The NRA Finally Responds With Its "Meaningful Contributions"

[Formaldehyde]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss:

The NRA finally divulged their "meaningful contributions" to the issue:

NRA Press Conference: Wayne LaPierre Calls For Armed Police Officers At Every School

WASHINGTON -- The nation's largest gun-rights lobby is calling for armed police officers to be posted in every American school to stop the next killer "waiting in the wings."

The National Rifle Association broke its silence Friday on last week's shooting rampage at a Connecticut elementary school that left 26 children and staff dead.

The group's top lobbyist, Wayne LaPierre, said at a Washington news conference that "the next Adam Lanza," the man responsible for last week's mayhem, is planning an attack on another school.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," LaPierre said.

He blamed video games, movies and music videos for exposing children to a violent culture day in and day out.

"In a race to the bottom, many conglomerates compete with one another to shock, violate, and offend every standard of civilized society, by bringing an even more toxic mix of reckless behavior and criminal cruelty right into our homes," LaPierre said.

He refused to take any questions after speaking. Still, though security was tight, two protesters were able to interrupt LaPierre's speech, holding up signs that blamed the NRA for killing children. Both were escorted out, shouting that guns in schools are not the answer.

More than a dozen security officers checked media credentials at various checkpoints and patrolled the hotel ballroom.

LaPierre announced that former Rep. Asa Hutchison, R-Ark., will lead an NRA program that will develop a model security plan for schools that relies on armed volunteers.

The 4.3 million-member NRA largely disappeared from public debate after the shootings in Newtown, Conn., choosing atypical silence as a strategy as the nation sought answers after the rampage. The NRA temporarily took down its Facebook page and kept quiet on Twitter.

Since the slayings, President Barack Obama has demanded "real action, right now" against U.S. gun violence and called on the NRA to join the effort. Moving quickly after several congressional gun-rights supporters said they would consider new legislation to control firearms, the president said this week he wants proposals to reduce gun violence that he can take to Congress by January.

Obama has already asked Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and pass legislation that would stop people from purchasing firearms from private sellers without a background check. Obama also has indicated he wants Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity magazines.

NRA news conference: Do previous actions foretell response to Sandy Hook shooting?

Here is how the NRA previously responded to recent mass shootings.

Cleveland Elementary School, Stockton, Calif.

Jan. 17, 1989

Dead: six, five children and the shooter

Gun used: a Type 56 assault rifle (a Chinese copy of the AK-47)

When the NRA issued first statement: same day as the shootings

Initial statement: "That citizens have these and use them is not the problem. It's that criminals misuse them," NRA lobbyist David S. Marshall told the San Diego Union-Tribune, referring to the gun used by the shooter, which was bought for $400.

What NRA did next: Opposed measures to create a ban on assault weapons. A 1995 NRA ad called Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents "jack-booted government thugs," prompting former President George H.W. Bush to quit his membership in the group.

Did anything change? It took nearly five years, but the shooting led to the first major federal legislation on military-style assault weapons. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was enacted in 1994, but expired in 2004.

Columbine High School, Littleton, Colo.
April 20, 1999

Dead: 15, including the two shooters

Guns used: Intratec TEC-DC-9, 9mm semiautomatic handgun, two 12-gauge sawed-off shotguns and a Hi-Point 9mm carbine rifle

When the NRA issued first statement: same day as shootings

Initial statement: Actor Charlton Heston, who was then the NRA president, offered sympathy to the victims but urged members to "stand in unshakable unity, even in this time of anguish."

What NRA did next: Amid calls to scrap its previously scheduled convention in nearby Denver just 12 days after the shooting, the organization canceled seminars, exhibitions and luncheons. But it didn't cancel the main speech by Heston. "We're not the rustic, reckless radicals they wish for," Heston told the 3,000 members who attended. While the organization agreed to consider some gun control proposals, it opposed others.

Did anything change? The NRA fought an attempt by the U.S. Senate to pass a bill requiring background checks for firearms sold during gun shows. The bill passed by one vote, with then-Vice President Al Gore breaking the 50-50 tie in the Senate, but it died in a House committee. Colorado restarted a program that required background checks with firearm purchases. Another state bill failed. It would have allowed local officials to enforce a federal law that banned gun dealers from selling firearms to anyone under 20 years old.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va.
April 16, 2007

Dead: 33, including the shooter

Guns used: a Walther .22-caliber pistol, a Glock 19

When the NRA issued first statement: same day as shootings

Initial statement: "The National Rifle Association joins the entire country in expressing our deepest condolences to the families of Virginia Tech and everyone else affected by this horrible tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families. We will not have further comment until all the facts are known."

What NRA did next: It cautiously supported a bill that would financially penalize a state if it failed to provide records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check, a database that tracks people who are prohibited from obtaining firearms. The Virginia Tech shooter should have been excluded from buying the weapons he used, but his mental health information wasn't entered into the database before his purchases.

Did anything change? President George W. Bush signed the bill.

Tucson, Ariz.
Jan. 8, 2011

Dead: six, 13 injured, including then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords

Gun used: a 9mm Glock 19 semiautomatic pistol with a 33-round magazin

When the NRA issued first statement: same day as shootings

Initital statement: "Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this senseless tragedy, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and their families during this difficult time. We join the rest of the country in praying for the quick recovery of those injured."

What NRA did next: Opposed efforts to pass legislation banning large-capacity ammunition magazines used in the Tucson shooting. "Despite the burdens it would put on honest Americans, (the) bill wouldn't stop a criminal from obtaining magazines that hold more than 10 rounds," the NRA said on its website. "Tens of millions of Americans own countless tens of millions of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. . . . Anything that common can be stolen or bought on the black market."

Did anything change? Bills that limited high-capacity magazines and required background checks at gun shows failed.

Aurora, Colo.
July 20, 2012

Dead: 12

Guns used: an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and at least one of two .40-caliber handguns

When the NRA issued first statement: same day as shootings

Initial statement: "Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families and the community. The NRA will not have any further comment until all the facts are known."

What NRA did next: For weeks after the shootings, the NRA issued the same statement to media outlets: "The NRA believes that now is the time for families to grieve and for the community to heal. There will be an appropriate time down the road to engage in political and policy discussions." A statement providing more reflection was never given and by October the media had stopped asking.

Did anything change? In the middle of a presidential campaign, the topic was hardly discussed. Neither Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama proposed measures to address the shootings. But in three states controlled by Democrats — California, Illinois, and New York — bills were introduced to curb the sale of guns. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives considered the possible easing of regulation on armor piercing bullets, according to the Sunlight Foundation. On Dec. 6, eight days before the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary, the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action sent out an alert to members urging them to weigh in on the ATF request, which was made after the agency received requests from unnamed sources to review its policies.

A police officer at every single school? Armed volunteers? Video games, movies, and music videos are at least partly responsible for our supposed culture of violence, but not the policies of the NRA?

Is anybody really surprised that their latest "meaningful contributions" are just more "law and order" far-right knee jerk reactions, along with the ludicrous notion of even placing armed volunteers in our schools? That they wouldn't even take questions after the press conference, while being paranoid that they would quite possibly be exposed to some sort of violent reaction themselves from those who were apparently required to have media credentials?

 

[Phrossack]

Cops won't do much. There were very few, maybe two, at my middle and high schools, and if a shooter came in, they'd target the cops first. Plus shooters are in the habit of wearing armor nowadays.

 

[Antilogic]

Is anyone really surprised the NRA is recommending more guns as a solution to our problems?

 

[Evie]

It still beats "arming the teachers" as far as solution goes.

Obviously my favorite solution is "as much gun control as can be achieved", but failing that, policemen in every school beats arming the teachers.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Yeah, this was pathetic. They were blaming the kids with their rock and roll music and funny haircuts and and and

 

[warpus]

Armed cops in school won't really be able to make much of a difference.

I recommend armed drones patrolling the corridors, at least one per floor.

Janitors should also be armed with grenade launchers, just in case.

 

[dutchfire]

The US has 100.000 schools (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84)
Each school will have 2 armed guards on average. (Conservative estimate)
A school year has roughly 250 days. (Conservative estimate)
Each day, the guards have to be there 9 hours.
Hiring a guard costs $25 per hour. (Conservative estimate, I think)

That's 11 billion annually. The total the US spends on education is 810 billion (http://rossieronline.usc.edu/u-s-education-versus-the-world-infographic/)

So this would take 1.35% percent of the current US education budget.

edit: And then I read the article, saying they're volunteers...

 

[Antilogic]

You cannot expect volunteers to cover that many hours--these people need to be paid. And I'm assuming we aren't factoring in health benefits or anything for these guards, right?

 

[bestrfcplayer]

Hey guys! Let's just get more guns to stop this! There's no possible way that this can go wrong!

That's like saying we need to tackle the obesity problem in America by saying we need to eat more food.....

 

[dutchfire]

Now, my opinion about this idea.

I agree with Antilogic that thinking you can cover this by volunteers seems naive. You want people who you can trust, who are trained in using guns and in how to respond to dangerous situations. You also probably don't want new people doing this every time, you want the guards to get used to the school and the kids, and to spot things that are unusual. You can't expect this from volunteers, since you need to cover a lot of hours.

I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of having a security guy in every school (although I think it is a bit paranoid. But of course, it is not paranoia if they are out to get you.), but I think the money would be better spent on things like improved mental health care.

I'm also not sure that this would be very useful in increasing security. You basically need to put your guard in a bullet resistant location to prevent him from being the first to get shot. Even then, I think the guard is "only" 50-50 in getting the gunman down before the gunman gets him down. Schools are also typically big enough, and have enough entrances, to allow a gunman to do quite some damage before the guard can get to him. Setting up a static defence against incidents like this is just essentially very hard, since the attacker will always go for the weakest spot in your defence.

So, I'm rather meh on the whole plan, it is certainly not the best thing since sliced bread, but I have heard stupider plans.

 

[Berzerker]

More than a dozen security officers checked media credentials at various checkpoints and patrolled the hotel ballroom.

fortunately they pulled a sign out and not a gun

 

[Formaldehyde]

So, I'm rather meh on the whole plan, it is certainly not the best thing since sliced bread, but I have heard stupider plans.

The first step in this approach would be to redesign and rebuild all the schools to be like prisons, only all the security measures would be to keep bad guys out instead of in. All outdoor activities are right out unless the area is enclosed in a giant bullet proof bubble since that would expose our children to sniper fire.

Then we must take the same measures with playgrounds, parks, malls, sports facilities, arenas, and the like. We can have special areas in malls that are children-only. Armed volunteers who have passed extensive screening and qualified through the necessary training can act like surrogate parents. Special armored stands with bullet proof bubbles specifically for children can be erected in coliseums and arenas.

At least we already have the infrastructure in place to spy on all Americans to determine who many be a dire threat in this new regard. But an additional database must still be built that tracks and monitors all gun purchases, including gun shows, to determine who the greatest threats likely are. Memberships in organizations like the NRA would also be factored in. Of course, a downside is that many of the armed volunteers and even police assigned to schools would likely show up as being considerable risks in this process. But fortunately FEMA is already building camps that can quarantine the ones who show the most risk until they can be properly interrogated and reeducated.

In short, we must completely overreact to this incident much like with did after 9/11. The solution clearly isn't to address the issues which cause these sort of incidents. We must assume they hate our children's freedom and will do anything to end it.

 

[bhsup]

Watching CNN and they showed parts of it, but they conveniently cut the part about the media's obsessive coverage.

 

[MobBoss]

Is anyone really surprised the NRA is recommending more guns as a solution to our problems?

Sounded to me like they were recommending more police. But to each his own, I guess.

Armed cops in school won't really be able to make much of a difference.

Israel arms their teachers. Guess which nation has fewer school shootings?

 

[Phrossack]

Volunteers, eh? "Hey, can I enter this school with a rifle? I want to volunteer, to, uh, protect the children."

 

[ace99]

Sounded to me like they were recommending more police. But to each his own, I guess.



Israel arms their teachers. Guess which nation has fewer school shootings?

Hey if you want to arm those same unionized teachers who get bashed as incompetent and undeserving of their salaries go right ahead....

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/23572/Default.aspx

You’ve probably seen it at least once on Facebook. Or in a chain e-mail like the one above.

So, is it true that Israeli teachers are armed? It would be half of Gunnutistan‘s wet dream – don’t pay the teachers, but give them each a nice, shiny weapon. Because derp.

Well, the answer is no. Israeli teachers are not armed. In fact, it’s unlikely that the person shown above is a teacher at all.

There may be some exceptions in dangerous areas like the West Bank (where five percent of Israelis live), but in general, Israeli teachers are not walking around like it’s the Wild Wild West, strapped with a six shooter. No, our teachers are not focused on shooting, but educating. That doesn’t mean, however, that we don’t protect young students.

In the picture, the students are on an outing. While it appears that the teacher is holding a rifle, I have never seen such a thing in ten years of living here. Rest assured however, they are under armed protection. In most cases it is an armed guard or a soldier that will accompany a class, not the teacher. And my guess is that the woman with the gun is a security guard, not a teacher.

Secondly, they are not armed in the classroom. Is that really the image you want to imprint on the minds of six-year-olds? (That would be Hamas). On the other hand, I have never seen a school in Israel that was not fenced in. You must go through a locked gate that is guarded by an armed shomer, a security guard. He or she, on the other hand, is not concerned with educating, but protecting. He or she will ask you why you are there? What is your child’s name? Show me your I.D. card. And he or she would not let you bring a weapon inside.

These types of massacres don’t seem to happen here for other reasons as well. Despite the stereotype of Israel being a violent nation, it is a million times (slight exaggeration) easier to get a weapon in the U.S. than it is in Israel. Gun control laws are very strict here.

Two types of people have guns in Israel: Soldiers and those with licenses. Mentally unstable people don’t have guns—and thus, don’t shoot people. And it is not as easy to steal a gun as it is in the U.S. When you are drafted you go through mental tests to see if there are any red flags. If so, you will be discharged or placed in an area where you would never see a rifle.

http://www.jta.org/news/article/201...s-strict-gun-laws-keep-civilian-violence-down

 

[Kennigit]

Hypothetically I am not opposed to hiring police officers for schools, if the community wants to pay more taxes to be able to fund a permanent position. I personally believe the effort would probably be a "waste" of money, but there is nothing wrong with trying to make the education and safety of your children the highest priority.

If a community wants to raise its property taxes (which generally are used for schools afaik) to fund it then power to them, but the problem is that schools already don't have enough funds for teachers/education and people won't pay higher taxes/can't afford to unless they are at a suburban wealthy neighborhood. And I also believe the police officer would be ineffective--maybe in some particular case of the various instances of school shootings the police officer would have been effective, but for things like Columbine or even Sandy Springs the shooters would have been perfectly capable to shoot a police officer. Not to mention there is more school shootings than mass shootings.

Volunteers are insane, as it is far far more likely that the volunteer will end up doing a crime against the children or staff of the school (may not be violence, but say sexual harassment or otherwise. There has been sexual abuse cases of security personnel at schools) than solve anything. Police officers are an official state entity though that, I assume, can or already have
1) monthly progress/evaluation reports by their bosses/police chief and peer evaluations by fellow police officers that can catch any officer on a slippery slope in mental health
2) can be made to see a shrink or have access to mental health services on a regular basis to check if their mental state is good besides just the peer/boss evaluations
3) are trained properly and, at least hypothetically, you have to be vetted to be a police officer in the first place to some degree

That all being said, a police officer can also double up as some other functions for the school. I'm 80% sure the crossing guard at one of the elementary schools I went to was a police officer (would have worked for the school in the 30 minutes before opening/after ending, and otherwise have normal police duties). Maybe having a police officer in a school at all times can cut down on drugs that occur at school. Maybe the police officer can be trained to be a sort of guidance counselor as well, and for school kids it certainly can be a good role model.

The problem is that there isn't the funds for it, funds are better spent elsewhere, and it distracts from solutions to the more real problems (mental health system, gun control, etc, as shooters can always go shoot people/children at a mall instead of a school).

 

[AlpsStranger]

Watching CNN and they showed parts of it, but they conveniently cut the part about the media's obsessive coverage.

I would never harm another person unless I was forced to, but I swear I'm going to buy a gun and take myself out the next time we start having a "national conversation" about something.

 

[woody60707]

 

[Kaitzilla]

Sounded to me like they were recommending more police. But to each his own, I guess.



Israel arms their teachers. Guess which nation has fewer school shootings?

Being completely defenseless is the only way to stop violence. Protecting yourself is barbaric.