Where is the NRA? Question of the Day

Once again, after a high profile spree killing, the NRA  is in lock down. This despite — or because — of mainstream media pro-gun control carpet bombing. Despite the looming threat of new legislation designed to degrade and destroy Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. All that’s coming from the nation’s oldest civil rights organization during this anti-firearms freedom furore?  . . .

Radio silence. Well, two Facebook posts (above and below). And then more radio silence. Which begs the question . . .

NRA Facebook post (courtesy facebook.com)

What is the NRA waiting for? Are they waiting for public sentiment — anger, outrage and disgust — to “cool off”?

In a world of 24/7 “news,” in a country that’s experienced a cluster of horrific mass shootings in a matter of a few months, anti-gun rights resolve appears to be hardening, not dissipating. The NRA’s PR delay leaves the pro-gun position relatively undefended, at a time when its attackers are at their strongest.

As is its pattern, the NRA will eventually emerge from their media isolation to posit a carefully crafted pro-gun position. A position that will do nothing to appease the progressives howling for civilian disarmament.

Shouldn’t the NRA be here, now, at the forefront of the pro-gun position: resisting gun control laws, countering falsehoods, debating gun grabbers, restating the reasoning behind the Second Amendment, giving aid and comfort to its allies, etc.?


  1. avatar JS says:

    I dont know. The libs will scream at one another that something must be done, while gun owners will change the channel or read elsewhere. Neither side will gain or lose members in this battle. I think it may be smarter to let the SJW’s burn out a little.
    My worry is that Trump seems to be affected and will now cave without gun rights people getting anything in exchange.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Call The Whitehouse and tell them what you think.

      (202) 456-1111

      Remind the President that he wrote “Crippled America” (Chapter 11).

    2. avatar kevin says:

      I think its smart to remain silent and save it for later. You can’t say anything right now that couldn’t be spun into “support for mass killers.” Anyone who speaks right now is going to be a shit magnet.

      1. avatar John Shawn says:

        Where’s the NRA? Not on mainstream liberal media talking facts. 1. Possibly afraid of personal attacks on high ranking individuals. 2. Sitting on a pill of cash for larger salaries. NRA/ GOA not stepping up the game, but actually contributing to the gun control community.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Where’s the NRA? Not on mainstream liberal media talking facts.”

          If “facts” could win the argument, we would not be having these conversations, would we?

          Facts are utterly useless in the face of emotions in full cry.

          Fact: facts do not raise the dead; facts do not undo a murder; facts do not prevent the next horror story; facts cannot comfort; facts are unable persuade the committed anti-gun acolyte.

          So many people believe that facts “speak for themselves” and any intelligent would observe the facts, and act accordingly. Those many people ignore the fact that to admit “the facts”, and change a value proposition is not a mathematical equation. To abandon a deeply held emotional certainty is to engage is the most harsh form of self-criticism, to reject self and have the courage to recover and move forward. People capable of that are more rare than the unicorns who are “uneducated”, “unsure”, “undecided”, “sitting on the fence” about so-called “gun rights”.

    3. avatar CZJay says:


      The anti human rights crowd will grow significantly by recruiting the youth and focusing on the women. With many of the new recruits being of age to vote, so called “pro gun” politicians will easily give up the fight for another check or to get Trump elected for a 2nd term. The pro human rights people will be out numbered, if they are not already. A minority might be able to win a genuine physical war, but they can’t win at the voting booth when the opposing force is busing in never ending reinforcements. Remember that most people don’t own guns and don’t care about them; they do care about kids the most.

      The best defense is a good offense.

      NRA members are too passive. They think all that has to be done is hunker down until the storm passes. They behave as if the storm is actually going to stop at some point. This storm will never stop, which is why a whole continent was stolen. If you remain idle, you will slowly lose the war because at some point you will die of old age. They will starve you until your force is to weak to put up a fight.

      Don’t be bullied by a bunch of kids and women. You can’t lock yourself up in your room while they are trying to burn down the house.

      1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

        Where do you get that ‘most people don’t own guns’ stuff? Sounds like you’re copying cisco kid.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          It is said that there is a gun for every American, but not every American owns a gun. This is because most 2nd Amendment defenders own more than 2 guns.

          Keep in mind that the population grows quickly with migration and those immigrants don’t vote pro gun.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Where do you get that ‘most people don’t own guns’ stuff?”

          Well, let’s see…..

          Many claim there are at least 100 million legal owners. That is 200 million less that the total population, so that would mean “most people don’t own guns”.

          Where is the support for the claim of 100 million gun owners? Where is the registry that numbers gun owners in the hundred millions? Since there is no registry, the claimed number of gun owners must be a projection, an estimate based on assumptions that are no different in quality and reliability than projections of global warming/climate change.

          We simply do not know, as in have the undisputed facts, how many legal gun owners exist in the country. Just as we do not really know the number of firearms. And…there is no current means of determining the size of either.

          So, it’s a silly game to claim more or less people own guns.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        My ancestors were forced into living in a prisoner camp. The government figured they couldn’t win by attacking the men directly; they side stepped them by going after the women, children and food supply. Eventually, they had to compromise in order to survive. They now live in a concentration camp were they are quickly going extinct.

        Why do the anti human rights people focus on using kids and women? Why do they mention how your force is rapidly decreasing? Why does the NRA end up helping pass laws against human rights? Why do pro gun people compromise and compromise?

        If you allow the earth to be scorched for so long, you too will end up on the “reservation.”

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Truth. Both of your comments were on target.

  2. avatar Sad Trombone says:

    Because they’re cowards ?

    1. avatar S.Crock says:

      This is a depressing time to be a young gun owner. Republicans are pushing for gun control. The NRA is either silent or taking weak stances on the tough issues. Many people who are neutral or middle of the road when it comes to guns are getting brainwashed into becoming anti gun. This seems to be a worse period for the pro gun community than right after Sandy Hook in 2012. At least after that the pro gun community was more united and Republicans were mostly opposed to draconian gun laws.

      1. avatar jimbo says:

        the gutless maggots are too scared to “call out” these “mass shootings” for WTF they really are….
        a bunch of bogus baloney HOAXes!
        every second or third YouTuber knows these incidents are garbage….just check the comments on YouTubes abt Fl and Vegas, for instance….

  3. avatar Jimmy says:

    Uh, Dana is going on CNN TONIGHT for a town hall, update this.

    1. avatar Alex Waits says:

      That’s still not doing anything, do you really think a NRA spokeswomen is going to get any traction or move hearts and minds with a rational debate, on CNN? No.. they are going to prop her up and beat her over the head with progressive talking points in the guise of “Fair and balanced reporting” anyone who watches CNN is already drinking the Kool-Aid and not likely to be convinced of anything contrary to their own bias.

      1. avatar Jimmy says:

        Anddddd, this is why they don’t do anything. Sorry, you don’t get to complain about radio silence and them engaging, pick one.

        1. avatar Alex Waits says:

          Heheh, yeah “engaging” …right, because pissing in the wind is accomplishing anything to further civil rights and roll back infringement perpetrated by an overreaching government.

      2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        You say you have a real solution? Well, you know, we’d all love to see the plan.

        1. avatar Alex Waits says:

          Well, The NRA is supposed to be a lobby group (among other things), I propose that they .. umm.. lobby… I suppose they could contact every congressman and representative that will pick up a phone, prepare facts and figures, describing the cons of gun control, educate these folks on how and why guns work the way they do, send NRA folks to their offices, set up meetings, engage them as often as they can. They can gauge the receptiveness of these individuals on upcoming legislation, good and bad. Then the NRA can compile this data, who took meetings, who sat and listened, who worked with the NRA, who didn’t and who will not support favorable gun bills and let the NRA members know. Novel idea right? The NRA could then pass that info to its members, so they know which representatives are on board, who goes back on their word and which reps are against our values and ideals. They almost had it right with their “ratings” but the political winds of change are a frequent cause for reevaluation. and constant updates.
          Is the NRA doing this now? All I really see out of them is flashy recruitment and celebrity faces, and pants on head retarded PSAs.

          Is this a “be all end all” solution to the struggle of defending freedom and rights? No, but its a start. It’s par for the course at the local level, and its not even my day job.

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Or they could at least draft an e-mail and send an “action alert” to their members.

        3. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          Alex? Who’s to say they aren’t doing that right now behind the scenes?

          TxLawyer? Get off your butt and do it yourself. Quit waiting for exactly the guidance that all NRA members seem to take offense at when liberals claim that’s what they sit around waiting for.

        4. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I don’t have access to the NRA’s member list. Sorry. As for me, I have called and e-mailed my Senators. I’m not worried about my representative. He already did what I was asking my Senators to do. Furthermore, I’m more concerned about Cornyn than Cruz.

    2. avatar Rick says:

      Good lord, Boobs McGee is terrible at interaction. She can barely read the teleprompter competently, but boobs. I’d much rather see Colin Noir(SP?).

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        Colion. Don’t worry. It’s not a real name. It’s something he made up for Youtube and got stuck with.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        It would be much better to have a black man talk to CNN as they use black men to push their propaganda. Plus, he seems better equipped for such a talk.

        1. avatar Rick says:

          But boobs.

  4. avatar Joe R. says:

    The NRA forced the hand of the right side of our House and Senate, and the President to ‘rule’ on bump-fire stocks.

    I need a bump-fire stock more than I need the NRA.

    The NRA is empowering though. It really makes people feel like they could take on the POS (D) and rino anti-gun establishment on their own.

    Because you have to.

  5. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

    Actually, I think the NRA should always just shut up and work behind the scenes when on “defense”. The people they would be responding to now don’t care one iota about facts and statistics.

    They should only make public comments when things are quieter and they can be on “offense” pushing things like reciprocity, etc. without all the emotional screeching getting in the way.

    1. avatar Shire-man says:

      When emotions rule everything like right after an incident like this any word from the NRA is just tossing gas on the fire. The NRA should sit back and the lunatics hang themselves as they always do. The kids involved will get sick of it soon enough. The pressure will be let off the politicians to “act now!” and the dust will settle.

      Wayne gets on TV and says anything at all and the news flares up again and all the talk shows have a new set of clips to play over and over.

      Anti’s are like puppies going after squeaky toys. Stop squeaking it and they’ll forget and go take a nap.

    2. avatar Owen says:

      Agree 100%. The grief is too close. Any countering of the students movement etc would come across as callous and “unfeeling”. Better to wait until something is actually proposed then spring into action IMHO.

    3. avatar Joe R. says:

      Silent but deadly.

      Ohole imported MS-13 gang-bangers would bring you pelts and scalps for half of what the NRA yearly membership money is. Hell, you might even get a vote at their next meeting.

    4. avatar IS THAT FROWNED UPON says:

      Don Vito to Sonny: “Santino, come here. What’s the matter with you? I think your brain is going soft with all that comedy you are playing with that young girl. Never tell anyone outside the Family what you’re thinking again. Go on.”
      PR 101: when you don’t like the conversation rules, change the rules to what suits you, if not the conversation itself. Establish your agenda vs. playing into your enemy’s agenda. Just do what you got to do. Talk is cheap even more so against hysterical people.

    5. avatar CZJay says:

      When you stay silent people think you are guilty.

      Most people are in the middle — all they are hearing right now is a strong case of emotion. There needs to be a strong case of logic countering the emotion. The logical case becomes stronger when it has to fight emotion because every response can be countered with a solution. If the emotional side wants to refuse every logical solution, they will look bad/dumb in front of the neutral people (who are the majority).

      Pro gun people don’t effectively provide a clear and full solution at the most important time. They like to say “shall not be infringed” or “every law you passed didn’t work.” That looks kind of childish to non gun people. The things they provide — once people are no longer listening — are a bit lacking. Overall it looks like the pro gun side doesn’t care, don’t want to spend their money on solutions and won’t do anything until someone’s kid dies.

  6. avatar Sam I Am says:


    As you have pointed out so many times, NRA has a symbiotic relationship with police. NRA cannot criticize police or FBI, or even come close. So, yes, NRA is moving carefully.

    Note, however, the the same crowd who claims the NRA is more politically powerful than all the anti-gun movement supported by left wing billionaires, now claims the NRA’s army of millions is a figment of NRA imagination.

    “Liberalism is a mental disorder.”

  7. avatar Alex Waits says:

    The NRA is not doing its “job”. Whether or not its “Politically Expedient” they need to be fighting, they claim to be Defenders of Freedom and “America’s Safest Place” but they are not actually doing anything. The NRA is continuing to demonstrate their apathy for the gun rights movement, because 3D chess or some nonsense.

    1. avatar maxwell97 says:

      Being politically expedient is what makes them effective. There are plenty of politically-inexpedient groups out there that say the first things to come to mind. You’ll note that they’re not the ones being demonized by the antis, because most already dismiss them as nuts.

      Like it or not, playing political games is essential to maintaining freedom.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        “Like it or not, playing political games is essential to maintaining freedom.”

        As the saying goes:

        You might not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you!

        Ignore politics at your own (and everyone else’s) peril.

      2. avatar Alex Waits says:

        By not playing political games, this country was founded.

        You know the system is broken when it requires capitulation, manipulation and money to maintain some semblance of freedom. Where you have to submit someone’s political beliefs, instead of it being “common sense*”.

        *Common sense in the terms of it being written down in plain English, by our founding fathers to prevent government overreach.

        1. avatar maxwell97 says:

          “By not playing political games, this country was founded.”

          The founders played plenty of political games. That’s how we went from “all men are created equal” to “three-fifths of all other persons.”

      3. avatar IS THAT FROWNED UPON says:

        Our enemies main beef with the NRA is the “political power” they have with politicians. It could be that they have true power or it may be “perceived” power, it does not matter. Our enemies would give up their left testicle (if they had one) or anything to have that same power. My observation is that the majority of the hate for the NRA is directed to the politicians that seem to be under the control of the NRA. Shannon and company would love to be in that position.
        It appears that the anti’s wrongly perceive that their adversary is THAT THING CALLED “the NRA” which is composed of NRA staff and paid members as a group. What I think they don’t get or refuse to accept is that there are MORE non-affiliated Constitution loving NRA NON-MEMBERS. I think that the reason they refuse to accept it is..because guns. Who in their right mind would really, really, really like guns? Not my neighbor! Not my co-worker! Not my (fill in the blank). THAT THING CALLED “the NRA” is an easy target, visible, apparently homogeneous, with a designated address, easily identifiable, recognizable and definitely miss-understood. When the enemy is not so bright, they like to group things so they may create easy labels for the lesser “not so bright” to at least have a little clue. Clips, that thing that goes up, assault weapon, emojis, so called “memes”, “liddle so-and-so”; these are all short-cuts and labels. At this point if I was a member of the antis, I would love for anyone from the NRA to confront me publicly so I could give them “more cowbell”. I rather own the news cycle onmy own terms when the next shinny thing captures the attention and imagination of our emoji loving sjw crowd. And the fact that I am not visible as an organization at the moment does not mean that I stopped massaging the “political power”.

  8. avatar Wild West 42 says:

    The NRA has been too busy negotiating away second amendment freedoms to be bothered to respond. More and more of us are withdrawing our support and shifting to the GOA. Corporate supporters of the NRA are going to lose business because of these actions.

    1. avatar FedUpinNY says:

      NRA is becoming synonymous with RINO. In a friendly room they are the best 2A cheerleaders money can buy. When the heat is turned on they wilt like 3 day old gas station roses.
      Wayne needs to go. NRA must recommit and reassert the mission to preserve and protect 2A while also engaging in the educational, training and safety tenets of the organization.
      Enough with the tailored suits and corporate speeches. Get out there and defend 2A, ALL DAY, EVERY DAY.

      Agree with me or disagree but we are not getting our money’s worth out of Wayne, INC.
      Selective advocacy may make occasional sense but they have forsaken entire regions of the United States for political and/or financial reasons and that is simply unacceptable.
      We are under assault right now, in response to a terrible tragedy, but we need NRA more than ever to be Front and Center and they are not.

  9. avatar Bloving says:

    When confronted with an irrational and ranting opponent it is often advisable to let them get it out of their system. “Give a fool enough rope and he’ll hang himself”. Many of the anti-civil rights bigots have already tipped their hands and declared that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms needs to be outlawed, we’re just waiting for the upper echelons to make the same statement.

  10. avatar Felix says:

    I repeat what I said in the other article: the NRA needs to take the offensive, highlighting how many people every day use guns to defend themselves. Fighting off rapists and child abductors and home invaders, scaring burglars and thieves. Get out in front, show how many times a day ordinary people prevent deadly crime.

    Enough with this cowering in the dark.

  11. avatar barnbwt says:

    Silent? They offered up bump stocks, and now raising the age limit to 21 for rifles. I’d say they’ve spoken loud and clear.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      I do think there needs to be some reorganizing of age limits for various things. Such as: legal drug use age, driving age, military service age, voting age, sexual consent age, gun purchasing age, legal marriage age.

      Right now it’s a little silly 21 year olds can buy a handgun when they start drinking and clubbing, 16 year olds can operate a car on public roads before they can buy a gun and 18 year olds can join the military before they can drink a beer.

      Now the debate is what should be allowed at what age.

      Should we raise the cannabis use and voting age to 25? Should we lower the age to purchase and carry any firearm to 18? Should we force 17 year olds to do 1 year of military service as their last year of public education? Should we lower sexual consent and marriage age to 16? Lower the alcohol consumption age to 15-16 when under supervision and 18 for purchasing?

  12. avatar Matthew the Oilman says:

    The NRA will not speak until 17 days have passed. It’s their policy not to jump into the cooling blood. Unfortunately our opponents are far better prepared to take advantage of these situations.

  13. avatar 33Charlemagne says:

    At times like this I often wonder if it is better to go after the grabbers or do the “rope-a-dope” and let then slug themselves out. I myself have spent a lot of time on the internet battling misleading and disingenuous remarks by anti-gun types. One thing they almost never try to respond to is asking them to explain how their various measures wil actually work. I also like to point out that comparing only “gun homicides” instead of total murders is misleading.

  14. avatar Hank says:

    At this point I don’t think it matters. This all going one way at this point. We’ve crossed the Rubicon as a society already, on the road to war. The tinder box is ready, it only needs a spark. That spark might not be the assassination of an Archduke, but the results will look the same. Get your things in order, stock up while you still can.

  15. avatar million says:

    it’s probably best not to get into a public “debate” with the shrieking perpetually aggrieved who know very little about firearms. let them burn out on this in a few days or weeks.

    they beat Hillary and got us Gorsuch. and this is just a regulation that can be changed by Executive whim. this is not a law. watch him change it back unannounced with little fanfare in his second term.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:


        The U.S. Supreme Court will not hear Second Amendment cases right now because the court is split 4-to-4 with Kennedy being at best a wild card and at worst a Second Amendment traitor.

        As soon as we replace Kennedy or Ginsburg with a conservative justice (assuming that actually happens), I am pretty confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will again hear Second Amendment cases and issue rulings consistent with the U.S. Constitution, Common Law, and Natural Law.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          “I am pretty confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will again hear Second Amendment cases and issue rulings [less in]consistent with the U.S. Constitution, Common Law, and Natural Law.” FIFY. If Kennedy and not Roberts is the problem. Likely, but by no means guaranteed.

          My point was that what they “got” us, we already had. The best they’ve ever done, on a national level, is to not lose ground*. That isn’t good enough for me, especially when they aren’t always at their best. I’d be happy to eat some crow on the issue.

          *It could be argued that they gained ground with the FOPA, but they also managed to get more categories of people added to the prohibited person list, a machine gun ban, and I think something else I’m forgetting. I call that losing ground, but am willing to admit that there were gains.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “They may have gotten us Gorsuch, but the court still won’t take a 2A case.”

        True, dat.


        SCOTUS is taking, for the third time in four years, another case regarding the mandatory union dues for people who do not support union politics outside the union. With thousands of cases filed, SCOTUS can only hear about 80(?). It’s all a matter of resource management (priorities).

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I answer that with any of Thomas’s dissents on this issue. They are normally described as scathing. I haven’t read this one yet, but, based on experience, I will assume it reflects my position. He’s been my fave for, like, decades. (Looks in mirror at gray hair, realizes that’s not an exaggeration, and the descriptor young no longer applies, sad face).

  16. avatar W says:

    The NRA is always quiet following a massacre. They seek to avoid the political give and take while funerals are being performed. Do people not know this? They were quiet for a period of time following both Las Vegas and Sandy Hook.

  17. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    We can’t legislate crazy away but we certainly can lessen the response time to deal with a murderer.

    The village approach has failed when it comes to policing the mentally disturbed among us, regardless of all the obvious red flags. And parents aren’t taking responsibility for their bad apples.

    There are lots of veterans and people looking for jobs, give them jobs working as security for schools.

    So… repeal gun fee zones. Otherwise the only hope kids in schools have is police response time — which is unacceptable of late despite best intentions.

    All the systems are in place (on paper) to catch the mentally disturbed and violent but mistakes and inaction are costing lives.

  18. avatar John Thayer says:

    Parkland’s David Hogg Can’t Remember His Line!
    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8t0ydtHKkY&w=339&h=270%5D

  19. avatar former water walker says:

    The NRA gets blamed irregardless. Not GOA or 2nd Amendment. They opened a can of worms with the bumpstock BS. Keep yer powder dry😡

    1. avatar Alex Waits says:

      Recently I read,

      “If you take credit for the rain, you’ll be blamed for the drought” – Dwight Morrow paraphrased.

  20. avatar Big Tex says:

    What about the Superintendent of that School, Should we not hold him accountable for what happened at His school. The Supers are paid alot of money to run these Schools, keeping the children,staff, and anyone within the confines of the property safe are part of that job. Fire that SOB, He had to know of the expulsion of that nut job kid. Fire all the Assholes that did not do their JOBS.

  21. “You always know the mark of a coward. A coward hides behind freedom. A brave person stands in front of freedom and defends it for others.” -Henry Rollins

    The NRA, It’s pseudo-intellectual members members and the politicians on it’s payroll are the cowards… the 2nd Amendment is just words, words cannot out do actions of the free american people who are sick of these terrorists.

    Thought’s and prayers cant save you from being shot.

    Australia does not have this problem, Europe, does not have this problem, Canada does not have this problem and neither does Japan.

    A lot of people in the comments are saying that teachers should be armed… The same teachers that are overworked and underpaid, who work nights and weekends to get test plans ready and grade papers, who often have to work a second job just to make ends meet, who are the first to get blamed when your bratty kid has no discipline and acts out, who are ridiculed for being in a union, whom many have not gotten a raise in several years, who are teaching overfilled classrooms, who just lost their minuscule tax break for having to pay for students supplies out of their own pockets because parents are sending their kids to school with nothing, who have to pay to have copies made out of their own pockets because the school doesn’t have toner for their copier… You want those people to now be armed guards as well?
    Let me ask this also; who is going to pay for the guns and the training? Are you willing to pay higher taxes for this?

    1. avatar Gordon in MO says:

      “Europe, does not have this problem”

      You are obviously not paying attention to what is going on in Europe. Gun control is the rule there so the Islamic hordes have free reign to kill with guns, knives, trucks, bombs or what ever they can think of.

      The major media in America does not report those crimes because it does not fit their agenda and might show people of “the religion of peace” in a bad ( but true ) light.

      At least part of the time, turn off CNN, MSNBC and those other branches of the democrat party and tune into some others. Try One America News (OAN) for a channel that supports America.

    2. avatar W says:

      Hey brainiac.

      “its” not “it’s.” It’s is a contraction of it is.

      “the politicians on it’s payroll”

      You’re welcome.

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      “Thought’s and prayers cant save you from being shot.”

      Neither can arbitrary declarations that a facility or nation is “gun-free”.

    4. avatar bobo says:

      hey its the copy paste nutter yet again!

      please come up with new ones!
      or ask your boss for new thoughts?? because these are getting old!

    5. avatar Hank says:

      Who’s going to come take our guns? You?

    6. avatar doesky2 says:

      How are you ablle to talk like that when you have Hillary’s di*k in your mouth?

    7. avatar CZJay says:

      I hear there is a surplus of 1911s.

      I am sure gun companies will love to take on a large contract to produce pistols for teachers at low cost. These kind of contracts is what keeps gun companies alive considering they no longer produce household items like they did in the past. A lot of NRA members have a few guns they could donate. There are firearm trainers who will donate their services or teachers can join the police during their active shooter training classes.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if a “Gun Fund Me” page could easily raise the money necessary for both the handguns and the training. If a person can raise hundreds of thousands just for a druggie living on the streets, there should be no problem helping protect school kids.

    8. avatar Scoutino says:

      Maybe from Canada the Bill of Rights looks like “just words”. Let me assure you that the whole Constitution including 2nd amendment is more than words to us here in US of A. Let’s see your heroic action, but never forget who is organized, united by idea of protecting our natural, civil and constitutional rights and ….armed. In other words – bring it, bitch!

  22. avatar C.Z. says:

    We need more voices that assert the second amendment with all other rights Americans enjoy. If they want to raise the age to buy a rifle to 21, we’ve got to suggest or insist they do the same for voting.

    1. avatar Big Tex says:


    2. avatar Setnakhte says:

      And the draft and military enlistment and so on.

  23. avatar Oh noes says:

    Trump seems to be on the fence and I don’t think it will take much to tip him over to the gun control “Ban-Wagon”. Republicans already showed they’re willing to compromise away OUR Liberty. That is the crowbar in the door jamb for the progressives to start prying away our 2nd amendment rights. First ban bump stocks, then implement age restrictions for buying long guns, Waiting periods for all firearm purchases, Enhanced background checks ( whatever the hell that means) ban/confiscation of all AR-15 style and AK variant semi auto rifles, Magazine capacity limits, firearm registration,
    Ban ALL semi auto rifles and shotguns. Threats of Hefty fines and federal prison time for not turning over Firearms related contraband. (I think the Nazi’s did that too)
    >>>> Remove liability protections for Firearm manufacturers<<<<<,
    Background checks for All ammo purchases, licenses and permits for reloading, owning pistols, rifles. Ect. ect ect………..

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Oh noes,

      “Republicans already showed they’re willing to compromise GIVE away OUR Liberty.”

      There, fixed that for you. If the Republicans got something in return that we wanted, that would be compromise. Just giving away our liberty is not compromise.

  24. avatar strych9 says:

    I’m no marketing guru but it strikes me that “radio silence” is at this point probably the best idea.

    The reason is fairly simple: There is no position to attack at this point which means that attacking risks making a headlong charge towards a windmill.

    I admit that I have not paid the closest possible attention to the anti’s position in the last few days but what I’ve seen as been calls for “sensible gun control” with no substantive suggestions behind that statement. It’s vague and probably intentionally so.

    If history serves, the antis usually start from this position and then go on to propose a series of policies that get crazier and less realistic as time goes on. I say let them do that and then attack them once they’ve set up weak positions. If they want to dig in to positions in the open well within range of artillery… let them. And then shell the ever-living-fuck out of them.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      It is difficult to win while always on the defensive. The NRA should have canned “solutions” just like the left. The only difference would be that the NRA’s solutions would be real. After a massacre in a GFZ, push hard for “doing something” by eliminating GFZs. If it happens in a may-issue place, demand “doing something” by having shall issue, as several courts, including the prominent D.C. Circuit, have recognized as a constitutional necessity. Canned video testimonials of people who stopped mass shootings, preferably before they even qualified as mass shootings. Canned video testimonials about people who were murdered waiting on permission to have a gun.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        I’m not talking about being on the defensive. I’m talking about letting them stake out a position before attacking them so that you don’t end up throwing wild punches at what ends up being nothing. Let them do that.

        Think of it kind of like boxing or MMA. If you let your opponent set their feet it makes them much easier to hit and hit hard. The same is true if they telegraph their movements because it allows you to set them up to walk into a big shot. One of the things you’ll generally notice about good boxers and MMA fighters is that they tend to have one of two things, or more rarely both, on their side: An excellent judgement of distance or they tend to be very patient in feeling out their competition before committing. It’s pretty rare to see someone who just marches straight into the middle of the ring, starts throwing punches and ends up with a winning record.

        In the latter case, that is having patience, while you’re waiting for them to make a mistake/show you their style you can’t just stand still. Instead you dance around a bit or use distance to try to avoid the possibility getting blasted in the jaw yourself. It’s not being defensive. It’s being patient and using movement to your advantage. I don’t see this as much different.

        If you want to put it in other terms you can get pretty deep into The Art of War in terms laying traps for the enemy to walk into in terms of terrain, tactics or movement. Personally I prefer the boxing/MMA analogy because it’s shorter and easier to deal with. Either way, I don’t personally like the idea of rushing headlong into something like this. Let the anti’s set themselves up and plant their feet. When they do that they’ll be easier to take down because as I noted before, once they stake out a position they tend to rapidly get less and less rational and that position devolves into mindless gabbering that the public doesn’t much care for.

        Historically they always make this mistake and what do we say about interrupting the enemy while they’re making a mistake?

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Yes, but once they stake out a position, responding to that position is being on the defensive. Attacking their position is a defensive act. They say “impose this burden,” and we say “don’t impose that burden.” That’s playing defense. Whatever we do, our goal should be to have them on the defensive as much as possible until we win. Only then should we default to being on the defensive because there is no more ground to gain.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          No offense but I don’t see how attacking is defensive. By it’s very nature, and the definitions of the words in use, attacking is offensive while static positions are defensive.

          In terms of politics attacking a non-position is pointless. Let them stake out their positions first then attack them.

          Why? Because of the built-in nature of the Left. The Left does this with everything (look at DACA) they’ll start out with “reasonable positions” and rapidly devolve into sheer madness on their own as the Left-on-Left infighting commences between the really rabid anti-gunners and the slightly less nutty ones. They’ve done it before and they’ll do it again. Let them cut each other’s throats for a bit and then attack.

          Here’s what will happen if you let this play out a bit:

          First, they’ll stake out some “reasonable positions” like UBC’s or maybe raising the age to buy a semi-auto rifle to 21. Then the infighting will start and within a week the message in the media will be “ban semi-auto rifles!”, “ban magazines over 10 rounds!” and the like.

          Now, those later positions are actually pretty unpopular with Mr. and Mrs. America. So, I say, let them show their crazy. Let the mask slip. Let them fight each other to see who can get more to the Left on gun control and let the media run with it (they will). Let that play out for a bit and then attack them once the mask has slipped (again). Remind Mr. and Mrs. America that “background checks” and other “reasonable, common-sense gun control” are NOT what these people want. What they want are bans and confiscation and the best way to show that is to let the anti’s say it themselves on CNN.

          Don’t fight them on the “common sense” stuff while the wounds are fresh. That breeds sour grapes and fights emotions. You cannot reason someone out of a position they’ve emoted themselves into. Let the passions cool and let the Left go full-on stupid. Then attack. You greatly reduce the risk of self-inflicted injury to us, you let them inflict injuries on themselves and you let them devolve to positions that are 1) indefensible, 2) no longer supported by raw emotions and 3) actually pretty unpopular. This is when logic and rational thinking, properly wielded, can actually do some real (and possibly permanent) damage.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          In a self defense situation, you may attack, but it is characterized as a defensive action. If we attack a position they choose, we aren’t attacking, we are counter-attacking. We are defending the status quo. We aren’t advancing. If we go out and say “end this blood shed by enacting these common sense policies that would have let Aaron Feis be more than a human shield,” then they will have to defend the status quo GFSZ.

          On a micro level, you are right that attacking them on the ground of their choosing (which is in our territory) is an attack, but on a macro level, that is a defensive action.

        4. avatar strych9 says:

          Not everything is about constant advance. While that’s a tempting line of thought always keep in mind that if your attack is going well you’re probably walking into a trap. Sometimes you want to pause, let them fuck up and encircle them with a pincer movement. Counter-attacks are often just as effective, or even more effective, than frontal assaults. Just ask most of the guys who’ve walked into Conor McGregor’s left hand.

          You can parry and then thrust in this situation. If you let them stake out positions and then fight each other to the point that they look stupid then you have an advantage AND you make them defend the status quo GFZ. If that takes a couple of days who cares? Especially if waiting those couple of days means that you greatly reduce the chances of walking into something yourself…

          Why not let them look stupid and then, while looking stupid, defend the status quo. That confers some of the stupidity, in the mind of the general viewer, to the status quo which makes it easier to attack.

        5. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Playing defense can be a good idea. Always playing defense is a guaranteed losing strategy. That’s how we lost Vietnam and tied in Korea. It’s also how the Confederacy lost. When always playing defense, the best that can be done is to not lose ground.

          While the NRA is quietly being quiet, Trump is moving left on guns.

        6. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Also, waiting for the media to stop paying attention before making your position known will prevent your position from being heard.

      2. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

        “The NRA should have canned “solutions” just like the left”

        Yes, this is my biggest gripe. After 8 years of saying they need all the houses to do anything, they have … nothing to propose. Not for Obamacare, not for anything. Meanwhile the Dems jump in with a pre-crafted Hughes amendment at the first opportunity (literally after the republicans went home in that case), and huge game changing bills like NFA and GCA can be produced seemingly on demand.

        Meanwhile we still have an HPA that they can’t get through their own goddamn committees without getting a “Fix NICS” bill stuck to it.

        Back to the topic, the NRA should be assisting friendly lawmakers in producing good 2A-compliant gun laws so they’re in the quiver when the time is right.

        1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          Too late to edit: of course “Fix NICS” is stuck to nat’l reciprocity, not HPA.

        2. avatar Stereodude says:

          Well, they did eventually repeal the individual mandate. The pointed the nose of the Obamacare plane at the ground and pushed up the throttles to max.

  25. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Generally speaking, the NRA is better off remaining quiet publically, but working diligently behind the scenes, in the aftermath of a spree shooting. You want to avoid applying what psychologists call classical conditioning. Think back to your college Psych 101 course and Pavlov’s dog.

    An unconditioned stimulus, like dog food, prompts an unconditioned response, the dog salivating. This is natural and instinctive.

    A neutral stimulus, like a bell, prompts no conditioned response, like salvation. Ears make perk up and the head may turn, but that’s just curiosity.

    Combining the bell ringing with food prompts the unconditioned response of salivation. That’s the conditioning processs, associating the bell with the food.

    Finally, ringing the bell alone, the conditioned stimulus, prompts the salivation, the conditioned response. OK, so what?

    Well, a school shooting is an unconditioned stimulus. The public’s anguish, handwringing, sense of powerlessness, etc. that follow is the unconditioned response.

    The NRA making a very publuc statement is a neutral response. They make statements all the time, after all. Who notices?

    If the NRA comes out swiftly and loudly right after a school shooting, however, it’s possible they can be linked with the shooting in the minds of the public, and therefore be associated with and a cause of public anguish. That anguish is a period of days/weeks, you see, and not everyone feels it immediately. An NRA statement, right after the shooting, could still precede much of the anguish.

    Avoiding that public statement and association is wise, for it avoids linking the NRA with the shooting and by extension the overwhelming negative emotions people feel.

    That’s the theory, anyway. Some supporting evidence for it relates to politicians and others sending their “thoughts and prayers” to victims and their families. Now, thoughts and prayers are viciously ridiculed as being worthless, such perfunctory statements are beimg seen as exacerbating people’s existing negative feelings.

  26. avatar Hannibal says:

    There is no response from the NRA that will change minds positively. Any response will probably do the opposite, if anything. Coming out swinging may make gun-owners feel good but that’s not going to put votes on the table that weren’t already there.

    Sometimes the only winning move is not to play. Or at least know when not to play.

    1. avatar Lewis says:

      Yes. I agree with several posters. The “offensive” move is to work behind the scenes and avoid crystallizing the public discourse by offering a target while people are mourning. It is also the respectful move.
      The NRA is a huge and juicy target with political capital and a network to lose. If they enter the game early they will be on the defensive for sure.
      I do like what GOA did.

  27. avatar Specialist38 says:

    Don’t know.

    I called or emailed all my state and national representative today.

    I didn’t mention the NRA. I was representing me. A concerned citizen.

  28. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Shouldn’t they be talking about National Concealed Carry Reciprocity about now???
    Since Wayne LaPierre did bring up.

  29. avatar Felixd says:

    Nice job creating more division Bobby. We really can use this right now.

  30. avatar Uh-huh says:

    The Prog media and their feral parrots are already conditioning the public with extreme Hate and vitriol: “Kill the NRA” “The NRA is responsible for Sandy hook, Las Vegas, and Florida killing spree” “The NRA and Gun owners are responsible for mass shootings”
    “The NRA don’t care about minorities” “The NRA is EVIL” “The NRA don’t care about dead Children”
    Sad part is Iv’e most of those on the Prog stream media.
    Their goal, plant seeds in the minds of fence sitters and foment hate among the libs. subcounsious reaction when thy hear the words “NRA”

  31. avatar Kendahl says:

    Here is a club with which to beat the gun grabbers over the head: You care about 17 dead high school students and teachers. So do we. But we also care about 17 people killed, one by one, in everyday violent crimes because they were forbidden the tools they needed to defend themselves. You don’t care at all about those victims.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Oh, I REALLY like this tactic.

  32. avatar anonymous says:

    Slightly on topic:

    If Wayne LaPierre — or any other representative of the NRA — had any guts, they would appear on TV talk shows in Washington DC and hold up a 30-round AR magazine.

    Yes, there is a risk of getting arrested for violating the district’s ban. But they could — and should invoke the David Gregory defense.


    1. avatar Stereodude says:

      What’s the weather like on whatever planet you’re on? You can’t possibly believe that someone of the opposite political persuasion would be given the same latitude that was given to David Gregory via prosecutorial discretion do you?

      1. avatar anonymous says:

        > You can’t possibly believe that someone of the opposite political persuasion would be given the same latitude that was given to David Gregory via prosecutorial discretion do you?

        We need guns to fight oppressive tyrannical government . . . but we’re not going to do anything that subjects us to the possibility of being arrested, even though (1) Wayne can afford the best legal representation possible, and (2) the Washington DC Attorney General is already on the record as stating that “a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust“.

        “Under D.C. Code Section 7-2507.06 [the magazine ban], any person convicted of a violation of this Subsection may be imprisoned for not more than one year, fined not more than $1,000.” If Wayne isn’t willing to risk that in his so-called fight for freedom, to demonstrate the pointlessness of certain gun-owner control laws, what is he willing to risk?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I agree. Unfortunately, these organizations don’t seem to foster activism; which we badly need. A heavy, unrelenting push in the courts combined with highly aggressive street activism could win the day. However, privileges instead of rights organizations, like the NRA, would lose power if they won anything substantial AND sustaining.

  33. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    As is its pattern, the NRA will eventually emerge from their media isolation to posit a carefully crafted pro-gun position.
    Well, it did work after Sandy Hook. I would take the current atmosphere over the Sandy Hook environment any day of the week.

    1. avatar VerendusAudeo says:

      Because this time it was only 17 dead high schoolers and teachers instead of 26 dead first graders and teachers, no? A little less shock value and a little more resignation and apathy.

      1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

        How about the realization that even if you outlawed every gun in America today there would be problems for at least the next 100 years?

        Or the realization that the only logical way to protect our schools and kids is with armed folks between them and the bad guys.

  34. avatar Jamie in North Dakota says:

    Don’t worry the “hardcore” 2A defenders like GOA will come out to defend us with all their political power! Oh wait, they’re a 75 pound weakling compared to the NRA. All you NRA hating people need to STFU, you people are just as whiney as any gun hating leftist.When the left comes out against the 2A it’s the NRA and it’s members they put the crosshairs on, not your backwater gun rights orgs.

  35. avatar Art says:

    Wayne LaPierre should lose his job.

    Tim from YouTube’s Military Arms Channel would make a good replacement.

  36. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

    How did Rosa parks get her seat assignment moved to the front of the bus?

    Civil Disobedience.

    It’s time we simply stopped following the “rules”. Carry your piece everywhere. No matter what. The more times one of us stops an active shooter in what they thought was a Gun Free Zone, the more times we can point to the fact that the only solution is one which involves fighting back.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Well, this certainly would demonstrate how effective the “good guy with a gun” mantra really is.

  37. avatar Uriel Scott says:

    “Which begs the question . . .”

    * Raises the question.

  38. avatar Michael Reagan says:

    they’re trying to figure out how to give away our basic rights so they can still party in the swamp, but still take our membership money.

  39. avatar sound awake says:

    theyre doing what they shouldve done after las vegas

    that is shut the FUCK up

    anybody remember this:

    “Bruce Joiner, a security guard shot in the leg by two radicalized Islamists at a “Draw Muhammad” event in the North Dallas suburb of Garland in May of that year, learned months later that an FBI agent had been undercover in the terrorist cell that executed the attack. The agent had texted one of the assailants to “Tear up Texas” a few days before the attack, and was also in a separate vehicle directly behind the two terrorists taking pictures of them just seconds before they opened fire at a perimeter parking checkpoint.”


    knowing what we know now about the fbi its now established fact that whatever they say absolutely cannot be trusted and its at least as likely as not that the same thing or something similar to garland happened in florida

    doesnt it seem kinda wierd that they copped to screwing up the florida thing so fast

    like they were trying to throw everybody off the scent or something

    anybody besides me think its strange that so soon after the shooting there was already a nationwide march organized

    its totally apparent they were WAITING for this to happen

    theyre coming for our guns people


    just like feinstein said

    “we make a stand NOW or there wont be anybody left to go to the chopper…”

  40. avatar Bob999 says:

    Hello! Everyone stop with the emotional outburst. Let’s lool at reality.

    The NRA does not exist to win every battle, it is here to win the war. If ithe NRA would have charged into this issue while the leftist media was spinning the emotions of the country, would their message be heard? The answer is a complete no. In reality, the left will take small snippets of the NRAs message, taking it completely out of context, and in the end, make the NRA look horrible. Just like any organization like the NRA, they make mistakes, but this is not a mistake. Sure, the enemy of the 2nd amendment is marching onto the field with great fanfare, and you want to fight them. The left wants you to make emotional, uncoordinated attacks because that thins your resources. A smart general knows that this is about the long game. This is about logistics. It is about how to position and use resources to win the entire war, not to waste resources at every skirmish. This is a game of chess, not checkers. Some times, you lose a few pawns, but your goal should be to take your opponents king.

  41. avatar Sprocket says:

    Things feel different this time. The lefties and their scumbag friends in the media are going to push hard. Sending checks to the NRA and mailing congress critters isn’t going to cut it. I hear a lot of people complain about what the NRA is or isn’t doing. The fact of the matter is the NRA, or GOA, or any other gun rights organization isn’t magic. We can’t just join, send our money and expect a panacea. Some people treat this as if they’re hiring a plumber to plunge the gun control turd out of their plumbing and they can go back to sitting on the couch while it gets sorted out.

    I think this time around gun owners need to figure out the ground game. The lefties are good at getting people in the streets, it’s time for us to get good at it as well. It’s my hope that the NRA makes this part of their strategy. Unfortunately, I think the NRA has become very Washington focused and simply do what they know; congressional and media weasels. If an established organization doesn’t step forward, all of us need to think about what we can do to organize locally. There are a lot of us, and we need to get off the couch and put our numbers to work.

  42. avatar Ron Carlson says:

    I hurt for the victims and want safety for the kids, but its dam hard to watch victims being used and fed lies by the Left.
    It was on CNN or MSNBC, doing live interviews by the school, they interviewed the wrong student, he said something like “I blame the shooter not the gun”…reporter with fake smile and on to next interview…
    So Hypothetically lets say the NRA entered the media ring right away and debated them all and won.
    How would the public see that?
    We always complain when the media doesn’t wait long enough.
    Some pro gun students from the school have went on You Tube claiming they didn’t go on the bus trip to the capital because CNN edited there speeches and they were denied to say things like armed veterans could help prevent this from happening again.
    The medias true agenda, Gun Control not Safety will become more and more obvious to the public.
    So I’m guessing soon the NRA will start going public and fight for the Long Game

  43. avatar Joe R. says:

    The NRA



    AARP (and we all know what a communist pile of cr_p those aholes support)

  44. avatar Adnan Firman says:

    They’re busy laundering cash from the Russians…

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email