NRA blames media, music , etc., for violence

[Police Moderator]

NRA blames media, music and more for culture of violence
By Tom Curry, NBC News national affairs writer

National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre blamed Hollywood, video games music, the courts and more on Friday for creating a culture of violence in the United States.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said at a Washington press event, adding, “With all the money in the federal budget can’t we afford to put a police officer in every single school?”

LaPierre made his lengthy statement to the press one week after the shooting that killed 20 children and six adults at a school in Newtown, Conn.

Protesters twice interrupted LaPierre, who will appear this Sunday exclusively on NBC's "Meet the Press," holding signs reading "NRA KILLING OUR KIDS," and screaming that the gun rights group has "blood on its hands."

Read more: nbc news

[frayne]

America's "Deadliest Lethal Weapon" is by far the automobile. America's DLW, requires a registration, a periodic inspection, and it must be insured. The driver has to have a high-tech, state issued picture ID, which you have to jump through hoops to get. All of these can be revoked at any time, and there are penalties for non-compliance.

Yet, of course, we still have drunk drivers, uninsured and unregistered drivers, and people who violate traffic laws. And we still have car accidents that result in injury and death. Although these laws do not eliminate them, I submit that there would be a lot more automobile related deaths, and a lot more drunk driving if there were no such laws.

I don't believe that the laws regarding hand guns, or any other kind of guns are nearly as strict as our automobile laws. If they were, I'm sure we would lessen the chances that guns would fall into the wrong hands for the wrong reasons, and I suspect we would avert some of these gun related crimes. Not all of them, but a lot of them.

Owning and operating a firearm should not be right but a privilege, much like driving.

Placing an armed guard at schools, or having teachers trained and carrying firearms does not make much sense in my opinion for various reasons. I doubt if the NRA would endorse any legislation or additional tax on firearms in order to pay for these ideas.

Just my two cents.

[Justin Thyme]

frayne, owning a car is a right, driving it on a public highway is what is the privilege.

[frayne]

Semantics my friend, are you going to own a car and not drive it ?

[Deleted]

The second amendment does not refer to the privilege to bear arms. Semantics do make a difference.

[JC]

Placing an armed guard at schools, or having teachers trained and carrying firearms does not make much sense in my opinion for various reasons.

We have kept guns out of schools for over 20 years now. Gun Free School Zone Act.
Hows that working out?

Didn't take but a couple years before this school shooting problem to start.
Really got bad in 1995 after Clinton's "assault weapons ban" kicked in.

Let's make decisions based on facts and history instead of emotion.

[frayne]

Dec 21, 2012 18:20:10 GMT -5 @yodanbr2 said:

The second amendment does not refer to the privilege to bear arms. Semantics do make a difference.

I agree, the second amendment needs to be changed to make firearm ownership a privledge, and not a right.

[frayne]

Dec 21, 2012 18:21:50 GMT -5 JC said:

Placing an armed guard at schools, or having teachers trained and carrying firearms does not make much sense in my opinion for various reasons.

We have kept guns out of schools for over 20 years now. Gun Free School Zone Act.
Hows that working out?

Didn't take but a couple years before this school shooting problem to start.
Really got bad in 1995 after Clinton's "assault weapons ban" kicked in.

Let's make decisions based on facts and history instead of emotion.

OK, rescind the gun free zone laws. The assault weapons ban was a joke and most know it as the gun manufacturers by-passed the regs by building guns just below the assault weapon threshold, knowing full well a buyer could easily bring up to AW specs.

We don't pay our teachers a decent wage to teach and you want to issue them firearms to take out some nut with an A-15, wearing body armor and loaded for bear ? Check the stats with rounds on target by trained professional and get back with me how your think a 7th grade English teacher is going to respond to a serious threat.

Common sense and emotions are entirely two different drivers. Facts and history are pretty self evident when it comes to firearm violence.

[JC]

I suggest that you research "rounds on target". Very low percentage of failures to stop threats, even when they DO miss, it still stops the threat.
The Oregon mall shooter was stopped without even one round fired.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dsV6TCwd0o

"We don't pay our teachers a decent wage to teach and you want to issue them firearms to take out some nut with an A-15, wearing body armor and loaded for bear ?"

According to timelines, the shooter entered the school about 9:30. Shortly after, the Principle attempted to stop the shooter and was killed in the process. At 9:38 an offer radioed that the shooting appears to have stopped. At 9:46 they found the shooter's body.

That's a lot of minutes and dead children that could have been saved had the Principle had a means to stop him. The officers were not even on the scene yet when the principle tried to stop him.

I would rather have a retarded monkey on the scene with a gun than highly skilled officers that are only minutes away.


"Common sense and emotions are entirely two different drivers. Facts and history are pretty self evident when it comes to firearm violence. "

That's right. Firearm violence is a horrible thing. Armed citizens that are able to stop immediate firearm violence is a good thing. That's proven, not emotion.

[JC]

OK, rescind the gun free zone laws. The assault weapons ban was a joke and most know it as the gun manufacturers by-passed the regs by building guns just below the assault weapon threshold, knowing full well a buyer could easily bring up to AW specs.

"Assault weapon specs" is cosmetics.
There is absolutely no difference between a common everyday hunting rifle and a "military grade killing machine". Well, other than a mean ole' pistol grip and a bayonet lug, that is. Having your strong hand vertical instead of horizontal doesn't change the function or "deadliness" of the weapon.

[Tsavodiner]

Dec 21, 2012 19:22:31 GMT -5 frayne said:

Dec 21, 2012 18:20:10 GMT -5 @yodanbr2 said:

The second amendment does not refer to the privilege to bear arms. Semantics do make a difference.

I agree, the second amendment needs to be changed to make firearm ownership a privledge, and not a right.

Well, by all means, organize a Constitutional Convention and let's get that done.

BUT, while the books are open, amend the FIRST Amendment to proscribe:
ANY act of fictionalized violence against governmental entities, members, elected officials, clergy members, teachers, lawyers, homosexuals, treecutters, and newspaper delivery boys;

open, hell, DO AWAY with the Fourteenth Amendment;

amend the Fifth to do away with that pesky self-incrimination thingee; oh, and no more free lawyers for the accused.

THEN we'll talk about your pet project of giving away MY Rights.

THINK ABOUT IT

Do you REALLY want only people like ME with the armament to enforce policy decisions made by madmen? Really?

[Tsavodiner]

I would rather have a retarded monkey on the scene with a gun than highly skilled officers that are only minutes away.

And I resemble the implication, and what's the difference?

[Half-Tard]

Do you REALLY want only people like ME

I don't want people like you near children.

[frayne]

I'd take a highly skilled officer over a retarded monkey anyday of the week, even allowing for the stats below;

The Times reported that in 2006-2007, Los Angeles police officers hit their targets between 27 and 29 percent of the time, respectively. There is no reliable national data on hit ratio.


According to Thomas Aveni, who has written extensively about police shootings and is executive director of the Police Policy Studies Council, many police agencies do not collect data on officer-involved shootings and that those that do are often reluctant to hand it over to academics, advocates or the press.

In addition, Aveni says that many analyses of the available data fail to parse important elements, such as whether the shootings occur in daylight, how many officers are involved and how close the officers are to their target. His 2003 report on the subject found that shootings involving a single officer have an approximately 50 percent hit ratio, and that low light diminishes police accuracy by up to 30 percent.


Aveni, a long-time police trainer, says that improving police hit ratio has been a decades-long struggle.

"What's been lacking in police circles for years is some measure by which we can see how an officer will perform in a life-or-death situation," says Aveni.

Typically police officers are tested on marksmanship at a firing range where the officer and the targets are still. The problem, says Aveni, is that this kind of test "does not require any judgment or real exertion." In "real life," he explains, an officer will miss most of the time when the target is moving or if there is a physical struggle involved.

But recognizing a disparity between how police are trained to shoot and how they usually end up shooting in the field is one thing - developing training that addresses the issue effectively is another.

Avent says that technology - such as virtual training simulators that allow officers to practice their skills in an "active shooter" situation - has helped some, but that the real challenge is replicating the adrenaline rush and hormonal changes that occur within an officer when he or she is confronted by an armed individual. Having officers run in place and then complete a virtual shooting scenario, or using equipment that fires paintballs at the officer hasn't made much of a difference.

"I've seen guys hold fire when they know they're being critiqued and they know the bullets aren't real," says Aveni.

[Tsavodiner]

Dec 21, 2012 20:51:44 GMT -5 Half-Tard said:

Do you REALLY want only people like ME

I don't want people like you near children.

but I'm so child-like at this time of year

[Tsavodiner]

frayne, I'll not disparage anyone who's not experienced live-fire combat, but from experience resulting in my distinguishing poliosis, if you're hitting anywhere NEAR 25% shooting at dynamic hostile targets, you're Audie Murphy. Ten percent's closer to normal.

[JC]

I'd take a highly skilled officer over a retarded monkey anyday of the week, even allowing for the stats below

That worked out real well for those 26 kids, didn't it.

[frayne]

Dec 21, 2012 20:57:23 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

frayne, I'll not disparage anyone who's not experienced live-fire combat, but from experience resulting in my distinguishing poliosis, if you're hitting anywhere NEAR 25% shooting at dynamic hostile targets, you're Audie Murphy. Ten percent's closer to normal.

Excellent point, how would a teacher with a weapon do in a live fire situation ? Not inferring a teacher is a retarded monkey here, just asking an honest question.

[frayne]

Dec 21, 2012 21:04:28 GMT -5 JC said:

I'd take a highly skilled officer over a retarded monkey anyday of the week, even allowing for the stats below

That worked out real well for those 26 kids, didn't it.

Well, we will never know if the retarded monkey would have made a difference. With human's track record for firearm safety I would safely bet arming even select teachers and administrators we would probably have more than 26 accidental deaths a year for a number of various and sundry reasons.

[frayne]

Dec 21, 2012 20:40:35 GMT -5 JC said:

OK, rescind the gun free zone laws. The assault weapons ban was a joke and most know it as the gun manufacturers by-passed the regs by building guns just below the assault weapon threshold, knowing full well a buyer could easily bring up to AW specs.

"Assault weapon specs" is cosmetics.
There is absolutely no difference between a common everyday hunting rifle and a "military grade killing machine". Well, other than a mean ole' pistol grip and a bayonet lug, that is. Having your strong hand vertical instead of horizontal doesn't change the function or "deadliness" of the weapon.

Most everyday hunting rifles aren't equipped to take 30 round clips.

[JC]

Dec 21, 2012 21:18:59 GMT -5 frayne said:

Dec 21, 2012 21:04:28 GMT -5 JC said:

I'd take a highly skilled officer over a retarded monkey anyday of the week, even allowing for the stats below

That worked out real well for those 26 kids, didn't it.

Well, we will never know if the retarded monkey would have made a difference. With human's track record for firearm safety I would safely bet arming even select teachers and administrators we would probably have more than 26 accidental deaths a year for a number of various and sundry reasons.

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Your fear of accidents is BS and should not overrule your childrens' safety.
The 2007 Small Arms Survey estimates there are 88.7 guns per 100 Americans
A 2010 estimate from the NRA states "Privately owned firearms in the U.S.: Approaching 300 million, including nearly 100 million handguns. The number of firearms rises over 4 million annually."
Recently released numbers (few days back) are estimated at 350 million and growing substantially since last Friday.
There are nearly 1 million non-law enforcement permitted gun carriers in Tn, GA and FL. How many nation wide, I dunno. In the millions somewhere for sure.

How many accidental shootings, or innocent bystanders are shot in defensive shootings per year? The number is so low that the CDC does not keep a record of them. They report 31,347 firearm deaths total. That includes all firearm related deaths. By my math, that's 0.00885 including all deaths.

I would say that "human's track record of firearm safety" is pretty doggone good. The numbers do not lie.

[JC]

Dec 21, 2012 21:42:06 GMT -5 frayne said:

Dec 21, 2012 20:40:35 GMT -5 JC said:

"Assault weapon specs" is cosmetics.
There is absolutely no difference between a common everyday hunting rifle and a "military grade killing machine". Well, other than a mean ole' pistol grip and a bayonet lug, that is. Having your strong hand vertical instead of horizontal doesn't change the function or "deadliness" of the weapon.

Most everyday hunting rifles aren't equipped to take 30 round clips.

Some are, some aren't.
Doesn't matter one iota anyway. Takes all of one second to change a mag. Quicker than that with practice. Youtube "mag changes" to see umpteenth regular folks doing speedy changes.

That means that three 10 rounds mags would take... maybe 2 or 3 seconds longer to fire 30 rounds than one 30 round mag would.
Big BIG difference there, eh.

[JC]

I'll do you one better, Frayne. Come out to the range one day and see the differences (or lack thereof) firsthand. I'll bring an AR-15 if someone else will bring a non-militarily killin' machine.
You don't have to shoot but I'll guarantee that you will want to. Can even handle moi AR 22 squirrel killer "military killing machine".

Serious offer

Dec 21, 2012 20:49:15 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

I would rather have a retarded monkey on the scene with a gun than highly skilled officers that are only minutes away.

And I resemble the implication, and what's the difference?

The difference?
One is there and one isn't. Even the most retarded monke.... I mean, even the most retarded offic... er, I mean, even the most trained officers can not save fayne's ass if the cops are not near.

[Tsavodiner]

True, that.

Proximity MATTERS

What nauseates me is the rehash of the argument of the Eloi that, by parking even a retired copper in every schoolhouse, we're turning the country into "a Police State". This screed's going 'round loud and long, sponsored by the same people who'd UTTERLY disarm YOU before your enemies to attain their Valhalla of a gun less society.

[Tsavodiner]

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Should I apologize for that night of the Senior Prom?

[frayne]

Dec 22, 2012 0:01:07 GMT -5 JC said:

I'll do you one better, Frayne. Come out to the range one day and see the differences (or lack thereof) firsthand. I'll bring an AR-15 if someone else will bring a non-militarily killin' machine.
You don't have to shoot but I'll guarantee that you will want to. Can even handle moi AR 22 squirrel killer "military killing machine".

Serious offer

Dec 21, 2012 20:49:15 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

And I resemble the implication, and what's the difference?

The difference?
One is there and one isn't. Even the most retarded monke.... I mean, even the most retarded offic... er, I mean, even the most trained officers can not save fayne's ass if the cops are not near.

Thanks for the offer but I am well aware of the differences or lack thereof. Carried an M-16 as a grunt in Nam 70-71 with the 1st Cav. Also have shot a friend's AR at the Chattanooga Gun Club a few times. FWIW also a CCP holder and shoot at the local ranges here. I realize the differences are mostly cosmetic but I have yet to see many hunting rifles with 30 round clips, or the need for a 30 round clip on a hunting rifle. But no big deal and we can agree to disagree. The NRA's suggestion may sound good to some but how would it be funded and that my friend is the crux of the matter. As far as a deterrent I don't think it would make much difference to some nut case hellbent on killing a bunch of kids.

Don't know a good answer but I do know the easy availablility of firearms in this country only adds to the problem.

[Warkitty]

I find I cannot agree with more gun laws and restrictions. Much as I understand the call for it and am sympathetic to the wish for same, I simply do not think it would help with the problem any more than making pot illegal has reduced the use of it. I find I actually agree that the availability of guns is less problematic than the cultural norm presented that gun violence is "cool."

Now, calling for federal funding to place an armed guard, cop or whatever at every school is also naive when we're facing the fiscal cliff, cries for "no new taxes" and demands for budget *cuts*, so really that leaves us with removing the "gun free zone" claim, continuing to regulate *student* access to guns at a local level (I mean, inner city you'd have to, but go rural northwest and it's a whole 'nother matter), leave that up to each school district, but allow teachers and administrators to carry if they have a CCL.

The kids don't need to ever know which teacher is armed and which isn't, and neither does a potential perpetrator.

[Deleted]

That works for me, WK.

[Half-Tard]

No need for the military style weapons on the street are the deer getting gangsta. maybe after a few more hundred kids are murdered we'll talk..

[JC]

The NRA's suggestion may sound good to some but how would it be funded and that my friend is the crux of the matter.

I agree. Putting law enforcement RSOs, which is the best thing to do, in schools will cost $80,000/yr per RSO.
For a county the size of Hamilton Co., that's just too much. It's even too much for small rural counties.
Not to mention cities like Chattanooga that already have an understaffed police force. Can Chattanooga/Hamiliton Co. really afford to take 76 cops off of the streets?

That's why I fully support citizens being allowed to go armed on school property. It will not cost tax payers one red cent to do that. I'd opine that most rural schools would have a line of volunteers willing to do it nation wide. Even in gun-scarce states like NY or CA. I, personally, would volunteer my time or donate guns/ammo/gear to others to protect the schools near my home.

Urban and city schools would obviously have a problem getting volunteers, but allowing this bill (already proposed in TN before 2013 session even starts) would allow those schools to hire armed security at a much lower rate than it would cost for law enforcement RSOs.
As the NRA stated, there are lots of unemployed vets and volunteer/reservist cops, military, first responders that would be happy to have a paying job.
Even offering $20k/yr would have people lined up for the position. That's a pretty sweet pay check when you have summers and every holiday off.

The NRA says they will help fund putting security in schools with the help of the feds. Hope they release these details on Monday.
The NRA would certainly have the funds to pay for a lot of this. 72,000 people have joined the NRA since last Friday. That's a lot of additional revenue in and of itself.