Wise Talk: What Is the NRA Afraid Of?

President Obama is trying to restrict—not entirely ban—assault weapons. The NRA is opposed for a few reasons, but none of them are logical.

Let's talk about assault weapons and the President's attempts to modify existing gun laws. First of all, those weapons are used almost exclusively for target practice. They are rarely, if ever, used for hunting. Any hunter who uses those weapons for game would tear his target to shreds, making the hunt useless and ridiculous.

I have a close friend who is a shooter, and an excellent one at that. He tells me that assault weapons have a minimum kick, so they can be used pretty accurately. He's the one who told me that those weapons are primarily used for target practice, and he should know.

So, if they are used primarily for target practice, why is the NRA so virulently against their restriction. What are they afraid of? The President isn't trying to take existing weapons away from their owners. He's trying to make sure those weapons are not sold to criminals or to the insane.

Furthermore, to be afraid of the government taking over all weapons is ridiculous as well. We have the National Guard and the U. S. Military, who if I remember correctly, consists of us—and they (we) have access to those weapons in that fashion. So apparently, the gun lobby is afraid of us taking over our own country. Now that makes no sense at all.

Finally, why does the gun lobby and the NRA have so much power? They number about four million members and the rest of the country outnumbers them significantly, and most disagree with their position. So why do they exert so much influence, far out of balance with their numbers. That is a question which must be addressed soon and the situation changed immediately.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

JustUs February 14, 2013 at 11:09 PM
Why aren't the liberals talking about the REAL cause of gun violence - like mental illness and the failed 'drug war'??? The 'drug war' is responsible for about 85% of the gun deaths in America. You have teenagers in the hood dying over a pound of pot, a benign drug that is no more harmful to a human being than a gin fizzy. In fact, it's less harmful. So when are the liberals going to talk about the real issues? What are they scared of, George Wise??? Hmmm? And if you fail to address those problems your talk is not wise at all because you are avoiding the crux of the problem.
Libi Uremovic February 15, 2013 at 02:46 PM
it is the gop that are blocking the legalization weed, not the dems... going down the 'it's a mental health problem' road is going to result in mental health evaluations as a prerequisite for weapons purchase... is that the result that you're looking for...??
Angela Burch February 15, 2013 at 03:16 PM
Good points George. Why is it that whenever someone speaks out and tries to help fix a problem, they are labeled as a "liberal". There is so much anger in the pro-gun side. I wish one of them would calm down and listen instead of just talking. Nobody wants all guns taken away! They just want them better regulated and kept out of the hands of criminal or mentally unstable people. Why does that need to be fought tooth and nail?
Jay Berman February 15, 2013 at 04:50 PM
Because over 1/3rd of our population are gun owners. We are democrats, we are republicans ... we understand the meaning of the second amendment ... Assault weapons ... AR-15 is a .223 caliber semi automatic rifle, just like a hutning rifle, it only looks like a military weapon. If you took an AR-15 into combat it would be like comitting suicide ..
Bill February 15, 2013 at 05:17 PM
Could President Obama pass the background check? He has control of the nations nuclear weapons. He is an admited drug user.
David Shisler February 15, 2013 at 08:43 PM
Shane you assume a lot. I think many people are worried about this country and where it's headed, there seems to be divisiveness everywhere one looks, I know I would feel safer with an AR-15 in a roit situation, (my door being busted down) then having a hand gun. Oh and by the way it would already be loaded before they busted into my home. And what makes you think Ar-15 owners would be carrying it out on the streets, do you expect things to get that bad, if so you might want to purchase one yourself.
Arthur Spooner February 15, 2013 at 08:57 PM
If Shane cannot have a gun, then no one can. He is your typical liberal. Either we all get it or no one does. Its not fair you have a BMW and I only have a KIA. Whah!
Bill February 15, 2013 at 10:10 PM
Better to have it and not need it , than to need it and not have it . Because when u need it. You will really really need it . Life or death .
Unincorporated February 15, 2013 at 10:44 PM
Shane is correct. An AR-15 is for "killing many people quickly." Unfortuanately David is correct too "I would feel safer with an AR-15 in a riot situation." We live in a world that cannot be completely controlled by oneself or the government. We are the government and people have forgotten how to govern themselves. I'm still not comfortable with giving up my freedoms after having visited Dachau in the 1980s and experiencing the LA riots first hand.
N1smo2go February 16, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Let's get one thing straight here. Any weapon can be used to kill people quickly. As a Marine that served 8 years on active duty, and served in the Middle East, I can tell you what the difference is between my M-16 issue and my two AR-15's I have at home and why I have the right to own them. First of all the M-16 is selectable fire with a semi automatic mode and burst mode firing 3 rounds. In theater I rarirly used 3 burst mode simply because of accuracy. My stock was standard and it was outfitted wth a optics and a forward grip for stability. The standard 30 round magazines that are issued were hardly filled with 30 rounds, more like 27-28 because they would jam up. My AR-15's at home are similiar "looking" but much different, they are semi-auto matic single shot per pull of trigger with 20 round magazines. I have 20 magazines each filled when I go target shooting or want an adrenaline rush for "SPORT", to shoot off as many as I can and work on my own speed reloading drills. Not to shoot people! It has optics and a collapsible stock. I also chose the AR-15 as a PDW because familiarity and ease of use and cleaning and I know it like the back of my hand, when thinking of the M-16. People do not have to fear me with my weapons, only intruders in my home. I can get to any one of my PDW's in my home within 5 seconds. Knowing the secure boundaries of my home and ideal areas to be, in the event of an intruder coming in to my home helps protect my family.
N1smo2go February 16, 2013 at 12:26 AM
As trained Marine, with knowledge of small arms and explosives. If I was going to inflict mass casualty on "society" my weapon would be used only for defense of me, I would resort to other means. Using my AR-15 was also the best weapon to have when I went on a feril hog hunt 3 years ago. I was able to get shots off quickly and accurately, and was able to enjoy good bbq allyear long because of it. Guns are not the problem, people are and always will be. Taking away guns of a certain type because of a few evil people chose them for their criminal deed is wrong. I know for a certainty where I live, police are 5-6 minutes away. My PDW's are the first line of defense to stave of a home intruder while I wait for police to arrive. I would call anyone that does not or have not lived in an environment with high crime or gun violence foolish to comment on topics that they have either no idea what they are talking about or never experienced. The fact that people are killed daily by guns is a problem, but too many people do not focus on the criminal element because it's easy to gloss over. I can't go out and buy automatic weapons and would have no need for them. But unlike many of people, I would dare ask, how many people have trained or practiced emergency plans in their homes in the event of a home invasion robbery or intruder breaking in. This is the society we live in and if you don't think it will never happen to you, you are nieve. Responsible gun owners are not responsible
N1smo2go February 16, 2013 at 12:31 AM
for the mass murders that have occurred in the last few years. We use our guns for protection, sport, hunting, recreational shooting and an adrenaline rush. I rather shoot off 200 rounds than jump out of a plane with a parachute for my rush. That is all i use them for. Liberals are trying to bully honest abiding citizens when they are not the issue. Point blank we have alot of bad Americans in this country that will do any of us harm at any time and crime is relevant and real. As soon as we make them the target the quicker we will stop having this stupid gun debate. People and their free will hurt others is the problem, and we have a problem in this country with those people, not we responsible gun owners. We need to point fingers and be honest and say that the criminal element in this country is the problem.
Libi Uremovic February 16, 2013 at 12:42 AM
you boys sound like a bunch of 10 year olds talking about shooting animals... have any of you ever actually had a use for a weapon....and no, the boogie man and killer squirrels don't count ...
Libi Uremovic February 16, 2013 at 12:47 AM
the criminal element in this country isn't the problem...mass murders are being carried out by legal weapons owners.... at least criminals have a use for their weapons ... and show some entrepreneur spirit...
Jay Berman February 16, 2013 at 01:14 AM
Shane, you have no idea what you are talking about ... and you have no right to tell me what I need and what I don't ... I can do more damage and fire faster, aquire my targets faster with my Ruger 9mm semi automatic handgun ... another thing .. there is no difference between a .223 Caliber semi automatic huting rifle and an AR-15 except the way they look ... Rifles have better range accuracy that a handgun ... I you don't want to own or shoot a firearm, fine ... goody for you but don't tell me what I should shoot as you don't have a clue ...
Jay Berman February 16, 2013 at 01:15 AM
Very good Bill ....
Rick Jones February 16, 2013 at 02:36 AM
This is a sad discussion by people that have no idea what guns are for in American Society!
Arthur Spooner February 16, 2013 at 03:20 AM
Shane has, he claims to have been in vietnam.
Jay Berman February 16, 2013 at 04:05 AM
I have a Marlin 22 rifle .. great for varmints ... I can't beleive Shane was in Vietnam .. sounds like a young progressive ...
gringo February 16, 2013 at 07:37 PM
Very poor and misleading article. The first paragraph is completely false. Do some real research before you spew your opinion.
TGB February 17, 2013 at 06:14 PM
We all draw lines on what is acceptable and what is not. Using the reductio ad absurdum argument, is there anyone who thinks a private individual should own a nuclear weapon? How about a flamethrower, a howitzer or a rocket propelled grenade? It all come down to where society draws the line on what is acceptable to own and what is not. The current debate is trying to find that line and right now it appears to be somewhere around semi automatic weapons. There will always be those on both extremes, those who want total availability of any weapon of any kind and those who want no weapons of any kind allowed to be owned by private individuals. Society as a whole needs to find the line which is acceptable to the majority of its members.
jill smith February 18, 2013 at 04:21 AM
Fast and Furious was not acceptable to me, but it was acceptable to the president that does not deserve our trust. Obama is the one that was over seeing guns placed in the hands of drug cartels.
jill smith February 18, 2013 at 04:21 AM
Fast and Furious was not acceptable to me, but it was acceptable to the president that does not deserve our trust. Obama is the one that was over seeing guns placed in the hands of drug cartels.
Dan Avery February 19, 2013 at 06:35 PM
There was a time in this country when The Dumb and the Willfully Ignorant worked on assembly lines and wanted nothing more when they got off work other than "Miller Time," a woman with a retarded sense of morality, and a double=wide they could call "home." Then can downsizing, outsourcing, Bush the Second's devaluation of the dollar, and the economic collapse of 2008. Now The Dumb and the Willfully Ignorant are unemployable so they spend their days comment on the Patch. Even when the article deals with topics they know nothing of; they live to spew their ignorance and hatred. They don't use their real names because they claim speaking your mind can be dangerous. Tell that to Martin Luther King, Jr. Malcolm X, Nathan Hale, Thomas Paine... They are cowards and like all cowards they bully if you point out their complete lack of logic. They ruin online communication and any chance we may have had to learn from each other. They will continue to do so until we stand up and shout them down.
Ray Hayashi February 21, 2013 at 12:00 AM
Untrue, the people behind the scenes do want to ban all guns: The Brady Campaign emerged from Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI), originally the National Council to Control Handguns (NCCH), and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (CPHV). NCCH was founded in 1974 by Dr. Mark Borinsky, a victim of gun violence, and became HCI in 1980.[4] On June 14, 2001, Handgun Control, Inc. was renamed the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in honor of Sarah and Jim Brady.[4] On October 1, 2001, it incorporated the Million Mom March.[5] "We will take one step at a time, and the first is necessary - given the political realities – very modest. We’ll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and again strengthen the next law and again and again. Our ultimate goal, total control of handguns is going to take time. The first problem is to slow down production and sales. Next is to get registration. The final is to make possession of all handguns and ammunition (with a few exceptions) totally illegal." Pete Shields chairman HGC 1976 (Wikipedia)
Ray Hayashi February 21, 2013 at 12:05 AM
remember the guys that defended thier shops, the rioters decided to find easier game...
Frank H. Robles February 22, 2013 at 12:06 AM
The NRA yields much power today not because they represent the the 4 million members that pay 25 dollars per. year, but they represent the Gun Industry which is a 12 Billion business. They became " Not Your Fathers NRA " back in the Mid 90's. When then President Regan, along with former President's Ford and Carter urge'd Congress to support a ban on assault weapons. Later George H.W.Bush " Lifetime Member " left the NRA, after Wayne Pierre comments " Jack Booted Thug's that have a badge and the government's go-heed to Harass, Intimidate, even muder law abiding citizens" Over the past 2 decades they have really gone after the gun industry, the NRA always shows yearly income of 200 Million - 250 Million ...!!!
Bret D. Rijke February 24, 2013 at 11:54 AM
@Frank H. Robles; You wrote; "...after Wayne Pierre comments " Jack Booted Thug's that have a badge and the government's go-heed to Harass, Intimidate, even muder law abiding citizens" And is he wrong? Have you not been reading what the BATF has been doing over the last few years? Or how about the "Fast and Furious" deal? Or the multiple incidents of police corruption and violence in the nation over the last 10+ years? When the assigned government agencies begin to fail in their duties, or when they begin to abuse their granted authority against the populace they are supposed to protect, then where do the law abiding turn to? I think you give the whole concept of a benevolent government way too much leeway.
Frank H. Robles February 25, 2013 at 05:43 AM
Bret......good post, it goes deeper than the question at the end of the main article that I was trying to reply to. Why the NRA has show much Power, they began to partner up with the Big Gun Industry back in the mid-ninties, when Regan and Busch were pro - gun control, The Big Gun Industry began to make large Money dotations. I also was a long time member of the NRA, did not renew with them back then, did not like the direction they were going....!!!!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something