude murdered his own mother!!

He's DERANGED! Can you wrap your head around that fact? He killed his own momma to get these few guns....

And you want to use this guy as a springboard to curtail our rights. You "feel sorry for" those kids so you'll make it worse by not only perpetuating and supporting the very mindset that brought this on us, you'll speak out in favor of making it WORSE! You and yours MADE the situation that allows this sort of crime. Back when you and yours voted for "gun free zones" we told you this would happen, it's inevitable. Make safe havens for mindsick people to operate in and IT WILL HAPPEN! Look at those poor kids on the island where Breivik made his little statement......mourn over them. And please explain to me how they were "made safe" by gun laws....BYW, read "The Breivik Manifesto" for a nice view into the reality you promote.

NO vicvanb I didn't call you out "for summarizing what Wayne LaPierre said" I called you out because YOU stand for what I DO NOT!!! People like you spit on our Founding Fathers and on our Constitution, calling it a "living document" to be twisted and malformed as you see fit, to match your view of the world. People like you think you're "smarter" than this nation's Founders.

I called you out because I DO NOT agree that you and our current president are smarter than the folks who wrote and signed The Constitution Of These United States.

Is that CLEAR?

I don't believe people like you deserve to live here because you don't appreciate that blood has been shed to give you the right to believe the way you do. I'm not kicking you out, I'm just sharing my feelings. I FEEL it when people disrespect the Second Amendment.

I don't believe our president deserves this, the best job he'll ever have, either.

Again, I'm not "attacking you" I'm stating clearly HOW and WHY and WHERE we disagree.... I'm disagreeing with you.

Because you brought it up.

al
Click to expand...

This is so far off base that it really deserves no reply. You are guessing and assuming what I think and in nearly all instances you are dead wrong.
 
OK, he killed his mother, therefore his court appointed lawyer, will swear that she left them to him in her will, to do what ever he wished. His mother tried her best but failed, but the government failed first by not backing her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top