Previous Post
Next Post

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, whose offices are located in Newtown, about three miles from Sandy Hook Elementary, just released its response to the, um, workproduct of Tailgunner Joe Biden’s Civilian Disarmament Commission. And they’re focusing on keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have ‘em by “Fixing NICS” and education program to make sure gun owners lock up their heaters, especially in homes with “children or at-risk individuals.” Press release after the jump . . .

All Americans share the goal of wanting to make our communities and children safer by reducing violence in our society, like the tragic incident that occured last month in our community of Newtown, Conn. We are reviewing Vice President Biden’s recommendations with an open mind in hopes they will offer real means of achieving our shared goal.

The central issue involved in violence where a firearm is misused is the unauthorized access to the firearm. We believe it is critical to first focus on the unauthorized access to firearms by irresponsible persons and those not legally qualified to possess them.

We support immediate improvements to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that will bring all appropriate mental health and other records, such as restraining orders, into the NICS system. Fixing NICS must be among the highest priorities in order to help further prevent illegal purchases of firearms from federally licensed retailers.

In order to help prevent unauthorized access to firearms in the home, we have long supported and are initiating an expanded safety campaign to promote the secure and responsible storage of all firearms and ammunition when not in use. We believe the personal responsibility of gun owners, especially if there are children or at-risk individuals in the home, is central to any meaningful discussion of the issues.

The NSSF will continue to lend its expertise to this important national conversation and the accompanying legislative and policy making processes. We do so respecting the various points of views represented in these discussions.

NOTE: The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is the more than 8,000 member trade association for America’s firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry.

Previous Post
Next Post


        • seriously? Come on…
          “National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that will bring all appropriate mental health and other records, such as restraining orders, into the NICS system.”

          Thats fine with me. If you dont agree, you’re insane. I’m happy with that thats all they’re gonna get too. I have no problem with requiring a buyer have a background check. Hers a WIP chart im working on…

          Feedback always welcome 🙂

          The above would only require that at a gun show a would be buyer be verified prior to purchasing a firearm. Protecting both the seller and the buyer, while providing a reasonable “feel good measure” that isn’t much of a big deal. I’ve passed background checks for employment, the Navy, and firearms. I’m ONLY OK with the above if the serial numbers are not tracked, just the sale.

        • Yeah, you’re okay with it. I’m not. Once you start down the road of requiring private sales to be approved by the government, while at gun shows for now, then we start getting into the question of what constitutes a gun show. And then the gun grabbers will start demanding that all gun transfers be approved by the government. Then they will have the means to know where all guns are in the country. Yeah, just not the serial numbers. Whoopee.

        • OK, here’s a little something for the NICS supporters to think about very carefully:

          Once you have all that information collected in a nice, one-stop-shopping database, guess who else is going to want to use it?

          Employers. Especially large companies.

          There’s a whole lot of shopping around that large companies do when they’re seeking to vet applicants for jobs. They’ve tried stalking your Facebook page. They try running credit checks on applicants. They look for DMV violations, court records, etc.

          Give NICS all this information and mark my words: Big companies will be lobbying to have access to it. They’ll love the idea that they can get a “go/no-go” check from Uncle Sugar (with the details omitted) as to whether or not they want to employ someone.

          And at that point, you’ll see the likes of the ACLU and others start messing with the NICS system, because the employers won’t let their access go. And we’ll be right back where we started – or worse.

          People should think carefully about what happens to information when it’s gathered up into one neat little pile…

  1. Compare this very well-reasoned, open-minded and reasonable postion to the increasingly irrelevant and often batshit crazy positions stated by today’s NRA “leadership.” We responsible gun owners need to let the NRA know that we need them to join the conversation, not scream wild and crazy accusations, engage in character assasination and perpetuate fringe conspiracy theory crap that just makes all of us look like we’re nuts. Or does anyone reading this really believe that the NRA’s position on this whole issue wasn’t prepared and set in stone well before they sat down in DC?

    • 100% agree. If you’re not an nra member right now you’re perception is that they are the fringe. The public has yet to hear them say anything about a commitment to reducing gun violence. I would love to hear them say something about how their members are committed to reducing gun violence while protecting the rights of law abiding citizens.

      Unfortunately the antis have win the moral high ground, the nra doesn’t seen at all interested in winning it back.

      • These days saying anything about “reduction of gun violence” appears to translate to “no more guns”. I can understand people’s reluctance to such statements, but on the other hand, if we, the responsible gun owners, use the same terminology, it’ll water down.

        The way the antis “won” the high ground is by ridiculing. The NRA in my view was very correct in holding back with making a statement and I’m amused by the fact that one of Obama’s points is that of the NRA: Armed security in schools. I’m not particularly fond of federally mandated security in schools (because in the long run I expect a TSA-like constitutionally debatable behavior), but the idea of not hoping for the attacker’s mercy like a helpless victim is appealing.

        Sadly, the NRA made themselves look like a bunch of grumpy old men by yapping over computer games and movies. I’m surprised Marilyn Manson wasn’t mentioned.

        Gun control legislation is like Sex Panther Cologne. They’ve done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time.

        • What about trident control?

          You have a friend that killed a man with a trident. In broad daylight nonetheless.

        • To kill a man with a trident, you need to have some good trident control. Those things are not easy to handle.

    • Really the NRA says it all the time. They are the ones saying enforce the 20,000 gun laws that are already in place. Like the woman that bought the AR for nutjob that shot those fireman. She should have the book thrown at her.

      Also I think the NRA knows that something will happen, and are probably OK with NICS checks for all gun buyers but they never want to give an inch for fear of the slippery slope.

      Its all about bargaining.

      • America is no longer on a slope, it is in Free Fall
        There is already in place in Utah that collects and files ALL data on US citizens as well as other enemies of Obama. Once OCare kicks in and the Improved NICS we will find that “Rumored Spousal Abuse” “Financial Irresponsibilitys” even Traffic Infractions and visiting certain web sites will be enough to deney a purchase

    • +1, we need to focus on the “keep and bear” part of the second amendment, stopping gun/magazine bans, and expanding where you can carry. NICS (as long as records are destroy on time) doesn’t restrict what I can have or where I can carry. Fighting it just because draws attention and effort away from what’s important.

  2. This response isn’t perfect, but it doesn’t have the crotchety-old-man feeling of the NRA’s statement. As someone who enjoys video games, I can see how people might be offended by LaPierre’s attempt to push focus to the likes of Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto.

    • Ya I was annoyed when they threw video games and movies under the bus. There are age ratings. I have to show my ID to buy Assassin’s Creed and Call of Duty. Are you going to start saying what kind of games and movies adults are allowed to experience?

      • You don’t HAVE to show your id in most places and most retail places will sell M games to 8 year olds. It’s a guideline, not a law. I’ve witnessed this in various stores like GameStop. I’m not saying Video Games cause this type of violence in normal well adjusted and grounded people, but to mentally ill individuals I could see heavy doses of violent video games reprogramming/desensitizing the mentally ill individuals to violence. The problem here again is mental health, not video games. However, mental health isn’t an exact science, it’s a subjective medical field. There’s no sure proof way to determine which mentally ill individuals are just “different” and which ones will be violent. And you start sticking agenda driven mental health officials/doctors in the mix and now normal people could be categorized as mentally unfit to own firearms because they like watching the Military Channel or play Call of Duty.

    • +1.

      I’m 35 years old and enjoy playing Battlefield or Call of Duty on line with my friends. I am an officer in the US Army, and the vast majority of the men in my office between the ages of 18-35, play these games online as well. It is up to the parents to control access to these games.

  3. I’m sorry, but I don’t see anything wrong with the above statement? Can people tell me what they are having a problem with?

    • It grants the premise that there is something that gun owners must give up to prevent violence. By granting that premise, it allows for more and more encroachments on our freedoms.

      Not even a hundred years ago firearms technology was almost as highly developed as today and anyone could freely buy a machine gun and silencer and sawed off shot gun. There is nothing anyone can do to stop every madman who is intent on homocidal mayhem. But the NSSF agrees that we need even more obstacles to gun ownership, as though this has any impact on madmen. The only people these proposals affect are law abiding people who have a sudden need for firearms and can’t get one because of a longer, more stringent process. It also helps create a registry, however much they deny it, of gun owners.

      The progressives push and push to the left, while the conservatives never push back to the right, they only try to slow down the movement to the left. It’s time to stop that leftward movement and start shoving back towards freedom.

      • Making sure that existing laws are enforced and educating people about safe storage is giving something up?

        • Did you notice number 2?

          HIPAA was sold to us as protecting our medical privacy, but what it really does is create medical databases for insurance companies to keep people from changing insurance companies with pre-existing conditions. The reality is that HIPAA makes your data freely available to just about everyone except loved ones and others that you might ask to help you.

          What #2 does, on its face, is take all this data that Americans believe is supposed to be private and give it all to the government. This is a HUGE change and now the government gains another foothold in having absolute control over your health and thus your life, all under the guise of keeping guns away from loonies.

  4. Does anybody know the number of firearms related
    murders and assaults committed with a legally bought
    and owned weapon? Oddly enough I can’t find
    the numbers on this. I’m sure everyone’s surprised.

    If anyone does actually know, please point me in the
    right direction.

      • May or may not be, the problem with such research and the reason it was stopped and supported being stopped by many, was because of the way it was lined up to be used to demonize firearms owners and even threaten to increase insurance or deny them insurance because they own guns.

        Look, the antis can play the “we are just doing it for the kids” game all they want, they know it won’t pass the muster of history. Gun control is a failed experiment.

        • Agreed, but for the antis to insinuate
          that all firearms used in a crime are
          lawfully possessed is as much a fallacy
          as saying firearms are deadlier than

          So how can anybody say any of the
          new laws or EOs will have any affect
          without data to support them?
          I definitely not advocating a national
          registry, just pointing out that
          without data the only thing left is
          the emotion card.

  5. This statement is 100 percent in line with the NRA, they are focused on things that will actually protect kids, not things that wont, like gun bans and NOT putting protection in our schools.

    On a side note, I think it is time for Wayne to let someone else be the speaker, like Chris Cox, he just doesnt present the image as well.

    • Oh, come now. How else will he earn that nearly $1m salary and wine and dine congressmen while at the same time refuse to protect our rights in court?

  6. If the NRA issued this statement, some of the commenters here would be labeling them as traitors. People, you can’t have it both ways. Either the NRA is too radical or not radical enough — it can’t be both. Make up your damn minds.

    The NSSF represents the manufacturers. As we know from prior experience, the manufacturers will roll over and p!ss themselves if POTUS looks at them crosseyed. That’s what Bill Ruger and S&W did when Clinton stared at them. They sold out. They sold us out. Well, Bill Ruger is dead and S&W has had a change of management, but I don’t expect either company — nor their mouthpiece, the NSSF — to do things any differently this time around.

    The NRA represents us. They haven’t just said “no,” they’ve said “f^ck no.” They’ve taken a hard line and goddammit, they’d better. If they want to keep their base and their membership, they had better be as radical as me, or more.

    There is a special place reserved in hell for the manufacturers and NSSF because they will do nothing in this time of moral crisis.

    • Ralph, me thinks these statements are coming from some ‘knew visitors’, if ya know what I mean. The ideological statements identify the person and their agenda.

      • Agreed. And I’m tired of this boiling frog crap. Either keep the temperature where it’s at, reduce it, or make them throw the ****ing thing into the fire so everyone can at least see what the real deal is.

    • Agree Ralph, and as an FFL and a gun business, I’m among the cohort that could actually apply to join the NSSF as a voting member. Not feeling the urge to do so is what keeps me from sending in an app.

      I remember the Ruger roll-over on magazine size and the S&W sellout. S&W, especially, took a really hard hit from gun owners in the aftermath of their ham-handed sellout to the Clinton administration.

      In the last decade, the NSSF appears to have learned that gun owners are perfectly willing to go after sellouts and quislings in our ranks, so they tread more carefully now.

      There’s a reason why liberals demonize the NRA: The NRA wins political battles behind the scenes in DC. The NRA can cause people to lose elected office. The NRA has a lobbying and voter information machine so well oiled, it practically qualifies for designation as an EPA Superfund site.

Comments are closed.