I am disturbed by Wayne LaPierre's support of "Gun-Free Zones" (http://www.nra.org/Speech.aspx?id=6043). As recent events at Virginia Tech demonstrate, "Gun-Free Zones" are an oxymoron at best, and a killer at worst. Criminals don't obey the law, period. Wayne should renounce his support of "Gun-Free Zones" and embrace the rights of students and teachers to be lawfully armed, or consider resigning his post. In addition, it is profoundly disturbing to me that he and the NRA are betraying their principals and the members by negotiating with the other side to further restrict our second amendment rights. I am speaking of the NICS enhancement bill.That was a pretty straightforward explanation of his position, wouldn't you agree?
Every time you compromise with evil, evil wins and you lose. Soon there will be nothing left of our rights and evil (Sarah Brady, et al.) will have won.
Here's their response:
Hello and thank you for contacting NRA-ILA in regards to the Gun-Free Zones issues.
Let's always remember first and foremost that it is those deranged individuals who have committed horrific crimes with guns at schools that are themselves responsible for their acts. Clearly it is already illegal to bring a gun to school and use it to take the lives of others. In committing these criminal acts, numerous federal, state, and local existing laws are broken. You can't make such heinous behavior any more illegal than it already is.
Of course, in the aftermath of such tragedies, Americans ask "why" and seek solutions to prevent future tragedies from occurring. If we are truly to find solutions to preventing school shootings, a wide range of remedies must be on the table for consideration, including whether or not there should be a lawful, armed presence on our nation's campuses. However, at the top of the discussion list, should be trying to figure out what has gone so wrong in these instances that an individual(s) feels the need to take the lives of young students in what should be a safe environment. One thing that is certain, however, is that passing additional gun control laws should not be part of the discussion, as again, you can't make what these criminals do with guns at schools any more illegal than it already is.
Suzanne N. Anglewicz
National Rifle Association
Institute for Legislative Action
703-267-1174
1-800-392-8683 (VOTE)
sanglewicz@nrahq.org
Pretty slick, huh? You notice she didn't actually give any kind of direct response to his concerns or anything.
Nope, the "top of the list" has nothing to do with NRA's "Purposes and Objectives" as defined in the Association Bylaws, "To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms, in order that the people may always be in a position to exercise their legitimate individual rights of self-preservation and defense of family, person, and property, as well as to serve effectively in the appropriate militia for the common defense of the Republic and the individual liberty of its citizens;"
If we are to believe Ms. Anglewicz (and why wouldn't we?), NRA's Number One Job is to figure out why psychotic killers "feel" compelled to kill. Meanwhile, nothing in Wayne's position has changed: The only ones who should be armed on campus are, well, "The Only Ones."
"...at the top of the discussion list, should be trying to figure out what has gone so wrong in these instances that an individual(s) feels..."
ReplyDeleteI don't have one ounce of caring for understanding why an insane murderous bastard wants to kill. Since earliest recorded history there have been murderers, (it isn't a trend that will be stopped by "understanding feelings" either.)
The only discussion should be: What is the fastest way to STOP the attacker?
Discuss away. But, any mention of attempting to understand the feelings of the attacker shows your ignorance of murderers throughout ALL of human history, or your utter stupidity, or your desire to push forward another agenda. Any of which causes you to lose your vote towards a solution.
Likely, you would have just voted in banning the victims access to the tool which makes self-defense as easy as "point-and-click". (Hint: It's already been tried, and has yet to stop a single murderer from killing their intended victim(s). Not to mention any such ban is blatantly unconstitutional.)
At least the NRA wrote back to him. My letters are always ignored completely.
ReplyDeleteWonder how many people they're alienating with this position? Most college students with CCW permits are unable to carry on campus because of these stupid rules, and so are their professors. College students might not be huge donors, but we may be in the future. The NRA burning us now isn't going to help them get any of my money, that's for sure.
ReplyDeleteTypical politician. Avoid the issues at all costs. I sent them a scathing letter myself the other day. And I have CANCELLED my membership to the NRA. I asked them " Just what part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED don't you understand?"
ReplyDeleteI took an oath to defend the Constitution, when I joined the military back in 1976, and that oath still stands as long as I am breathing. I flat REFUSE to support the NRA, and have nothing good to say about them in the future.