NRA speech.. thoughts?

[Riot]

What could possibly go wrong, with a volunteer, parmilitary police force hanging out at schools.

What do you think about a Committee of Safety?

*Please click the link and read up if you think this is just another government agency.

 

[DireWolf]

That must be why Bill Clinton brought it up almost 20 years ago, and kicked in over $60 Million in 1995 dollars to help pay for them.

Flashback: Clinton Requests $60 Million to Put Cops in Schools

He wasn't serious, and wasn't into a meaningful discussion.
Yeah right!

And Reagan supported the AWB, and Bush wrote a scathing resignation letter to the NRA at that time, for Wayne's drivel.

Your point?



Yeah. I thought so.

Oh look we have another trolling plant from (insert authoritarian group or think tank here)

It's a conspiracy. I'm a Sierra Club plant.



Just because I don't march lock step with the Kool Aid drinkers on this site, I'm a troll.

Makes sense.

 

[bnsaibum]

Perhaps you would like to expound upon why you believe this,

Blanket statements about more guns and armed guards is not serious, and the NRA has lost the plot for meaningful discussion.

otherwise this

I'm a troll.

could be seen as you telling the truth.

 

[michaels]

Hi Riot,

I think you are comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Riot]

Hi Riot,

I think you are comparing apples to oranges.

Not really...what I'm trying to say is that maybe the communities should be tapped to protect their own citizens for a change. Quit making the school zones "free shooting zones" and quit trying to advocate a police state at the same time. A Committee of Safety (aka a localized Militia) could be tasked to voluntarily patrol schools and train teachers on how to protect themselves and their classrooms.

The only other foreseeable option is to homeschool your kids. That's it folks. Want security at every school without paying for more taxes? Tell me how that is going to fly, there Chief.

 

[michaels]

Well, maybe you should have said that in the first place......

But I agree, communities should be in control of what happens in their communities.

I believe this can be accomplished without a citizens army, without police or security guards. Professional or volunteer.

But back on topic, I had a very negative opinion of the nra speech.

Again, the nra speech lacked in so many ways.

Without creativity and flexibility, lateral thinking....

The nra is supposedly defending my gun rights?

Doing a poor job.

 

[4Freedom]

NRA was being condemned for not standing up for our rights, now they are condemned for being too zealous standing up for our rights. They just will never get it right.. Or maybe there is just no perfect answer. If people were screaming to ban cars tomorrow after a car accident killing a dozen school kids, etc, and the National Car Association had to come up with an answer, would there really be any feasible solution, that isn't just lip service or a "feel-good" measure to try to appease those who are striving to strip us of our freedoms so they can both empower government thugs, as well as make their witless, brainwashed, terrified, self-loathing selves feel comforted?

The NRA I think worked with what it had.. There was no good speech, no good solutions. Gun rights are rights. What would happen if we had people trying to "REDEFINE" the 1st Amendment. Here's an example of what they could say: "Oh, sorry, back in 1770s, people needed religion, but today religion can be dangerous and can only be approved by the State. Our founding fathers never had any intentions for you to really have your own freedom to worship any religion you wanted, etc , etc. "

Do you get the concept?

 

[michaels]

I'm not condemning them for being too zealous.

I'm condemning the leadership for being idiotic.

I hear what you're saying about redefining rights for sure.

I hate when people think that a legitimate argument against unions is that they were something we needed in the past, but not anymore.

 

[rocky3]

I think a formation of state police, local police and an FBI consultant should be available to any school official, superintendent, teachers principle, and custodians for training such as situations like Newton. Make it voluntary with all expenses paid by the schools, and make a good Samaritan law to make these responders free of liability lawsuits.
This, along with riddance of gun-free zones, might prevent another tragedy.

 

[Squidly]

NRA was being condemned for not standing up for our rights, now they are condemned for being too zealous standing up for our rights. They just will never get it right.. Or maybe there is just no perfect answer. If people were screaming to ban cars tomorrow after a car accident killing a dozen school kids, etc, and the National Car Association had to come up with an answer, would there really be any feasible solution, that isn't just lip service or a "feel-good" measure to try to appease those who are striving to strip us of our freedoms so they can both empower government thugs, as well as make their witless, brainwashed, terrified, self-loathing selves feel comforted?

The NRA I think worked with what it had.. There was no good speech, no good solutions. Gun rights are rights. What would happen if we had people trying to "REDEFINE" the 1st Amendment. Here's an example of what they could say: "Oh, sorry, back in 1770s, people needed religion, but today religion can be dangerous and can only be approved by the State. Our founding fathers never had any intentions for you to really have your own freedom to worship any religion you wanted, etc , etc. "

Do you get the concept?

Regardless of what you believe about the NRA speech, there was a huge surge in membership shortly afterward.

 

[DireWolf]

The Israelis had a problem with organized terrorists shooting kids. They armed the teachers. It worked.

Oops.

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

 

[Jamie6.5]

And Reagan supported the AWB, and Bush wrote a scathing resignation letter to the NRA at that time, for Wayne's drivel.

My point is, that if you truly believe that cops in schools isn't part of a "meaningful discussion" then Bill Clinton never offered a "meaningful" solution either.
Kind of a rough way to treat the savior of liberal causes isn't it?

Reagan wrote a letter in support of the AWB about the time he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. To bad the dems in congress weren't tested for it about the same time!
So, to quote you,... "Your point?"

Yeah. I thought so.

Meaningful discussion indeed. Wayne's is "drivel," but Bubba C's is not.

Here's hoping Santa brought you a clue for Christmas!

 

[Jamie6.5]

Oops.

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday,

CBS News is tripping over semantics.
You can betchurass that if the Newtown or Clackamas shooters had been associated with the hutaree or other militia, the news media would be calling them domestic terrorists at every opportunity.

 

[Suge206]

CBS News is tripping over semantics.
You can betchurass that if the Newtown or Clackamas shooters had been associated with the hutaree or other militia, the news media would be calling them domestic terrorists at every opportunity.

its absloutley not just semantics. sure, if it was a militia attack theyd call it domestic terrorism but it wasnt so whats your point again? Theyve had 2 incidences, both part of an ongoing military conflict, in the last 4 decades. They also have considerably more restrictive gun rights for private citizens and essentially no gun violence outside of the military conflict with Palestinians.

 

[Squidly]

Though it does seem that your admirable and legitimate concern is death of human beings including children, then let's ban something that would benefit all Americans, including children.
Ban cigarettes.

Is smoking a right or a privilege?

 

[Riot]

Is smoking a right or a privilege?

Well it ain't in the freekin Constitution, that's for sure...when compared to guns, tobacco is a better metaphor for inanimate objects that kill people.

If we can't ban tobacco (right out) then maybe only cigars or pipes that hold more than an once?

It's for the children!

 

[Stewage]

Here's how I see the problem. Forgive me if this comes out wrong.
The debate right now is a knee jerk debate on both sides. Here is an analogy (sort of).
I woke up one day after I had turned 32, walked into the bathroom and caught a glance of myself in the bathroom mirror and did a double take. What the F had happened, I felt like I had went to bed a fit young man and woke up a fat middle aged one.
I feel right now in America we are doing that double take (or being forced to).
Now we are standing here staring at ourselves and trying to come up with a solution.
Seems some want a quick fix (Liposuction)
Seems some are comfortable how we are (Do nothing)
Seems some want to blame someone else (My wifes good cooking)
Seems some want to take it slow (Good diet and Exercise)
The problem I see is this, the obvious (long term) solution is also the slowest one. The real solution to this problem will require a compromise from both sides. I would be willing to go to the gym but I refuse to do Yoga, that kind of thing.
Now back to guns. Here are comes the analogy part:
Seems some want a quick fix (take everybodys guns away) -Nope
Seems some want to do nothing (Just blame the shooter) true he was to blame, but I feel there is more to the whole situation than that.
Seems some want to blame someone else (It is video games/Movies)
Seems some want to take it slow (better mental health programs, showing our children better respect for life, weapons-ed in school (like drivers-ed)...)
The fact is, we will never rid society of ALL violent people, like I will never rid my body of ALL my fat. I also am of the understanding that I will have to continuosly work to keep myself in shape and it will be that way forever. There is no fix it and forget it.
Sorry for the long rant....

 

[Jamie6.5]

Is smoking a right or a privilege?

It won't matter as long as legislators, governors and presidents continue to feed at a trough filled with tax money from tobacco.
The price of a pack of cigs is over 50% taxes. Some federal, some state, and in some places, municipal taxes.
It's a cash cow.
And if they can't ban guns and ammo, you can expect they will do the same thing with them.
Imagine paying $40.00 for a box of Win whitebox for your 9MM.
Of course, $25.00 of that cost will be taxes.

 

[deadeye]

Though it does seem that your admirable and legitimate concern is death of human beings including children, then let's ban something that would benefit all Americans, including children.
Ban cigarettes.
Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States. Each year, an estimated 443,000 people die prematurely from smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6 million live with a serious illness caused by smoking. Despite these risks, approximately 46.6 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes. Smokeless tobacco, cigars, and pipes also have deadly consequences, including lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancers.
The harmful effects of smoking do not end with the smoker. An estimated 88 million nonsmoking Americans, including 54% of children aged 3–11 years, are exposed to secondhand smoke. Even brief exposure can be dangerous because nonsmokers inhale many of the same poisons in cigarette smoke as smokers.
Secondhand smoke exposure causes serious disease and death, including heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems, and more frequent and severe asthma attacks in children. Each year, primarily because of exposure to secondhand smoke, an estimated 3,000 nonsmoking Americans die of lung cancer, more than 46,000 die of heart disease, and about 150,000–300,000 children younger than 18 months have lower respiratory tract infections.
Coupled with this enormous health toll is the significant economic burden of tobacco use&#8212;more than $96 billion a year in medical costs and another $97 billion a year from lost productivity. <broken link removed>

Surely, common sense dictates that such a ban would be far more effective than banning 30 round magazines or any particular firearm, would it not?

Just to be fair, I say we ban cerakote.....http://www.cerakoteguncoatings.com/resources/files/MC series (Generic).pdf