Yahoo/AP: NRA criticizes Obama's reference to 'absolutism'

[Larry]

Link.

RENO, Nev. (AP) -- A top National Rifle Association official on Tuesday accused President Barack Obama of seeking to redefine the rights of gun owners, telling a hunting and wildlife conservation group that the president's use of the word "absolutism" in his inauguration speech was an attack on law-abiding citizens who own firearms.

Obama said in his speech Monday that Americans shouldn't "mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate."

The remark was interpreted by the NRA as a reference to the organization's steadfast opposition to any new gun regulations.

So, Obama objects to absolutism, and the NRA announces that they're being attacked.

Would the word "paranoia" have been better?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Nra=peta.....

[sacase]

Nra=peta.....

Except that the NRA is one of the most powerful lobbies, if not the most powerful lobby. I doubt PETA has any influence

[mboyd784]

Nra=peta.....

You lost me.

[Larry]

Nra=peta.....

There are some rather significant differences.

For example, I will observe that keeping and bearing arms is a constitutional right, whereas the right of animals to demand that everyone be vegan isn't.

----------

That said, though, I do find the first two paragraphs that I didn't quote to be really ironic.

NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre told a Weatherby Foundation awards ceremony that the Second Amendment gives Americans the unfettered right to own a firearm, but the president wants to redefine that freedom.

"Absolutes do exist, words do have specific meaning in language and in law," he said.

I love the way he's claiming that the President is using the term "absolutism" to point at his group, and objecting, and then announcing that the shoe fits.

(But then, that's true of a lot of political groups. One of the things you have to have, is a mirror that doesn't show irony.)

[Duckus]

Wayne LaPierre is the best thing to happen to ever happen to gun control advocates.

[Predicto]

Wayne LaPierre is the best thing to happen to ever happen to gun control advocates.

I dunno. He has been extremely successful in eviscerating all gun control laws for the past quarter century. Pretty strong track record.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Not even the First Amendment is an absolute protection of free speech. The government can still regulate speech. In fact, the NRA seems to want the government to regulate speech when it says we need to regulate video games and movies instead of guns.

Basically, this guy is a jerk. He's very good at lobbying, but he's effectively a giant *******.

[Burgold]

Wasn't sure where to put this, but thought it was really interesting.

According to John Rosenthal, Founder of Stop Handgun Violence there is solid evidence that members of Al Qaeda and Hezzbullah have been caught purchasing military style weapons at American gun shows in order to ship to their cohorts. I am surprised I haven't heard about this in other quarters which makes me somewhat question what he says, but on the other hand it does make sense that if this is a venue where a person could buy heavy weapons without ID or checks, it would be a good place for bad guys to get armed.

The story was meant to be about the fact that gun registration requests have gone up sharply since Sandyhook, but I thought that part was really provocative.

http://voicerussia.com/radio_broadca...102897548.html

[Larry]

Burg,

I wouldn't be amazed if there were a few isolated incidents where people kind of affiliated (or wannabe affiliates) did a little of that. A few individual weapons.

But no, I wouldn't believe that AQ gets even a noticeable fraction of its weapons here. For lots of reasons.

One is because at least the impression I get is that the world is pretty much hip deep in AKs, in wholesale quantity.

Another s that, I I'm AQ, I have to consider anything like that coming from America to be a potential trap, possibly exposing me.

And, lets face it, things in America cost a lot more.

[autoidiodyssey]

Burg,

I wouldn't be amazed if there were a few isolated incidents where people kind of affiliated (or wannabe affiliates) did a little of that. A few individual weapons.

But no, I wouldn't believe that AQ gets even a noticeable fraction of its weapons here. For lots of reasons.

One is because at least the impression I get is that the world is pretty much hip deep in AKs, in wholesale quantity.

Another s that, I I'm AQ, I have to consider anything like that coming from America to be a potential trap, possibly exposing me.

And, lets face it, things in America cost a lot more.

I agree. AQ would have no interest in the semi-auto AKs available at US gun shows. Not when they run in the sort of circles that make getting a full auto AK pretty easy. And probably much cheaper than a US semi-auto AK. I've seen some pics of captured AKs on a gun board. They were all date stamped from the 60's and 70's. One was from the late 50's. They last a long time. I'm sure there are plenty of groups/countries out there that are happy to supply AQ to keep the US busy. Just like how countries, including us, armed the Afghan fighters against the USSR.

I am surprised I haven't heard about this in other quarters which makes me somewhat question what he says, but on the other hand it does make sense that if this is a venue where a person could buy heavy weapons without ID or checks, it would be a good place for bad guys to get armed.

Like Larry said, I'm sure there are a few dingbats that have tried to do that. But it doesn't really make that much sense. The type of guns available at gun shows are not what, at least militarily, would be considered "heavy weapons". When the entire Middle East is full of full auto AKs why would these groups try to source semi-auto weapons from here? I'm sure Iran will happily provide those groups with anything they need. Full auto guns, mortars, RPGs, real military weapons. Plus they are centrally located within a few hundred miles of most of these conflicts, with no large oceans in between to complicate the shipping.

[Bang]

I recal seeing a 60 minutes report during the Bosnian war that also showed factions of that war arming themselves here.
In fact, at the time they had been buying 50 cal rifles. enough to drop a passenger jet from the sky they said..

it certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility that our enemies can and do arm themselves here.


~Bang

[JMS]

I dunno. He has been extremely successful in eviscerating all gun control laws for the past quarter century. Pretty strong track record.

No the NRA has, Wayne LaPierre is a duffus... He is a terrible spokesman who comes across as needlessly condescending and unpersuasive..

Fact of the matter is the gun control advocates here aren't asking for policies which will make any difference in gun violence. They want to ban the bushmaster (assault weapon)... Fact is the bush master assault weapon was created when the Brady bill outlawed citizens from owning M-16's. outlawing names is moronic and not designed to do anything but make law abiding Americans criminals. If they outlaw the bushmaster and the M-16, somebody will create a new name to sell the same weapon just like they did before... It's a rehash of a stupid idea which didn't work to solve a problem which doesn't exist. We had about 9600 gun related murders last year. about 300 were caused by rifles of any kind much less assault weapons. Trying to outlaw them makes no sense.. The murder rate didn't go down when the Brady bill outlawed them, and it didn't go up when the Brady bill expired and Americans could legally purchase them again either.

Just like magazine clips in excess of 7 rounds. It's an idea which was tried, and failed... It didn't reduce gun violence, and it didn't increase gun violence when it expired before.

So why are we trying these failed policies again? Because this entire exercise is being treated as a political dog and pony show rather than trying to address a real problem.

[Mad Mike]

Wasn't sure where to put this, but thought it was really interesting.

According to John Rosenthal, Founder of Stop Handgun Violence there is solid evidence that members of Al Qaeda and Hezzbullah have been caught purchasing military style weapons at American gun shows in order to ship to their cohorts. I am surprised I haven't heard about this in other quarters which makes me somewhat question what he says, but on the other hand it does make sense that if this is a venue where a person could buy heavy weapons without ID or checks, it would be a good place for bad guys to get armed.

The story was meant to be about the fact that gun registration requests have gone up sharply since Sandyhook, but I thought that part was really provocative.

http://voicerussia.com/radio_broadca...102897548.html

Sounds to me like someone trying to scare people. I call complete BS.

There is absolutely NO need to come to the US to get weapons. Anyone with an internet connection and enough cash can equip an army with full auto machine guns to rocket launchers. Why expose yourself in America to buy semi auto rifles in small quantities?

http://gizmodo.com/5927379/the-secre...nyone-anything

[Destino]

So, Obama objects to absolutism, and the NRA announces that they're being attacked.

Would the word "paranoia" have been better?

He is attacking them by objecting to absolutism, nothing paranoid about it. They'd better get used to it because the winds of change are coming IMO. The gun industry in the US, and I'm not talking about manufacturers here, has way too many issues with it for their absolute line in the sand stance to hold for much longer.

---------- Post added January-30th-2013 at 05:04 PM ----------

I recal seeing a 60 minutes report during the Bosnian war that also showed factions of that war arming themselves here.
In fact, at the time they had been buying 50 cal rifles. enough to drop a passenger jet from the sky they said..

it certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility that our enemies can and do arm themselves here.


~Bang

I'm not sure that anyone cares if they do. There are certain weapon systems that can't be sold but the US has an active and profitable arms industry that the government does not want to stifle. While the gun debate tends to orbit mass murder, home defense, and hunting it's no secret that armed conflicts require guns these days. Lots of guns and ammo. I'm sure that American manufacturers are filling at least some of that demand, even if indirectly.