When You Say It About Wayne LaPierre, You’re Saying It About Us Too
BY Herschel Smith
12 years ago
There is no end to the ugliness being spewed towards NRA’s Wayne LaPierre over his press briefing. There are too many main stream media articles, blog posts and tweets to link, and frankly, I wouldn’t want to give them credit they don’t deserve by calling attention to any of them.
True enough, the job Wayne did wasn’t perfect. David Codrea points out that it was a mistake to target video games. I’m ambivalent about dragging into the mix anything but the root cause of evil, or the defeater of righteous self defense. Good men and second amendment advocates will have different views of things, and I need not have my views synched with anyone else. We don’t all have to agree on every jot and tittle of Wayne’s presser.
The main point of the statement is this: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” It is this that so infuriates the progressives. That Wayne didn’t bend on the issue of further restrictions on firearms and continues to oppose increased gun regulations is obscene to them.
They have tried to paint gun owners as somehow opposed to the NRA, with the NRA being the controlling, evil, monster that loves violence and death. The followers, it would seem, are just deluded, confused, and drunk from the bloodlust. If we could only break free from our evil masters, we could think more clearly. Or so I assume they think.
The irony is that the NRA gets its authority from us, even when we disagree on the details. Wayne isn’t persuading any of us to think differently than we did before. The NRA gets its power from us, and with the exception of the details, Wayne is reading our talking points. We oppose further restrictions on firearms. We don’t believe that gun control works to stop crime, and we believe that you’re infringing on our freedoms when you legislate and regulate our gun rights away.
You think that because you look to your progressive idea-makers and leaders to know what to think, we do too. But we’re not like you. The irony is that when you say those things about Wayne LaPierre, you say them about all of us. When you attack Wayne, you think there is one. While this may seem terrifying to you, there are really about four million of us, and Wayne is only saying – in a mannerly way – what we all believe.
On December 25, 2012 at 7:58 pm, Mr. Mark said:
While leftist critics of Wayne LaPierre may intend to criticize all gun owners, I don’t take it that way. I am a gun owner and an advocate for constitutional rights, and I myself am very disappointed with LaPierre’s leadership of the NRA and have been for years.
There are two big problems with LaPierre’s recent proposed solution. First, he proposes yet another Big Government Program, which we could definitely do without, and which itself – if funded with federal tax (actually debt) dollars – violates the 10th amendment. Second, he proposes that we take yet another step toward turning America into a militarized police state. I am in complete disagreement with such a “solution.”
Wayne LaPierre does not speak for me. No one speaks for me and I don’t want anyone speaking for me as I think I’ve got speaking for myself pretty well down pat. LaPierre really stepped in it with his response to Newtown. I think he would have been criticized by the Left no matter what he said, but the criticism he is getting from conservatives and libertarians is a reasoned response to unreasonable rhetoric. I disagree with many positions taken by the dope-smoking hippie set at Reason magazine, but I think they hit the nail on the head when they referred to LaPierre’s solution as “NRA Fights Anti-Gun Hysteria with Pro-Gun Hysteria.”
What needs to be said to the anti-gun lunatics is, “No one can guarantee perfect security. Bad things will happen in the future no matter what we do. Now act like grown, mature, competent adults and go on with life.” Because that’s the truth and Americans who came before us could figure it out and deal with it. This is real life, not a Walt Disney movie. Happy endings cannot be guaranteed. Constitutionalists do not win conflicts with statists by trying to out-statist the statists. The NRA needs a new leader.
On December 25, 2012 at 9:05 pm, Herschel Smith said:
You’re not reading deeply enough. I didn’t say that the progressives were criticizing all gun owners. In fact, they don’t think they are at all. They think that Wayne is an outlier. To us, he may have proposed a unnecessary program. To them, he is a nut. You see how perspective is everything?
I don’t have to convince you that you hold some of the same views that Wayne does. You do. I do. You don’t hold every view in common with him. I don’t either. That’s irrelevant.
The point is that in slamming Wayne’s views of the lack of necessity of gun control is the same thing as slamming our own same view. The MSM doesn’t know that there is that many of us out there.
You can be disappointed in Wayne … or not. I don’t care. That’s not the point. The subject here is the MSM, not Wayne.
On December 26, 2012 at 8:40 pm, Will said:
I’m a gun owner, former Marine etc. I appreciate the 2nd Amendment and own an AR. The MSM is out of control with their coverage of this i.e. misinformation scare tactics etc. I’m actually pretty disgusted reading any article about it lately.
That said i believe the NRA is doing a huge disservice to gun owners. This pro-gun hysteria as mentioned above only turns the public off and does nothing to reach agreement. We are the only developed country with such lax laws. That is because of the 2nd Amendment but we, as the responsible gun owners, need to act responsibly in order to keep this right.
An 18 year old can just walk into a store and buy an AR, that’s ridiculous. It’s a dangerous tool and training is needed. It’s needed for everything else so why not guns? If we can advocate a well-trained, informed gun owner population that acts responsibly, it will be harder for gun-grabbers like Feinstein to erode our rights.
I earned the right to have an AR through training and competence and I would like to keep it. The hysteria has reached such levels now that it seems the tide has turned against us.
On December 26, 2012 at 8:51 pm, Herschel Smith said:
“An 18 year old can just walk into a store and buy an AR, that’s ridiculous.”
He didn’t. He stole it.
On December 26, 2012 at 9:10 pm, Will said:
Lanza did but what about John Doe with no weapons handling training?
On December 26, 2012 at 9:22 pm, Herschel Smith said:
18 year olds cannot purchase a weapon in the U.S. It is illegal.
On December 26, 2012 at 9:48 pm, Will said:
Q: Does a customer have to be a certain age to buy firearms or ammunition from a licensee?
Yes. Under the GCA, long guns and long gun ammunition may be sold only to persons 18 years of age or older. Sales of handguns and ammunition for handguns are limited to persons 21 years of age and older. Although some State and local ordinances have lower age requirements, dealers are bound by the minimum age requirements established by the GCA. If State law or local ordinances establish a higher minimum age, the dealer must observe the higher age requirement.
[18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1), 27 CFR 478.99(b)]
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/licensees-conduct-of-business.html#age-requirements
My point I’m trying to make is that the NRA’s stance of denying that there is any room for improvement may be detrimental to the cause of gun ownership.
On December 26, 2012 at 11:43 pm, Herschel Smith said:
How the hell is age or any new regulation or law related in the least to a person stealing a firearm and committing a crime with it?
On December 27, 2012 at 1:16 am, Will said:
Age isn’t related. I’m talking about the NRA making some reasonable concessions that won’t impact our ability to own ARs with 30 rounds magazines. I’m only using an example of something they could do, mandated training and instruction in local law, to show that gun owners are making an effort for safety. There’s other options as well but just something besides the same old line, it isn’t going to work this time and we’re going to be heavily restricted I’m afraid. A law mandating that firearms are secured may have helped. In the Marine Corps we couldn’t leave weapons unsecured or without a gear guard.
On December 27, 2012 at 1:33 am, Herschel Smith said:
But what does this have to do with a person stealing a weapon (a crime) and going on a shooting spree (a crime)? You didn’t answer the question. Your points are completely unrelated.