NRA: Society has left children 'utterly defenseless'

[ChiefsandO'sfan]

NRA: Society has left children 'utterly defenseless'
mug.cnn
Posted by
CNN Wire Staff

(CNN) – Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said "for all the noise and anger directed at us ... nobody has addressed the most important, pressing and immediate question we face: How do we protect our children right now ... in a way that we know works."

At a press event in Washington, LaPierre said U.S. society has left children "utterly defenseless."

A protester interrupted the NRA appearance before reporters with a banner accusing the NRA of killing children. The protester was led out of the room as he shouted anti-NRA slogans.

LaPierre added that violent crime is increasing in the U.S. due to a lack of willing to prosecute such acts.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

But they are mall cops essentially. They are low paying jobs with very little training. Basically they are there for show and hopefully to deter someone.

what training do you think is needed? The tactical response to an active shooter is not complicated, its this: go to the shooter, ignore any victims you see, ignore everything, just go to the shooter, and either shoot him or die trying.

These guys don't need to memorize traffic regulations and arrest procedure.

[KCChiefsFan88]

Originally Posted by Dayze

where does that 40 % number come from?

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by Hugh Janus

40% of gun purchases do not require a background check.

Ok....60% do.

And once again liberals and anti-gun people are using media hyped events such as this as the Batman massacre to fog over regular common sense here.

You're more likely to die from a deer hit in your car than from being killed in a school shooting.

[Dayze]

thanks. I hadn't heard that before; I thought the number was high, but I guess not.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by bogey

If you're haviong trouble finding the steak you're craving, I would like to suggest you go to the meat dept. at your local supermarket.

The meat dept. would not exist if PETA had their way. They don't have to listen to me or to the average person, they serve their members. If I'm having trouble finding a new Glock G30 and a 20-round magazine, I'll go to Bass Pro Shops. Since, you know, the NRA didn't let you ban them.

[KCChiefsFan88]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

Ok....60% do.

And once again liberals and anti-gun people are using media hyped events such as this as the Batman massacre to fog over regular common sense here.

You're more likely to die from a deer hitting your car than from being killed in a school shooting.

You are more likely to die from a deer hitting your car than from a terrorist attack... so no point in overreacting to terrorist attacks either, right?

Using your same logic?

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Hugh Janus

What are you arming these "volunteer armed guards" with to pierce through full military style body armor that these recent mass shooters are now wearing?

Perhaps our guards can wear the same thing, since this isn't exactly difficult to aquire equipment. Eventually the shooter will get hit in an area that is not protected or his vest will fail.

If not, then while they are busy trying to kill each other, that gives everyone else more time to get the hell out.

[CoMoChief]

That graph points to unlicensed sellers btw.....what makes you think people still won't buy guns from unlicensed sellers?

[frazod]

Originally Posted by Hugh Janus

You are more likely to die from a deer hitting your car than from a terrorist attack... so no point in overreacting to terrorist attacks either, right?

Using your same logic?

I propose the same solution for deer and terrorists - expanded hunting seasons.

And for that, we'll need more guns!

[bogey]

Originally Posted by alnorth

"something" does not equal any new gun control, at all. Requiring background checks for private-party transactions and gifts wont do jack to reduce gun violence, and the NRA members will not support whatever it is you probably think we need to do.

Disagree. Background checks, smaller clips will make a difference, however small it may be. NRA members will support whatever it is I probably I probably think we need to do. They certanly won't support it if it's not even put on the table for discussion.

[alnorth]

and above all, we still have this:

1) So-called "assault weapons", which are just rifles with dumb useless features tacked onto them to make them look scary, are not deadlier than handguns at close range. In fact, they are arguably less deadly, especially compared to .45 handguns.

2) We will never (at least not for the next 100 years) ban .45 handguns

3) We will never (at least not for the next 100 years), ban semiautomatics and force people to switch to revolvers.

4) We will never, ever for any forseeable period in the future at all, try to confiscate the current 300MM guns in the USA.

5) Reducing magazine sizes to a level the people would tolerate (maybe 15) will not significantly reduce gun violence.

6) Other ideas which may have some merit and which we may want to implement anyway, like tighter requirements to get a gun, lock a gun up, etc, will not significantly reduce gun violence.

Those are all pretty much given facts. If we don't like armed guards, the alternative (presuming we don't do both) is increased funding and support for mental health.

If that doesn't work, we're out of solutions. At that point, we then shrug and accept school shootings. Armed guards work at the airport, they work at the courthouse, and they are just about the only effective possible solution we have.

[Saulbadguy]

Originally Posted by alnorth

what training do you think is needed? The tactical response to an active shooter is not complicated, its this: go to the shooter, ignore any victims you see, ignore everything, just go to the shooter, and either shoot him or die trying.

These guys don't need to memorize traffic regulations and arrest procedure.

It gives the shooter a pretty good starting point.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by alnorth

what training do you think is needed? The tactical response to an active shooter is not complicated, its this: go to the shooter, ignore any victims you see, ignore everything, just go to the shooter, and either shoot him or die trying.

These guys don't need to memorize traffic regulations and arrest procedure.

To be effective they would need law enforcement training and certification. In fact it would be better if they would contract out with the local police department.

They probably also need a secured bullet-proof station..

Otherwise they will be the first fat slob killed

[bogey]

Originally Posted by alnorth

The meat dept. would not exist if PETA had their way. They don't have to listen to me or to the average person, they serve their members. If I'm having trouble finding a new Glock G30 and a 20-round magazine, I'll go to Bass Pro Shops. Since, you know, the NRA didn't let you ban them.

The NRA not only doesn't listen to their members, they don't even give their members the opportunity to share their opinions.

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by Hugh Janus

You are more likely to die from a deer hitting your car than from a terrorist attack... so no point in overreacting to terrorist attacks either, right?

Using your same logic?

The media has embedded terrorism into our brains for the last decade or so, so that Americans are scared looking for Al-Qaeda or some bearded turbin wearing guy hiding under your bed.

exactly.....esp when most terrorist attacks (OKC..9/11) and all govt backed operations.

The underwear bomber? - Justice dept put his ass on the plane.