The NRA is Making "Nice"
"The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."Wayne LaPierre
There you have it: the NRA's newest, revolting and stupid cliche. I guess the "Guns Don't Kill People" line had gotten a tad moldy.
Wayne LaPierre has got his work cut out for him, I'll tell you that! It must be difficult trying to peddle chickenshit as a dessert topping. The press conference we've been waiting all week for ended about a half an hour ago. Actually, it wasn't a "press conference" at all. At the outset one of his stooges announced that Wayne wouldn't be taking any questions. It was a speech; a very bad speech.Or maybe "sermon" would be a better description. Whatever you want to call this fiasco it was chock full of enough unintentional comedy that it made for some riveting television. That's the beautiful thing about these nitwits. They never fail to amuse and delight.
They announced this event a couple of days ago, saying that out of respect for the families of those poor children they would remain silent until then. They told us that they were going to propose some "meaningful changes". After being introduced by the stooge, LaPierre started to point the finger of shame and blame for what happened one-week-ago today at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut:
He blamed Hollywood.
He blamed the news media.
He blamed video games.
He blamed music videos.
He blamed gun-free school zones.
He blamed hurricanes.
He blamed celebrities.
He blamed President Obama....
As you might well imagine, the NRA was blameless. It really was oodles of fun to watch. The fact that America has the stupidest gun laws on this side of the Milky Way apparently has yet to enter his mind. He said that we protect the president with armed Secret Service agents; we protect banks and sports stadiums with armed guards. SHAME ON US FOR NOT PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN!!! That's right, Wayne LaPierre wants every school in the United States of America to be patrolled by armed security forces. I kid you not. This half-witted little Nazi wants to bring more guns into our schools. You could not concoct this stuff in fiction if you tried!Wayne LaPierre is not a good actor. The funniest thing about this "event" was watching him attempting to look heartbroken and sincere. It really was a laugh riot to behold. The website of Business Insider, hardly a hotbed of Liberal radicalism, called the whole affair, "rather stunning". Indeed.
Twice during this staged event, LaPierre was interrupted by protesters who were forcibly ejected by the NRA's goons. When it was over he seemed quite pleased with himself. Don't know why. He only hammered yet another nail into the gun lobby's coffin. This act of desperation on the part of the National Rifle Association backfired badly - as I knew it would. Not two minutes ago I heard my friend, Carolyn, yell out from down the hall, "ARE THEY KIDDING ME???" She had just seen a rerun of this morning's hideous publicity stunt. Everywhere you turn, people are stunned by the sheer arrogance of Wayne LaPierre. During a panel discussion immediately following this spectacle on MSNBC, former RNC chairman Michael Steele could barely get the words out. Maybe I was wrong when I said last week that nothing is going to change. Take a deep breath. Change is in the air. It's a sweet smell, is it not?
The headcases out there love to whine that easy access to firepower - the more lethal the better - is the last, best defense against a tyrannical government. Let's consider - just for the sake of a really stupid
argument - that Barack HUSSEIN Obama did indeed plan one day on
imposing whatever imagined type of dictatorship on Weeda Peepole. And
let's just say that every lunatic militia in the entire nation met that tyrannical government on a field somewhere in Montana to do battle....Imagine it - they with their trusty little semi-automatics - and the government with their tanks, predator drones and nuclear weapons. Can't you see what an insanely idiotic justification these jackasses are making?
Strange days indeed. Wayne LaPierre will be appearing on NBC's Meet The Press on Sunday morning. That ought to be a howl.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED LISTENING:
It's Now or Never
by John Lennon, Yoko Ono and the Spirit Choir
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyGpKdq9XiQ
This beautiful little tune says it so much better than I can ever hope to. It's now or never, folks. There's no time to lose. A dream we dream alone is only a dream. A dream we dream together is reality. Cha! Cha! Cha!
posted by Tom Degan @ 12:49 PM
27 comments
27 Comments:
A number of things have bothered me about this shooting. Wait. I should say that I utterly NOT surprised about any of this--mostly because Tom previously said so.
He was right...again.
What do you say to all of this? Are we really surprised by it? We're making a statement in this country that our selfish need to have a gun outweighs the death of 20 children. Why--WHY should we be oh so inconvenienced?
If "guns don't kill people--people don't kill people" should we assume that the cause of death for the children was a "people-ing?" Was anyone "peopled" in the head?
If "anything can be used as a weapon," why don't we hear more about 'mass-bludgeoning by tennis racket?'
This isn't about second amendment rights, safety, or the need for a militia. This is simply American intolerance for having to wait and go without. Be selfless is not an American virtue.
I agree Jay,,contact your elected officials now and demand them to start the movement now to repeal the 2nd Amendment!
No other greater friend to the USA than China has strongly suggested we do this now.
Americans need to be more selfless and we can start be getting rid of the right to own and bear guns. ALL AND ANY KIND OF GUNS!!
"And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."
Thomas Jefferson
Britain’s violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.
Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa – widely considered one of the world’s most dangerous countries.
The Tories said Labour had presided over a decade of spiralling violence.
In the decade following the party’s election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million – or more than two every minute.
According to the Daily Mail, Britons suffer 1,158,957 violent crimes per year, which works out at 2,034 per 100,000 residents. By contrast the number in notoriously violent South Africa is 1,609 per 100,000.
The U.S., meanwhile, has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is lower than France’s, at 504; Finland’s, at 738; Sweden’s, at 1123; and Canada’s at 935.
Piers Morgan is right, we need to become like Britain
The NRA plan to arm more people is an old argument that goes back to the 70's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWqaYdxI_I
Anonymous "'And what country can preserve...'"
So were those kids patriots or tyrants?
Hey Tommy,
I have a couple of topics for possible rants you may want to explore:
1) The Benghazi attack which a recent report shows that Hillary Clintoon's State Department handling of security there was a major clusterfuk. Poor Hillary can't testify about it because she has tummy aches. LOL on that Tommy. She doesn't want to be filmed getting her arse reamed knowing it will show up when she runs for President. "I take full responsibility for Benghazi" said Hillary Clintoon. Sure Hillary, sure.
2) Why there are currently no Democratic Black senators. I can understand when that KKK wizard Robert Byrd was alive there was rarely a Black Senator but when will the Democratic party progress?
Hey Mod,
For that answer you will need to ask Jefferson Guardian.
Anonymous, before you get a hard on for Hillary Clinton, you are aware that she has been rescheduled to testify on Benghazi before mid-January, aren't you?
As for the NRA, I am sure that La Pierre's suggestion for placing armed guards in every school will be taken up with great enthusiasm by the GOP. My question to them is after complaining about teachers salaries, eliminating school programs and such, how do they plan to pay for these guards?
The gun nuts' paranoia is so great they think they need 30 round magazines and 100 round drums for self-protection. Why not mortars and rocket launchers? But to suggest limiting sales of military rifles with such firepower, Oh the tyranny! Ten round magazines amount to "socialist gun control" to those goons.
They are the last people we should allow to dominate our public policy.
Let's see how long it takes for the NRA to kick in a couple hundred million for the "School Shield". Or will the Republican Party agree to raise more tax dollars for it?
Hah.
Cold day in hell when these reptilian soulless "gun fags"* care to back their "idea" with cash. No, that money is to be used for lobbying for the sacred firearm industry and campaign funding for its puppet politicians.
Human sacrifice is the preferable alternative for them.
*A term I learned from a Secret Service guy.
Dave,
AHH, explain this will you.
The U.S., meanwhile, has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is lower than France’s, at 504; Finland’s, at 738; Sweden’s, at 1123; and Canada’s at 935.
Based on your profile there are probably many subjects we do not agree on. This is not one. Increased gun regulation may not solve the problem, but it is a start and it can and will be done without stamping out any reasonable law abiding citizens right to kill four legged animals and creatures with feathers, or stop their target practice or protect themselves when needed.
Guns don't kill people, but they do enhance productivity. THe best way to stop a mad man with a gun is to make it difficult to get his hands on a gun.
"reptilian soulless liberal fags" and "big govt nuts' liberal paranoia"
now there's some hate, right DD?
What, hate? Hate from you maybe, but it looks like comedy from here.
Oh David, how hard you work to turn a blind to your own hate filled soul.
Bless you heart, I think you mean well, but fall so short as you work to be a part of the liberal stream of reasoning.
I wish Tom and all the followers of The Rant a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Hey, Sport,
As long as you are projecting your hate why don't you tell us exactly whom do you accuse me of hating?
Oh, that's right. you don't do that kind of thing. That requires evidence. You only accuse.
I say ban the sales of military weapons and magazines over ten rounds to the public is a sane first step.You say you want debate, then make your case. What's your solution? Yeah, whatever Rush and LaPierre say, of course.
Man up and make your case, Sport.
How many tax dollars do you want for the NRA's "School Shield". How much should they pay? Or do want my tax dollars to do it for you? You DO want to pay for it don't you?
You whine about wanting to "debate" here. All I see is provocation, accusations and antagonism. Let's see if you have any thoughts at all, apart from copy and paste words of others.
On a saner note:
Not all NRA members are paranoid lobbyists for weapons manufacturers. Most want some some limits.
Poll finds gun owners, even NRA members, back some restrictions
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-shooting-denver-guns-idUSBRE86O02O20120725
DD - I don't have a problem with the limitation on magazines or even the limitation on ownership of assault weapons, but I fail to see how it would do much in the way of making us safer from disturbed individuals like Lanza? It certainly won't limit criminal activity or gang activity as those are done mostly with typically available hand guns.
I think it may make people feel better that we've "done something" but I can't see how it solves much in a practical way.
I don't know - it is a very difficult issue. I am very puzzled, though, by the call for more armed security at schools by the Republicans as the solution. That certainly is not my view for America. Truth be told, while there may be some policy issues that can help, this is primarily an issue of a culture that has lost its ethical moorings - the reasons are manifold and have little to do with guns.
Harley,
There's no simple answer, and the most effective one is unrealistic.
I'm afraid the only way for Americans to be free from mass slaughter is practically impossible.
Australia did it, but we have an institutionalized gun lobby with too many politicians in its pockets.
While there is no absolute guarantee of safety, fewer military style weapons in public hands would mean fewer abuses of those weapons. The more flooded our population is with military style rifles, the more likely they will be used in crimes. That's just reality.
One poor mother of Newtown thought she was buying safety and protection, only to die from her own firearms.
This scenario plays out too often.
Our culture suffers from both real mental illness and trumped up paranoia.
We can try to expand treatment of mental illness. That could help. Good luck getting Republicans and the NRA to agree to expanding that kind of public health program.
We can also call out the foolishness of the gun nuts who think they need thirty and hundred round magazines to defend themselves from Obama the Kenyan Marxist. This is a willfully embraced mental disorder.
Fear-mongering has always been good for business.
Corporate media and politicians are too weak-willed and beholden to powerful interests to take up the cause.
Hey David,
Just quoting you own words, bless your heart, not projecting anything, unless it's you own words that are projecting hate.
So if the shoe fits DD, I guess you had better wear it.
Now that we got your hatred out of the way lets talk about the issue before us.
The NRA is always a easy target to focus ones understanding of what the gun issue in America is today. By doing so however, the ineffectiveness of our current gun control laws are over looked. Which is understandable as the full weight of the terrible actions committed by one deranged person are allowed to sink in. We ask ourselves, why did this happen, how can we prevent if from happening again.
As you review the facts behind this awfulness, you find not one gun control law was broken. That being the case, the next question is what law would have stopped the murders?
Having some form of marker placed on the ammo, wouldn't have mattered, as there never was a question about who was the shooter.
Equipping each firearm so that only its certified sane owner at time of purchase can fire it doesn't work because people do become insane after buying a gun while sane.
Limiting the capacity of the magazines might work if you can limit the number of magazines a person can own.
In all three of these solutions, the control might work for future purchases, but will not effect the guns currently legally owned.
I offer as the only solution that will work at a high percentage of the time the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, and the confiscating of all guns, including those owned by law enforcement departments and law enforcement officers and the National Guard. These would mean the only legal guns in America would be those owned by the Federal Govt, IE fr use by the FBI, and military.
Now you would have to admit, by doing this, America would be free of gun violence. So why isn't this being proposed?
Think of the peace and safety we would live in if there were no 2nd Amendment, and only our Federal govt had guns! Wouldn't that make you all feel better?
Dave "Amerika's most intellectual prison guard" Dubya:
"Our culture suffers from both real mental illness and trumped up paranoia."
Right on Dave, we can thank the ALCU from preventing Amerika's most mentally ill from being locked up in a mental institution!
Well, Sport, that's at least addressing the topic. Well done.
You even seem to consider further regulations would be helpful against future massacres, and that fewer large magazines and weapons that hold them may mean fewer mass murders.
So perhaps there are some sane steps to be taken short of repealing the Second Amendment, eh?
I'll take your inability to determine who my "hate" is directed at as a retraction of your accusation. Those words were mere descriptors. I'm not the hateful type. See, I can even be civil with you. ;-)
Ah, there he goes again. ACLU derangement syndrome strikes again.
The NRA is blameless in the weapons epidemic, but the ACLU is responsible for guns in the hands of unstable people.
Brilliant.
Oh, well, so much for attempting reasonable dialogue.
Bless your heart Dave, my suggestions were not listed as possible solutions, but listed to show them as failures before they are even put into place. None of them would have prevented any of the killings in CT or for that matter in Cook county, IL. any given week end.
Why don't you want the 2nd Amendment repealed and all guns confiscated from private hands? Why are you clinging to your guns? Are uncomfortable with the idea of only the Federal Govt having guns?
Explain you pro gun stance please.
From the "WORKERS WORLD".
"Most people find it unconscionable that anyone would deliberately harm a child. In fact, most would have the same reaction to callous disregard that puts a young life in danger’s way.
So when news of the recent shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., began to spread, it is of little doubt that the first reaction, especially of parents, was shock. [...]
The gun culture is more than that, though. The U.S. was built from seized land, land that was taken from the original inhabitants, who were then massacred — children, women and men. Whole nations were disappeared, killed by guns, knives and an early form of biological warfare, where diseased materials were used to introduce foreign illnesses to Indigenous peoples.
Slavery was maintained by the gun and brutal violence that saw the rise of the first standardized police force, the slave catchers. To this day, it has been violence that has maintained U.S. political and economic hegemony over most of the world. [...]
The only way to begin to address a tragedy like the massacre at Sandy Hook is to address the fundamental problems that exist. In the final analysis, it is the capitalist system that is to blame. As long as it exists, the lives of children are at risk, whether it be from violence, starvation, neglect or disasters caused by global warming. It is all rooted in a system that has outlived its usefulness."
I'm just surprised it took this long!
I could care a less about the NRA, not a member.
I could also care a less about Federal, not a member.
Who is a member of either, or both? What the hell is the matter with you if you are? Do you bond yourself to insidious organizations, all of which are intent on payment of your labor value in terms of some hell driven debt notes?
The 'Bill of Rights' is a limitation of natural rights. The natural right of any man is to protect himself from harm or death using any means necessary. If that means a Bazooka, then so be it. If it means a pair of brass knuckles with spikes, then so be it. All men are required to use all of their faculties and resources to protect themselves, and their families, to the degree necessary.
This is not the same as men taking arms in a crazypalooza shootemup as their last stand against humanity. So how is the line drawn? It most certainly cannot be drawn by strangers with profit and control in their minds. NRA and Federal are the definition of that.
Government exists in America (and the world) to profit from the masses. Show me one example, based on any organizational entity, that is opposite of that, and I will show you a sales pitch that seeks devotion to the profiteering cause.
Mankind has lost its ability to claim its liabilities and manage them. There is this constant goal of transferring liability in a quest to be free of liability. It is the American way, it is the Western way.
Government, corporations and organizations are all there to offer a means to alleviate liability, though in reflection and retrospect these entities only promise that which they cannot possibly deliver on.
To trust any org or corp to protect one's self, or family, neighborhood, or community is failure. All critically thinking men are required to use all of their faculties to secure themselves. When elephants, or jackasses, or any other fictional party of suited thieves are proffered as the answer to the fears those same parties create, then men, and mankind, are doomed.
chewybees.blogspot.com
I received a private email early this morning from a person who said that guns must be made easily available to protect us against the government. My reply:
Thank you for the note.
Government (our government) is supposed to be a reflection of "We The People". With all of its flaws I still trust it enough not to go completely totalitarian on us. The tyranical forces of which you speak are more likely to come from the right wing, the same ones who are advocating less (or zero) gun regulations.
New York City has very strict gun laws. It also has less gun murders per capita that any other big city in the United States.
I don't believe that this is a mere coincidence.
The availability of firearms in certain parts of the country his a threat to the public safety of the entire country. I suppose that you and I will just have to agree to disagree on this matter.
Sincerely,
Tom Degan
My rights are not negotiable to anguish-ridden attempts by Ovarians and Metrosexuals to "do something".
You want them? COME AND TAKE THEM...and unlike most pussy Leftists, (who are so "light in the ass" that they've never had to ball up their hand to make a fist in their entire lives!) I want EACH OF YOU gunhating hoplophobes, who, like stone-age primitives, think that a machine has magical evil powers...I want YOU fuckers to sign up, pin on that badge and MOLON LABE. You may not be willing to die for these Rights, being ignorant, whining Statists, but many of us ARE. So bring it on.
Post a Comment
<< Home