NRA Press conference - Page 3
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Firearms in the Media > NRA Press conference

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-28-2012, 03:34 PM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Edge of Darkness
Posts: 6,495
Liked 4790 Times on 2679 Posts
Likes Given: 1736

Default

The heat is on. The Left has tried do destroy the NRA for the past 100 years. We will take our hits and stay in the fight. The GOA and Larry Pratt are staying in deep cover. The Pratt Family owned private company GOA does not have elected officers and they are family members. The GOA could should risk a few family dollars and stand beside the 4 million NRA members who are under heavy fire. I hope the Pratt Family reads this.

__________________
nitestalker is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 04:06 PM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Great North Woods
Posts: 2,574
Liked 2042 Times on 1069 Posts
Likes Given: 392

Default

I think armed security at the school level can help prevent some violent attacks. Someone hellbent on taking out folks before they die? How do you really stop that?

I don't agree that the schools should be full of conceal carriers. These folks are teachers, not security guards. Anyone who thinks that arming the damned teacher's union is a good idea needs to rethink their position - seriously!

The NRA (I am a member) needs to take s good look at itself. To take the position that we can't review the general safety and potential hazards of certain types if weapons is not good IMHO. There is a reason we can't have hand grenades and F-16 fighter jets, perhaps that reasoning may, at some point in time, apply to certain weaponry. Case in point - what the heck does anyone need Barrett 50 cal for? And if you can have the Barrett, why not chain-gun? Not an easy issue, drawing these boundaries.

__________________
chloeshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 04:16 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Wiebelhaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belton,Texas
Posts: 970
Liked 268 Times on 167 Posts
Likes Given: 1032

Default

The NRA are the ONLY ones offering any logical plan of action, that's why I donated.

__________________

The police cannot protect the citizen at this stage of our development, and they cannot even protect themselves in many cases. It is up to the private citizen to protect himself and his family, and this is not only acceptable, but mandatory. - Col. Jeff Cooper.

Wiebelhaus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 04:20 PM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mosin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,589
Liked 3859 Times on 1864 Posts
Likes Given: 701

Default

If every anti gun crusader went out and stood as a crossing guard, or fought to reduce speed in school/residential areas, they'd save more children's lives than by removing all guns from the country.
Don't kid yourselves for a minute, this isn't about saving lives, or preventing massacres. It's about taking guns and taking control.

How coincidental that the anti gunners are conveniently big government control freaks, the ones that don't stop at the guns, but demand the government have a say in what you eat, and what you listen to.

__________________

America has fought wars across the globe, because we kept our firearms while others let dictators take theirs...

Mosin is offline  
5
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 11:35 AM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Edge of Darkness
Posts: 6,495
Liked 4790 Times on 2679 Posts
Likes Given: 1736

Default

Who needs a .50 Caliber rifle? Well that was the antigun disarm America propaganda of the 1960s. Before 1968 there were no limits on the caliber size of weapons owned by free men. The Liberals were able to Ban ownership of any modern firearms larger than a .50 caliber. They wanted to ban anything larger than a .45 caliber.
Why does anyone need a .50 caliber? How often are .50 caliber rifles used in crime? By that reasoning would you Ban the .22 rim fires which are used in crimes very often? Being pro gun and asking the old antigun question"Why does anyone need that"? Makes me wonder?

__________________
nitestalker is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 12:22 PM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Rick1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Clifton,Colorado
Posts: 4,168
Liked 1847 Times on 1031 Posts
Likes Given: 1219

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daoust_Nat View Post
Interesting that Obummer and a lot of the talking heads that are decrying the notion of armed guards in school send their children to the Sidwell School, which has no less then 11 armed guards at all time. Ibummer stated on Letterman in Sept. I believe that he was not worried about his daughters because they were protected by men with guns.

One of the thoughts I had was how do we compensate the armed volunteers? I think an equipment allowance would bring up a huge liberal hue and cry. Perhaps a tax writeoff on a handgun, and allow your practice ammo and range time as a tax exemption. It would not make it free, but it would reduce the cost by whatever your tax rate comes out.
Ask then to walk the hall once during the shift. That entitles themto the title of security officer. Pay them a little extra for that walk say $5. That would be a $25 per week diferential. $25 a week to protect a school is nothing. The cafeteria throws more than that away in left over food every day.
__________________

Romans 1:16 I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

Rick1967 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 12:24 PM   #27
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 28,735
Liked 21585 Times on 12248 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chloeshooter View Post
I think armed security at the school level can help prevent some violent attacks. Someone hellbent on taking out folks before they die? How do you really stop that?

I don't agree that the schools should be full of conceal carriers. These folks are teachers, not security guards. Anyone who thinks that arming the damned teacher's union is a good idea needs to rethink their position - seriously!

The NRA (I am a member) needs to take s good look at itself. To take the position that we can't review the general safety and potential hazards of certain types if weapons is not good IMHO. There is a reason we can't have hand grenades and F-16 fighter jets, perhaps that reasoning may, at some point in time, apply to certain weaponry. Case in point - what the heck does anyone need Barrett 50 cal for? And if you can have the Barrett, why not chain-gun? Not an easy issue, drawing these boundaries.
the state of Texas is starting to allow those with a CC permit to carry at school. no, i agree teachers are nor should they be armed guards, but if a teacher has a CC permit and wants to carry, then yes they should. should it become mandatory for a teacher to carry? no it shouldn't be. tho carrry concealed is a personal choice IMO.

Chloe, you used the Barrett 50 BMG rifle as an example. well California made anything in 50 BMG illegal for a private citizen to own. how many crimes were commited in California using a rifle chambered in 50 BMG? none! personally i have no need for a rifle in 50 BMG, but you can sure bet that if i had or had access to a range that had at least 1000-1500 yrds to shoot, i'd own one. the very vast part of my collection could be decided by others that i don't need them as they are nothing more than target rifles or target rifles. IMO, i don't like others making decisions as to what i need or don't need. i don't want others trying to decide my choices in life either. gun control is just another step of the government deciding whats in our best interests and making our decisions for us. gun control is just another form of slavery.

the 2nd admendment says, in very plain English, "Shall Not Be Infringed" and and as i am an NRA member also, i fully support the rights of those to own any and all firearms whether i have the desire to own them or not. personally, i have desire to own a fully auto firearm, but do strongly support others right to own them if they so choose to own them. the 2nd admendment to me has come mean, amuch about freedom and personal choice to own firearms and any restrictions is restricting my freedoms and personal choices.
__________________
Axxe55 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 12:32 PM   #28
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Rick1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Clifton,Colorado
Posts: 4,168
Liked 1847 Times on 1031 Posts
Likes Given: 1219

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chloeshooter View Post
I think armed security at the school level can help prevent some violent attacks. Someone hellbent on taking out folks before they die? How do you really stop that?

I don't agree that the schools should be full of conceal carriers. These folks are teachers, not security guards. Anyone who thinks that arming the damned teacher's union is a good idea needs to rethink their position - seriously!

The NRA (I am a member) needs to take s good look at itself. To take the position that we can't review the general safety and potential hazards of certain types if weapons is not good IMHO. There is a reason we can't have hand grenades and F-16 fighter jets, perhaps that reasoning may, at some point in time, apply to certain weaponry. Case in point - what the heck does anyone need Barrett 50 cal for? And if you can have the Barrett, why not chain-gun? Not an easy issue, drawing these boundaries.
The 2md Amendment is not about hunting and target shooting. It is about defending ourselves against a tyranical government. If 50 years from no we had to do that, I would not want the people to have nothing but bolt action guns.

As far as your feelings about not arming teachers...there were several teachers murdered with the students. Are you saying that you feel they should not have been able to defend themselves? You need to think hard about where you stand.
__________________

Romans 1:16 I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

Rick1967 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 12:36 PM   #29
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Great North Woods
Posts: 2,574
Liked 2042 Times on 1069 Posts
Likes Given: 392

Default

Being pro gun and asking the old antigun question "Why does anyone need that"? Makes me wonder?

With all due respect, I think you may be missing my point. I personally don't care if you, or anyone else, legally owns or operates a Barrett 50 cal. The question in my mind, at some point, becomes, where do you draw the line? Should a guy be able to purchase a 16 inch deck-gun from a battleship? How about a 20mm cannon, etc. That was my point. There has to be a boundary out there somewhere - we should not be afraid to be a part of where that boundary gets set. The NRA (of which I am a member) is very powerful but not more powerful than the US Government. IMHO, 2nd amendment supporters/protectors will be very disappointed if the NRA simply says "we got nothing" when it comes to this discussion - because there will be decisions made that we have to live by, and I for one would want the NRA to be involved with that.
__________________

Last edited by chloeshooter; 12-29-2012 at 12:48 PM.
chloeshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 12:56 PM   #30
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Great North Woods
Posts: 2,574
Liked 2042 Times on 1069 Posts
Likes Given: 392

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick1967 View Post
The 2md Amendment is not about hunting and target shooting. It is about defending ourselves against a tyranical government. If 50 years from no we had to do that, I would not want the people to have nothing but bolt action guns.

As far as your feelings about not arming teachers...there were several teachers murdered with the students. Are you saying that you feel they should not have been able to defend themselves? You need to think hard about where you stand.

Answering your question - yes of course I think everyone has a right to defend themselves, and also that non mentally ill non felons should be able to conceal carry anywhere in the US. Having said that, consider any gradeschool teacher you have ever know. Most aren't wired to do what would be called for in case of an attack: timely threat recognition, reaction time to draw and fire weapon, shoot to kill. I like the armed guards at the school idea, would not want this left to the teachers.
__________________
chloeshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
NRA press conference BullseyePrecision Legal and Activism 9 12-21-2012 07:50 PM
GSA Official At Yet Another Lavish Conference Bigcountry02 Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 08-02-2012 02:55 PM
Polite Society Conference locnload Training & Safety 0 03-29-2011 11:16 PM
Swine Flu Conference! Bigcountry02 Politics, Religion and Controversy 0 08-24-2009 12:21 AM