The Right Scoop
Dude, two years ago during his re-election, Wayne LaPierre praised Harry Reid of all people as "a friend to gun rights". Now Reid's working on legislation to get rid of gun rights.
Regarding Wayne LaPierre’s speech at the NRA Press Conference, How's about these suggestions to change the laws:
1. Closes ALL Gun Show loopholes. Background checks for ALL sellers at the shows.
2. Expand the "assault weapon" definition to include ALL weapons that look like assault rifles including the ak-47-ar-15 and all the "look-a-likes" Calling them "Barbie doll" guns, I find amusing: Come on you hunters, carry a gun with some BALLS!
These guns are killing machines, get a life. If you like to hunt/target practice, use the others guns/rifles available. Assault rifles, give me a break!
3. Ban the large clips of 25 rounds & more. Are you telling me YOU need a 25 round clip to hunt with? You think I fell off Mama's lap and hit my head on the floor? Some how YOUR IQ tells me you come from the Appalachians or have a pecker problem. Weeny too small not enough testosterone? Take Viagra for your CLIP problem!!!
3. Putting an armed police officer in every school won't solve the problem. An assault rifle will kill the officer quicker then he can draw his weapon.
4. And yes, by all means have more access to mental health records to make sure that guns don't go into the hands of the mentally ill. The shooters of Columbine, VA, Tech, the movie theatre and Sandy Hook school all had mental health issue records prior to their mass shootings. Also, warnings and recorded statements from teachers/fellow students & mental health workers were "on the books".
5. And expand the laws of those who CANNOT possess guns to include: perps of domestic violence, stalkers, and those w/restraining orders on them. This is just brain-storming a few ideas.
Look, many of us own guns. I believe in the 2nd Amendment, don't take the right to bear [own] guns away. But we can't keep blaming societymoviesvideo gamesmusicbooks etc.. And sorry, the statement that people kill, not guns is highly overrated. The killing machines of assault rifles is just that: IT'S THE CHOICE OF WEAPON TO KILL & MURDER PEOPLE OF ANY AGE!!
If someone broke into your house w/an assault rifle, chances are you'd be dead before you could defend yourself & family with even a 357/Parabellum. If they only had a handgun like yours, you'd be on equal turf with them. But, hopefully you can access it fast enough.
Anyway, these are some of my thoughts on the matter of gun control.
And for WaynO LaPeckerhead, NRA will lose this fight. I guarantee it. It's just to bad the ReBOOBlicans can't see that party lines, their jobs and die hard attitudes are just what will get them voted out of office in 2014. Their constituents are no longer important to them, THE PEOPLE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD who put them in office, they no longer care about.
Hey, Paul Ryan and your ilk, what will it take for you to "Get your mind right" and see that the gun regulations NEED to be changed. Hey, Pauly . . . what if your kids were in that school . . . and what if THEY were the victims? But knowing how you think and I've heard enough from your campaign, you'd probably NEVER consider pointing a spectral finger at the NRA.
Sorry if I sound cynical and even a little pessimistic, I just see how selfish many of us have become with demanding OUR rights regarding any belief we have. IMEMINE philosophy. I'm right and all you non-republican thinkers are wrong.
It's time to start "Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers." Let's get busy and get to work!
Selfish? When a tragedy happens two things happen: Fred Phelps leaps out of the woodwork saying God hates gays and America, and liberals leap out of the woodwork saying they hate guns.
Both groups are depraved.
Two thumbs way, way up!! Stand your ground, folks!! The ride from here on out may get a bit bumpy. Nevertheless, stand your ground!
Better look . . . Your ground just had an EARTHQUAKE! NRA just fell into the big Chasm of the Abyss. We don't need them, we will always have the 2nd Amendment to defend our rights for guns. But read my comments. Makes sense, wouldn't have written it otherwise.
Loved the speech, no wonder the left tried to stop it.
Gerald Celente – National Intel Report – December 18, 2012
Gerald talks on Trend Forecasting and how the government is using the Newtown shootings as a way to implement gun control, the way the media has portrayed the shootings and information that is not being discussed on the shootings.
18 Dec 2012
It's disturbing that lunatics can infiltrate a "press conference" to spread their uninformed lunacy in outbursts and generic made posters. SO much for press SECURITY CHECKS at the conference door? WHEREFORE such anti NRA posters smuggled in didn't draw a red flag? Perhaps a gun could of been smuggled in just as easily to take a pop shot at the NRA speaker in a different approach from angered and hate filled radicals? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDlH9sV0lHU
Amish youth are NOT being desensitized by what other youth are exposed to. Such as drugs/side effects, bloody and violent movies, gaming games that are gruesome. The Amish love to hunt, own guns and their youth are NOT violent with guns. Please watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDlH9sV0lHU NINETEEN CHILDREN (19) UNDER the age of TEN (10) died from a fertilizer BOMB in the Oklahoma Federal building by an ex-military soldier Timothy McVeigh. Then Fort Hood Texas had a military psychiatric specialist go bonkers on a killing spree. Then Fort Bragg has had soldiers killing their wives and children and unborn (pregnancy). How many politicians bawled their eyes out over Ruby Ridge or WACO TEXAS? THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT AFRAID OF YOUR GUNS THEY HAVE ARMY TANKS, POISON GASES, DIRTY BOMBS AND NUKES AND FEMMA CAMPS. NOW ON THE OTHER HAND A POLICE STATE IS A DIFFERENT STORY.
Australia had a massacre in 1996. 35 people were killed and 23 wounded at the historic tourist attraction of Port Arthur in Tasmania. The government of the day (a conservative one, equivalent to your Republicans) reacted by conducting a massive nation wide gun buy-back and introducing strict new gun ownership laws. And guess what. We haven't had a massacre since. Nearly two decades without a massacre! Wake up America. How many armed guards does this NRA kook think it will take to stop a deranged killer on a rampage. It wont work. We have the proof here in Australia. Less guns equals a safer world. Forget your paranoid dystopia, Mr La Pierre. Where would it end?
AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN
April 13, 2009
It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:
Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.
While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.
You can spout all the statistics you like. I know which of our two countries most people would tell you they feel safer in and it would not be the USA.
I will take being safer over feeling safer. Liberals are always led by emotion. I would rather be led by facts and history.
uhm...the US is not Australia. You can ck a globe if you don't believe me. We're not Japan either (Tsunami no looting-hurricane Sandy mass looting). US also has the largest blackmarkets in the world so your gun ban idea wouldn't work here it would just push gun sales underground. Also we are the most violent Country on average which doesn't make for a good combo to have innocent people unarmed and criminals armed to the teeth.
I take your point. You do have a pretty unique set of problems in the US. However, I have visited your country and spoken with many of its citizens over the years and have concluded we are quite similar Western societies. I just feel that the proliferation of gun ownership just increases the likelihood of these incidents. Were not the weapons used at Sandy Hook legally obtained? I believe you would be better to reign in firearms rather than just accept them as everyday household necessities. This notion that its OK for a good guy to have a gun would be fine except it ignores the fact that wrong judgements are often made about people and also that people can and do change.
@barropicker thank you for your reply. Lets assume you're right that a gun ban would reduce the likelihood of these incidents and lets also assume that is was possible to remove all the guns form within the society, would the conversation be over at that point or would you need to weigh the pro and cons of the 2nd amendment and then make your final decision?
The purpose of the 2nd amendment is twofold first to allow individuals the right to protect themselves against those who would do them harm or trespass on their rights but more importantly to allow them to protect themselves form the greatest threat of all their own Government once it became tyrannical. If you read the notes from the discussions they had when crafting the 2nd amendment you will see that the latter was of much greater concern to the founding fathers. One attendant even mentioned that the arms that they were referring to needed to be equal to any that the military might have. You have heard that the US was built upon a system of checks and balances, the right to bear arms was the greatest of the checks and balances by allowing the citizenry to not only protect itself from a government that became tyrannical but to overthrow it when it became necessary to do so. "When a people fear their government you have tyranny, when a government fears its people you have Liberty" If you consider this paranoia then you would have to also conclude that the (once) greatest Country ever conceived was built upon paranoia and considering the success the US had obtained this could not be the case.
So in our gun ban conversation do we have to look at which is the lesser of two evils?
Which would do more harm a tyrannical unchecked and unbalanced government (think Syria) or an occasional mentally ill person with an effective weapon. (My apologies to all who have been victims of violent gun related crimes but I am just trying to make a point)
I could have talked about how you never hear about these types of incidents at gun stores or pawn shops (where the perpetrators know they will encounter armed resistance) or how the Aurora Colorado incident occurred in the only movie theater out of seven in the area that did not allow concealed weapons, but I chose the less oft talked about purpose of the 2nd amendment because you have to sometimes do some deep thinking in cases like this so that you won't have a knee jerk reaction. I'll give you an example.
Do you remember the not guilty verdict of the Casey Anthony trial? Do you remember the outrage people had toward an obviously guilty woman who had murdered her child and then went off to party. I confess that I did not watch the whole trial but I did see the closing arguments and right then and there I knew they did not have enough evidence to convict her. People were screaming about how our judicial system was
broken and how something needed to be done to correct this injustice. But is it broken? Do we really want to change it? Our system was designed to favor the accused, to place the burden of proof on the accuser. It is thought that the greatest crime is where an innocent man is wrongly accused and found guilty of a crime he didn't commit. Our system is one where "if 100 guilty men have to go free to ensure that one innocent man is saved" it is worth the price. Should we change this policy just because Casey Anthony got away with murder?
Hopefully I have given you something to ponder and thanks again for your reply.
No, its very real and its a great place. You should visit some time. But leave your guns at home.
For those of you that think more guns is the answer for a safer country consider the following:
1) Our public school's can't afford basic supplies let alone armed police or security. Personally I'd rather see our states spend money to improve education rather than turning schools into armed citadels.
2) Arm teachers and staff? As a school teacher I can't imagine how bad that could turn out. SWAT teams and other law enforcement spend YEARS in gun ranges honing their skills so they can perform under the stress of a gunfight. Inexperienced people with guns sounds like a bad idea to me.
3) Rather than arm everyone why don't we reduce (not completely remove) some of the guns within our country? I'm not advising that we do away with guns, or that guns are inherently evil, but the fact of the matter is you can get a gun easier than a driver license. The opposite should be true. Let's make sure gun owners are responsible law-abiding citizens BEFORE allowing them to arm themselves.
By limiting who has access we could avoid some of these terrible tragedies. It won't be possible to end gun violence 100% or stop people from illegally obtaining them on a black market, but I don't believe more guns are the answer.
It is only the criminals who get guns easier than a driver's license and that will never change. My son attended a middle school outside of Washington DC in Silver Spring MD, and because many diplomat's kids went there, and there were also kids from a very tough area, they had policemen in the halls at all times. It made the kids feel safe and parents had no problem with it. We could also consider hiring vets to protect our children in schools - they would probably work for less and are not unionized, and many need jobs.
We waste money on so many things... perhaps we could eliminate a school administrative position and pay a cop or vet to protect our children instead!
Public schools can't afford basic supplies because the money you do get it is being wasted and nobody doesn't do anything about it. And when someone does try to do something, you (along with your thug union) scream bloody murder.
Since most teachers are liberals, I am concerned about having them being armed so you do have a point. I don't care if they shoot each other, but I would hate for an innocent child or bystander to get shot.
Sorry, but limiting some guns is a fantasy and it won't work. Even if you remove certain guns, the criminals will smuggle them in and anyone who wants them will get them. Why are you for destroying our 2nd Amendment?? If you don't want a gun, that is your choice, but don't you take away my right to own one, two or several.
Another thing to remember is this psycho in CT was supposedly angry at his mom and the children. If he did not have a gun, he probably would have gone to the school with an ax or machete and chopped those little kids up. When a lunatic wants to kill, he/she will plan it and execute it.
I didn't have to get my finger printed to get a drivers license, but, I did to be able to get a concealed weapons permit. I didn't have to get a back ground check to get my drivers license, but, I did to buy a gun. You are WRONG it is NOT easier to get a gun than it is a drivers license. Whether law abiding citizens have guns or not CRIMINALS will ALWAYS be able to get them illegally.
This disgusts me. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” And who tells us who is good and who is bad? And blaming shit on video games is ridiculous. Parents: be parents to your kids and stop blaming the world for your problems.
Once the NRA announced that they would not take any questions, I got the distinct feeling that the reps from the NRA were going to unload most of what they had, holding back just a wee bit, to buy time to review/filter responses across the political spectrum to determine direction of their strongest path forward, and to avoid unforseen political quicksand.
Interestingly, the NRA rep suggested a national registry of citizens individuals with a history of mental illness...which clearly will not sit well with the left [see http://tinyurl.com/bpqmapc as well as
http://tinyurl.com/c8eyz95 ] as it interferes with the statists destructive long term agenda.
It was the left and the ACLU who demanded that we close the mental health facilities that kept these people off the streets and gave them the level of care that they needed. We are now paying the price, with the homeless across the country and such inexplicable acts of violence.
Eloquent and honest, two things you can never say about Barack Obma who is incapable of any honesty and totally despicable.
Cuomo's father is responsible for me joining the NRA. It was not the riots and mayhem in NYC or being held up at knifepoint or any of that - it was on the eve of the Kuwait war when anyone could see the potential for a war in the middle east spinning out of control. If you have to go, then it is a very good idea to know the rifle. But Cuomo was going to ban the AR which is the closest thing to an M16 - for the lameass reason you see in the article. By saying an AR has nothing to do with hunting or sporting he conveniently denies that for over 300 years a whole bunch of americans were at war and what he calls the 'gun culture' is just plain old american culture that developed over that time. It did not spread as an ideology.
So --- what you have here is a Values War. You have the libs who want any newcomers to assimilate to their view, versus the traditional avenues of assimilation. The problem is that the libs want to do what Adolph Hitler did - ban guns. Sorry - that is unacceptable. Period. But we can see where some of it comes from. There were riots way back when in NYC where lots of unassimilated and thus irresponsible nitwits were packing heat and there was a bloodbath - whereupon NYC went for gun control. On the other hand, in England Parliament was persuaded to disarm returning soldiers on fears there would be a commie revolution. That was smart - now there are commies all over england.
So - assimilation is a huge issue where millions of people come here and think they can wing it. It touches the whole subject of out-of-control immigration. People who have not yet got the hang of living here will do stupid things, especially in a crowd. Hassan is no surprise. He never should have been allowed in the USA, never mind the army, never mind being allowed anywhere near a gun. American values do NOT include yelling alahu akbar and shooting other americans. Nor do we sacrifice chickens on the steps of the Supreme Court to persuade the gods to influence the judges. Idiot libs think all cultures are the same rather than the obvious fact that people adapt to their circumstances over time. Of course, the circumstances of a Gold Rush produces a culture with lots of gambling on everything in sight, lots of fighting, and not the sort of place to bring the wife and kids, and ends up producing ghost towns rather than quaint little peaceful villages. This appears to be part of the imagery the libs use - the 'wild west' atmosphere they always predict. It is therefore amusing when their predictions fail and the crime rate DROPS (because its the criminals who are scared rather than the citizens).
I thought it instructive that Paul Barrett told Brian Lehrer that he must concede that if someone at the school could have defended the children, a lot more of them would be alive. But Brian continues his position that there are so many guns "in private hands" , and furthermore the legislators should ban handguns and not just focus on assault weapons. I was wondering why Brian even had the guy on his show.
These libnuts go on like the revolution was a long time ago and nobody is going to attack us. That is amusing until you consider that in the 1977 blackout there were more looters in manhattan than there were soldiers in the Continental Army. Ditto for rioters in the Rodney King riots, the Newark riots, the Washington riots - one could go on at length. Ok, where were Cuomo and Bloomberg when little old ladies in the East Village needed protection from the rampant arson and punks knocking them down to take their checks or any gold chains. Hey - the mayor has more important things to worry about, and so do the police. So the libs don't like to go there, and have some smartass response to put you down. They think they are clever.
Yes, Bloomberg is very worried about salt being used in restaurants, over-sized sodas, and feeding the homeless meals that may not meet proper dietary restrictions. Those are much bigger concerns, don't you think?
These statists are absolutely brainless!!! Just a little common sense would go a very long way!
physicsnut- I'm sorry that you feel so frightened living here in the US. We actually live in one of the safer parts of the world despite these terrible shootings. As a liberal I'm not in favor of banning all guns or eliminating them from the country. I think people should have the privilege to bear guns: assuming they are law-abiding citizens and can maintain a license which proves they know how to safely care for their weapon and have storage for it. I don't think that's too much to ask for. As a 10-year old I was hanging out with a friend at his house when his parents weren't home. He pulled out his dad's handgun and pointed it at me as a joke. Sorry, but that's not responsible gun ownership. THIS is the type of behavior that I'm hoping we can address. If you can't keep your firearm locked up and out of reach from your 10-year-old then YOU DON'T DESERVE A WEAPON!
Furthermore, how is it that Israel, a country under constant threat of attack, has stricter gun laws than we do? I'm not suggesting we adopt laws as strict as there's, but I think there's a happy place somewhere in the middle.
BTW- I grew up in Los Angeles and was here during the Rodney King riots (as you called it)- I wasn't in fear for my life or felt the need for a gun then. I also lived in NYC for 9 years and never felt the need there either. I'm sorry you've had bad experiences being held up.
Interesting that conservatives and gun owners recognize any Americans right to own a gun, or not... yet it is clear that the vast majority of liberals, particularly in politics and the media, would like to see them banned for everyone.
Fortunately, our Second Amendment prevents that and though there is little respect for our Constitution among such people, I really hope they never try to deny law-abiding citizens that right because most gun owners in this country won't stand for it.
We have more than adequate gun laws... we just need to enforce them. These shooters are never legally licensed concealed carry gun owners... therein lies the problem.
Though I am not as fond of the NRA as I am with the GOA, I think he had some excellent points to share. However, the idea of a policeman in each school is a band-aid over a more serious problem that he did address.
The cure is something no one is willing to work on. It is a moral issue and instead of addressing the issue morally, we just add a couple of cops. Yes, he did mention the moral problems, but he offered no moral solution.
Let us put prayer, God's Word, back into the schools. Can we not admit as a society that this experiment is a failure?
Ironically, they are putting God back into the schools in Russia. It appears that they have learned a lesson that the progressives in this country refuse to recognize.
I was just listening to someone who watched the press conference. They are saying that La Piere was advocating for a national database on psychologically defective people.
If you think that this is good, think again. Many of our vets are being listed as defective mentally already, and often without their knowledge. This list already exists, and they are acting on it by detaining people without charge, having them "analyzed" then taking away their 2nd amendment rights. This can happen to anyone, without a court order or due process.
The NRA will not get my support any more. I now know that they are playing RINO type political games with us.
Preppers are now listed as possible terrorists by Homeland Security. La Pierre will give them a new database, and laws to go with it, that will enable government to target certain groups by labeling them "mentally defective" and then taking their rights.
You are done, Wayne, and many are figuring this out due to the fact that republicans are burning us at every turn. Consider yourself "labeled" as an estalishment shill.
If they don't get us by taking our guns they'll get us by labeling us mentally ill. We need to use good sense to avoid both.
I listened to the speech and read it as well. I don't see any indication at all that the NRA is proposing such a thing. They in fact stepped up and offered to design a model National School Shield Emergency Response Program to give to schools for Free!
I hope that you are right. I was just listening to an interview of someone who heard the speech. I will look into it further.
It's at about 7 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Lgu9f-qd_Uo#!
The school shooting was set up.
http://www.sott.net/article/254873-Sandy-Hook-massacre-Official-story-spins-out-of-control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQhdiqv3NN4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p_ODW4JG9y8#!
LaPierre is calling for a national database, and a nationalized police force in every school. He is calling for congress to act to legislate and fund it, which means further federalization of education.
He is a Statist.
He is calling for all of this based on a staged event put on by some black ops element of government to push this agenda.
Correct me if I'm wrong but, "background checks" done to see if felony; or
adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution; (that's just 2
of 10) under what's known as "Brady Bill Law". I believe what the NRA was meaning
the mental part data base is not kept up to date.
They should be speaking against a national database, due to the obvious and already present abuses that government engages in. It appears to me that La Pierre is a Statist. He wants to manage control of the people, rather than working toward more liberty. This is the same thing that republicans now stand for. Essentially, they are socialists who want to control the population based on popular demand, rather than essential rights considerations. Giving in to the media blitz against gun rights by compromising on gun control issues is not my idea of taking a principled stand. If a person wants to give in to the pressure and compromise to appease those who are pushing this agenda, then that person is just wanting a slower decline than the rest. Conservatives have to be equally as radical as the left by taking a stand for our constitution and bill of rights, which is now considered radical by many.
I will no longer pay the NRA to sell me out slowly.
The problem with progressive their solutions are to ban everything. Forget about solutions that work.
Its all whats in some liberal poll. Look I am 42 and graduated from a public high school in Orlando Fl. We had an armed Seminole County sheriff at our school. I graduated in 1988. To my knowledge there is still one there. In the late seventies there was no cop there and the school was known as having drug problems. The first year he was there hey had like 300 arrests problems solved. And no mass killings. There are a lot of reasons law enforcement should be proteting schools and not just high schools.
Read the hole PDF file, it has many statements and ideas that I'm sure you will not hear on the news.
One of the most telling remarks I have heard from the gun control liberals was "We can't have security at schools like what we have at banks. It's not like the schools are full of money." Kind of tells me what is more valuable to a liberal, what about you?
Remember, liberals are usually pro-abortion...and do not cherish, respect human life.
I saw this NRA speech in it's entirety and I give Mr. Lapierre huge applause for this press conference. He made excellent point's in regards to all the safety measures implemented into different organisation's all across America etc: but-- why not in our school's? He was spot-on in speaking-out about the glamorization of "violence in our movies" and with the "video gaming" industry.
Mr. Lapierre was absolutely correct in what he had shared about "a bad guy with a gun verses a good guy with a gun" ............., and I can tell you this much "those reporter's got a smack down" of truth handed to them. I loved every minute of it, because everything Mr. Lapierre had mentioned is fact.
The left want's gun control, but only when it suit's their purposes. What these people do not understand and with their politicizing for gun control........it doesn't change the fact that a crazy individual is still crazy, they'll just shoot regardless of one's political view's.
What's so hard to understand about our 2 amendment right's!!!
The cognitive dissonance in lefties' brains is a marvel to behold:
omigawd, armed people in our schools, oh noes ... so would they rather have their children killed?
Because we can't have a list of mentally ill people, oh noes, that's discrimination!
And we all know, don't we, that criminals don't use guns - only law-abiding citizens do.
Not one even addresses the question why banks and shops are protected by armed guards - but school children aren't ...
So true... Expecting logic and reason from a Libtard is like hoping to get warm from holding your hands over a bowl of ice cream.
Oh this was an unexpected additional little b-d present, slammed Barky Boy on budget cuts! That's why I just had to treat myself to a 5-year membership :):):)
I would love to see # years for each of that average, wouldn't it be cool if it's the 3-yr and 5-yr primarily???
People are getting the message: "NRA Membership Increasing 8,000 A Day After Sandy Hook Shooting
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/447898/nra-membership-increasing-8000-a-day-after-sandy-hook-shooting/#EhYUkfci5m0UCRjU.99
"
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.