How to address the gun contol issue...

[Barrettone]

MGO Members,

This latest tragedy in Conneticut has sparked further debate about gun control. In January, when the 113th Congress convenes, Diane Feinstein, and her ilk are going to roll out some pretty heavy-handed gun control legislation. http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons NRA will be leading the fight on this at the national level, however, it is VERY important that we, as Michigan gun owners, do our very best to make our case to those who are ignorant about guns understand why more gun control measures are not the answer. Additionally, we need to enforce the laws on the books, and even expand the ability for good guys to be able to have access to guns so they can stop the bad guys. Here is a helpful list of "talking points" to help you articulate your point to someone who is on the fence or even anti-gun:

1) The guns are not the culprit, our society is. The desensitization of our children to violence via video gaming, movies, television and even the news media is a large contibuting factor. Additionally, we have greatly reduced the amount of funding for mental health facilities for people with disorders. They really have no place to go to get help because we have made so many cuts in this area. Bottom line is that this problem is cultural in nature and we ALL helped create it, through our actions and inactions. We did not have these issues in the 60's and 70's, and AR-15's were in existence at that time as well. Loosen them up a bit with this analogy: Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'donnell fat...that outta give them a little perspective, and a laugh as well.

2) We advertise schools, movie theatres and churches as "gun free" zones, and that further exacerbates the problem, as it turns them into CEZ's or criminal empowerment zones. People hellbent on creating havoc while meeting limited resistence KNOW then can acheive their goal in these places. We need to create an environment where the success of their mission is reduced by allowing for an armed person or persons to be there to challenge them.

3) Point out how hypocritical we have become with what we consider to be important in our lives. We protect our money (in banks) with guns, we protect our celebrities, politicians, and even our president with guns. This is all acceptable, yet our most precious asset, our children, we want to leave unprotected. Even a police officer in every school would be beneficial if they don't want teachers or concealed carry people involved. However, financially, it would make more sense to allow teachers the ability to carry if they so chose, or to allow PROPERLY TRAINED CPL holders to carry in schools.

4) Use this analogy: It is like having cameras watching an area. Criminals will avoid these places because they fear being detected, and identified, thus leading to their capture. Is somebody ALWAYS WATCHING the cameras?...No, but they COULD be, and that serves as a deterrent. Not knowing where an armed good guy is in their targeted establishment creates uncertainty, thus deterring them from choosing it as a potential target. It is this UNCERTAINTY that will tip the scales in the good guys favor.

5) Point out that these so-called "assault weapons" (a media-spun term) are actually used for a variety of legitimate purposes, such as varmint hunting (prairie dogs, coyotes, etc), CMP matches, competitive action shooting, and yes, even in defense of hearth and home. These guns are not used "exclusively" for violence as the media likes to portray. I usually use the term "Homeland Defense Rifle" instead of "assault rifle", thus illustrating that it can be "spun" any way one desires...This approach usually illicits a chuckle. Showing them that even dads deer rifle is semi-automatic, and that these new laws would outlaw more than the politicians will have you know, sometimes gets them thinking.

6) Lastly, DO NOT get into a heated argument. Keep it a "discussion". Emotions are running high right now, particularly because of the ages of the majority of the victims. Be civil, maintain a non-agressive tone, and if the other person gets all wound up, back off a little. Overblown rhetoric will not win people over, only with a well thought out presentation of facts can we hope to sway them to our side. Go out of your way to appear conciliatory. This was a God-awful thing that happened. We need to be sincere with our delivery. We have to show that we want this problem addressed as badly as they do, BUT IN THE RIGHT WAY!!! We do not want more ineffective gun laws that criminals are not going to abide by anyway. We need more good guys with a gun, as that is the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun!!!

Even if we can make people "understand" our position, we are gaining ground. Don't expect to turn someone in one conversation...just make them think about it a little bit. Good luck in your efforts, and please report back in this thread what objections are still being raised after you point out the above facts. If you have anything you would like to add to what was said above, please do so. We will need to constantly "tweak" our message and adjust our argument to address these objections!!!

Jeff LaFave
MGO President

[mfytczyk]

Well said

[matt11]

Thank You.

[Winterbeater]

Thank you for this well written advice on ways to discuss the violence that has occurred and the backlash that is following. I agree that we must protect our children from the "bad" guns with "good" guns when required.

Each of us must calmly express our opinions whenever we can to prevent our being further restricted from protecting ourselves and our children.:grouphug:

[MC_Driver]

Thanks for the list, it was very well written and helpful. At times it is better to not become emotional during a debate and use a convincing fact embedded statement as above instead of just 'Guns don't kill people, People kill people' word track.
I emailed the list to myself for study purposes.

"NRA will be leading the fight on this at the national level".
I was just wondering if MGO contributes monetarily to the leagal costs of this fight or being Michigan based just contributes to laws that affect us as gun owners in Michigan? As an NRA member I know our dues and donations to ILA help with this endeavor. However, there is a storm coming and like storm Sandy at times we need to send relief.

[Barrettone]

Thanks for the list, it was very well written and helpful. At times it is better to not become emotional during a debate and use a convincing fact embedded statement as above instead of just 'Guns don't kill people, People kill people' word track.
I emailed the list to myself for study purposes.

"NRA will be leading the fight on this at the national level".
I was just wondering if MGO contributes monetarily to the leagal costs of this fight or being Michigan based just contributes to laws that affect us as gun owners in Michigan? As an NRA member I know our dues and donations to ILA help with this endeavor. However, there is a storm coming and like storm Sandy at times we need to send relief.

We will be utilizing our funds to mobilize our Michigan base. Additionally, we will be joining a coalition of other like-mined organizations to fight this legislation. More details will be forthcoming soon.

[TangoDown3727]

Very helpful info Jeff! Well said! Thanks for posting this.

[right2bear]

We will be utilizing our funds to mobilize our Michigan base. Additionally, we will be joining a coalition of other like-mined organizations to fight this legislation. More details will be forthcoming soon.


I will be waiting to hear a follow up on this :cheers:

[matt11]

My MGO membership is paid through next year.
I made sure my NRA membership was current.

[Barrettone]

Let me start by saying that this thread is NOT to devolve into anything but talking about the potential upcoming AWB legislation and our fight against it. With that said, here is what I can tell you at this time. MGO has formed a coalition with MCRGO, MOC, Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership, MUCC, Skip Coryell's Second Amendment March, Michigan Gun Rights and Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. This stems from a joint statement we all made regarding SB59.

We are now going to work together on fighting this upcoming AWB legislation, and I have included the parameters of this coalition below:


In the recent successful push to have Senate Bill 59 adopted by the Michigan Legislature, MCRGO, Michigan Open Carry, MUCC, Michigan Gun Owners, and Students for Concealed Carry on Campus worked together to achieve a common position in support of the bill and issued a joint statement to that effect.


Our organizations, along with SAFR, have discussed the creation of a permanent collaborative effort both to coordinate a shared message and strategy on gun rights and also to avoid stepping on each others' toes.


With the Sandy Hook shooting, the veto of SB 59 and the national push for more gun control laws, there is a new burst of energy in fighting to protect our gun rights in Michigan. Over the past month, we've seen tremendous gains in both the number of new paid members joining our organizations as well as people following us on Facebook. We're aware that along with new followers, there is also new interest in people looking to take a leadership role in gun rights.


Over the past couple weeks, we've helped organize a group of pro-gun women who will be operating an organization independent of MCRGO and we've become aware of interest in forming a collaborative effort from other groups such as Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership. New groups like Michigan Gun Rights, which describes itself as “the official gun rights page of the state of Michigan,” are also springing up. Skip Coryell's Second Amendment March has asked for all of our cooperation on a new march on Lansing in the spring. We also expect to soon see a group focused primarily on constitutional carry.


We're asking groups that are interested in joining a permanent collaborative effort to name one person from their organization who can speak for that organization to serve as a contact. Due to people's different locations and schedules, we will likely communicate primarily by e-mail and conference calls. Note this collaboration will not be formal in structure and won't become a new organization itself and no group will be bound by any joint policy decisions. It's simply to serve as a communications tool.


If you're interested, please contact me with the name of a representative from your group along with that person's e-mail and telephone number.


Thank you and Happy New Year,


Brady Schickinger
Legislative Director
MCRGO

I will NOT TOLERATE any bad-mouthing of any of these organizations as it regards this fight that we are all in together. We have a common enemy, and whether you shoot shotguns, rifles, pistols or black powder, or carry concealled or openly, this threat is very real to your sport and/or recreational pursuit with firearms. Gun grabbers work in increments. They may not be coming for your gun today, but they won't be far behind to get yours if they experience success in other areas for gun control.

So, all this said, we're in the same boat, and we will be fighting this with everything we've got. We have a 2A Defense Fund with monies allocated to efforts such as this, and the BoD will be looking at how we can most judiciously put those assets to work in Michigan so we can deliver the support the NRA needs from our state. After-all, Michigan grass-roots activism is what we are all about!!!

There is also another coalition of different state-wide organizations that is forming to take a hard line with the NRA to offer NO COMPROMISE on gun control so they do not "make a deal". I am looking into them, but I fear that getting involved nationally may be beyond our mandate if funding is required. I am waiting to see what they are proposing first.

Jeff LaFave
MGO President

[mikeb32]

I'm in Jeff....Let me know if you need any help in this!!

[Barrettone]

I'm in Jeff....Let me know if you need any help in this!!

I may be taking you up on that. This is going to be time consuming to say the least, but it is well worth the effort!!! We have been lucky the past few years as our gun rights have actually been expanding. Now, we need to fight. MGO has been building its war chest for just such an occasion, and we will NOT be silent on this issue!!!

Jeff LaFave
MGO President

[big44maghunter]

I'm in Jeff....Let me know if you need any help in this!!

I'm in too, I just got off my ass and got my 5 year MGO membership and upgraded my NRA to "Life". We need to take action ASAP to show 2nd amendment support, but it needs to be done correctly. I would love to see a peaceful show of support at the capital in Lansing with 100k gun owners. Even better would be an NRA coordinated event nation wide at all capitals!

Brad

[Barrettone]

I will also be looking at having MGO instructors do what my good friend Tony Ericson is doing in the Upper Peninsula:

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/20469407/nra-instructors-offering-shooting-to-up-teachers

[freakinhugebear]

MGO Members,


6) Lastly, DO NOT get into a heated argument. Keep it a "discussion". Emotions are running high right now, particularly because of the ages of the majority of the victims. Be civil, maintain a non-agressive tone, and if the other person gets all wound up, back off a little. Overblown rhetoric will not win people over, only with a well thought out presentation of facts can we hope to sway them to our side. Go out of your way to appear conciliatory. This was a God-awful thing that happened. We need to be sincere with our delivery. We have to show that we want this problem addressed as badly as they do, BUT IN THE RIGHT WAY!!! We do not want more ineffective gun laws that criminals are not going to abide by anyway. We need more good guys with a gun, as that is the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun!!!

Even if we can make people "understand" our position, we are gaining ground. Don't expect to turn someone in one conversation...just make them think about it a little bit. Good luck in your efforts, and please report back in this thread what objections are still being raised after you point out the above facts. If you have anything you would like to add to what was said above, please do so. We will need to constantly "tweak" our message and adjust our argument to address these objections!!!

Jeff LaFave
MGO President


I made a video bringing up some great points geared towards anti gun people. Send it to an anti gun friend or watch it yourself for some good data and points. The video was purposefully done in a kind respectful manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S15JGZ_ZBxw

[right2bear]

I made a video bringing up some great points geared towards anti gun people. Send it to an anti gun friend or watch it yourself for some good data and points. The video was purposefully done in a kind respectful manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S15JGZ_ZBxw

I think you'll have better luck not saying blah blah blah about the anti-gun statements @ around :50sec into your video.

Not trying to nit pick but the anti's will do just that and probably stop watching at that point.

[freakinhugebear]

I think you'll have better luck not saying blah blah blah about the anti-gun statements @ around :50sec into your video.

Not trying to nit pick but the anti's will do just that and probably stop watching at that point.


I appreciate you watching the vid and the feedback. I'll watch it over and consider editing that out and reloading. I tried to be extra calm and sensitive to anti's in the vid, but I'm sure you can imagine it's hard to hold every little thing back. thanks

[langenc]

Recieved communication from a Virginia gun rights group (VCDL).

They are suggesting that we all contact our Republican legislators and say "no more gun laws and enemurate some."

Advise that you will follow up and watch, and you should do both..

Wouldalso suggest you get on VCDLs email list. Verry informative. If you dont like it, cancel after few weeks/month.

Where are all the Obama voters who thought he didnt do so bad last term??

[XDM 40 cal]

As what you posted, If i come across a anti-gun attack or any conversations.

I will post.

This is great way to gain more responsible gun owners.

[sigkid229]

Just sent my payment in! anything i can do to help just let me know.

[XDM 40 cal]

I just found this website that is unformed on the issue and are need of positive infomation...

http://onemillionmomsforguncontrol.org/?gclid=COXLgozLzrQCFcFxOgodO0EAvw


EDIT: Correcting info.

[combo10106]

wow, great article.

[milkman]

Very glad to have been directed to this site. I will keep checking in and do everything I can because this is even larger than losing our 2nd ammendment rights. The liberal persuasion wants to take away our 1st amm. rights also, so only they can speak out. I.E., they will not stop with taking away our 2nd amm. rights, so we have to do all we can to protect the 2nd amm..
The NRA site has links to write to our congressmen.
Might be good to write to IL. congressmen.

[kotaguchi]

It would be nice for the NRA to have a large rally of gun rights supporters on the steps of the capital to show the politicians and the American people that alot of Americans still supports the second amendment.

Just a thought....

[tarkataku]

Jeff

I am in for the long haul. I will help wherever needed. I am more than willing to take time off to go to Lansing if needed. Short notice may be tricky. Your talking points are right on!

Jay Cooper

[kms]

I found that just miss unformed on the issue and are need of positive infomation...

http://onemillionmomsforguncontrol.org/?gclid=COXLgozLzrQCFcFxOgodO0EAvw

No offense meant, but what were you trying to say?! I've tried reading your post several times, but I really can't figure out what you're saying.

[jmer817]

This is what I pasted on my "facebook" page last month...similar to the comments on the first page of this thread.....

Gun control - The Conneticut school shooting was a horrible event. I have two kids an 11 year daughter and a 7 year old son. When I heard of the shooting I felt so bad for the parents of the young kids and thought about mine. It brought tears to my eye more than once. Since then we hear debate for more gun control, gun banning, and "assault" rifles. I am a gun owner and I would like to give you my... opinion. Eliminating guns will not stop these senseless acts. These lunatics will just find other ways to kill groups of people. Google "bombs" and you can learn how to make a bomb, how about using poison, or driving a vehicle thru a crowd? There are countless other methods that I refuse to even think about. Banning guns will not fix the problem. In fact all that will occur is that guns will be taken from law-abiding citizens. The criminals will still be able to get anything that they want. Take drugs for example, although illegal, they are very much a part of our society. There has never been a place that when guns were banned that crime went down. In all cases it went up! There are many statistics and facts out there that prove guns reduce crime and improve safety. Do your research. I recall a few years ago in the next town over from me that a law-abiding person with a CCW license pulled his gun and was able to peacefully stop an armed robbery in progress at a gas station. Only one TV news station in the area had a short 20 second spot on this, and the local paper had a two paragraph article in section C or D toward the back page. Why was this not front page news? Why does the media hide this? There are countless examples everyday across the nation where a gun saved lives yet gets no media attention! Ok, there are some out there that are OK with guns but are against so called "assault" rifles. I own an AR-15 (assault rife) in .223 caliber with more than one 30 round magazine. Why do I need all this fire power? I originally bought it for home protection. Understand, that I live in a rural area with no fulltime police. If I were to call the police right now, I would be surprised if they arrived within 20 minutes. If a car load of "hoodlums" pulled in my driveway with guns, knives, baseball bats, etc and began knocking down my door, I am grabbing the AR-15. With that said, I have also found that this "assault" rifle makes a very nice and versatile hunting rifle. (using the legal 5 round magazine) With the compactness, the adjustablity for different statures, the high accuracy, along with the .223 caliber bullet, it is perfect for coyote hunting! Many hunters are now buying and using AR-15's for hunting. You can step up to a larger .308 caliber for larger animals, or now they are very popular in a .22 caliber for target shooting and plinking. And with the adjustablity and endless accessories, it can be a gun that has multiple purposes and can fit anyone in the family. It is very egonomic and safe tool. And I call it a tool because that is what it is. It does not have a mind of its own. So with all that said, for those that are against gun ownership, please do your research and get the facts. You don't have to own or use a gun, but please don't take mine away from me.

[Barrettone]

Nice addition!!!

[XDM 40 cal]

No offense meant, but what were you trying to say?! I've tried reading your post several times, but I really can't figure out what you're saying.

Opps mental fubar. Correct the info.:hide:

[partdeux]

Great article by Tom Gresham
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2013/01/06/1-gun-control-has-a-clear-record-of-failure.html

[Glockslinger]

First off, I'm in! I'm on the Legislative Committee of SAFR (I am, right Barb? Brad?) Anyhoo, I'll do whatever I can.

Next, when the call went out to submit proposals to Joe Biden's Task Force on gun control, I submitted the following. (Doesn't mean they READ it, but I sent it in.) Would love to know what y'all think!

A PRACTICAL RESPONSE TO GUN VIOLENCE IN THE U.S.
(A Proposal)

OVERVIEW:
The recent murder of innocent school children at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown, CT, has brought renewed calls for “gun control,” and that something “be done about gun violence.” Indeed, this is the most recent in a long series of armed spree killings that go back through the years to August of 1966 and the sniper attack from the tower at the University of Texas. While overall murder rates have been in sharp decline over the past 18 years, the incidence of these high-profile mass shootings have escalated in the wake of Columbine.

Each time such an incident happens, many people are quick to propose what they think would have solved the problem. These ideas range from the extreme of nullifying the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution and confiscating all weapons held by civilians right on through to the other extreme of arming every citizen and making every neighborhood an armed camp. The two words most often spouted are “gun control.”

Yet the idea of gun control is nebulous. If a person proposes better fire safety measures, the immediate question is what new safety measure, specifically, should be adopted? Gun control proponents will say that gun laws need to be “tightened,” or made “more strict,” yet few people making these proposals understand that firearms are already tightly regulated. From the initial manufacture, transfer, advertising, sale, use, storage and final disposal, there are tens of thousands of federal and state laws governing firearms. Government legislatures being limited to creating law and regulation are then met with the limitations of their abilities. The simple fact is that criminals break laws, and when bad laws are imposed with good intentions, they often come with unintended, and sometimes deadly, consequences.

THE HISTORY:
Nearly all of the new gun controls now being proposed are nothing new. They have at one time been tried and have failed to make any meaningful impact on “gun crime.” I will briefly outline each and show where they are lacking.

1. Assault weapons ban. Back in 1994, “The Public Safety And Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act” banned various firearms dubbed “assault weapons.” This moniker is actually a contrived, politically motivated invention by a group intent on banning all firearms. Josh Sugarman, then president of the Violence Policy Center wrote: "The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." In short, they’re purposely confusing the public and lawmakers into believing that common, semi-automatic rifles are machine guns due to their cosmetic appearance. These rifles are, in fact, no more deadly or powerful than most legal hunting rifles and those used recreationally by sportsmen all across the country. When the law was originally crafted, members of Congress actually gathered around a firearms catalog and made a list of these cosmetic features that they thought made these regular guns “assault weapons.” Things like a folding stock, a barrel shroud, a forward pistol grip and a flash hider now became indicators that these guns were somehow different and evil.

Sensible or not, the ban was enacted and ran for ten years. The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) studied the "assault weapon" ban along with some other gun control schemes, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence." (See: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/violence/Violence.pdf)

Further, an assessment of the ban by the NIJ (National Institute of Justice) repeatedly mentioned “the weapons banned by this legislation were used only rarely in gun crimes before the ban” and that “the ban’s short-term impact on gun violence has been uncertain.” Finally, the report summarizes, “…the ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims. (See: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf)

In a 2004 follow-up assessment, Christopher S. Koper confirmed that “AWs [Assault Weapons] were used in only a small fraction of gun crimes prior to the ban: about 2% according to most studies and no more than 8%." It goes on to say that most of the crimes were committed with "assault pistols rather than assault rifles." This is notable since this is the first appearance of the term “assault pistol” I’ve found in any official reports. In the summary portion, Koper writes, "The ban’s success in reducing criminal use of the banned guns and magazines has been mixed,” followed by speculation about what could happen should the ban be re-enacted, going so far as to say, "Predictions are tenuous." (See: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_exec2004.pdf)

In conclusion, there is no good evidence to show that banning these firearms would have made any significant difference in the shootings in question.

2. Magazine capacity restrictions. As part of the ’94 assault weapons ban, the ammunition capacity of legally permitted firearms was reduced to the arbitrary number of ten. This number was not based on any sound science, nor was it suggested by law enforcement or researchers studying the mass killing phenomenon. It was just plucked out of thin air! The idea behind it is that, should someone attempt a mass killing, then forcing them to reload more often would give those being victimized a chance to subdue the shooter. In fact, this idea that seemed far-fetched at one time was given new life when Jared Lee Loughner attacked Congresswoman Gabby Giffords with a pistol that was equipped with an oversized, non-standard 33-round magazine. When the magazine finally ran dry, Loughner fumbled his reload, and bystanders did exactly what the imagined scenario predicted. Those familiar with firearms, however, know that there is much more here than meets the eye.

Those special magazines hold more than 3/5 of a standard box of ammunition. As such, they are heavy and unwieldy. Loughner was said to have “fumbled” his reload. Arguably, if the magazine had been standard capacity, this might not have happened. Even a modestly competent shooter can change a standard magazine in less than 1.5 seconds. So a good contention could be made that his capture was enabled by the large capacity magazine!

In the studies mentioned previously, researchers found that restricted magazine capacity did not reduce the number of people killed or wounded in the average shooting event.

Speculation aside, law enforcement officers always want to be exempt from restrictions on magazine capacity, and it is fair for us to ask why this exception should be! After all, we’re told that high-capacity magazines are only good for “killing as many people as efficiently as possible.” If that is truly the case, are we then authorizing police officers to be legal mass-murderers? Obviously not. So why do they want an exemption to this “common sense compromise” we’re being asked to abide by? It is because police have real world experience and empirical data. It is a fact that most criminals travel in multiples of 2 or more. Even if everyone’s gun were somehow limited to 10 shots, a lone officer would quickly be outgunned. Secondly, they know that when a person is actually trying to murder you, the body’s involuntary reactions can make even the best trained police officers miss, and miss a lot. So they know that more ammunition might mean the difference between life and death. Since the average person with a concealed carry permit might meet those same bad guys, alone and without a partner; without a bullet-proof fest; without back-up nearby at the click of a radio, is it fair, then, to ask responsible, armed citizens to accept anything less than police use to defend their lives?

In conclusion, a magazine capacity restriction is ineffective and could possibly have deadly consequences for law-abiding citizens.

3. Closing the “Gun Show Loophole.” Gun control proponents claim that anyone can walk into a gun show and buy any type of weapon they want with “no questions asked.” This claim often goes uncontested. The truth is that the majority of sellers at gun shows are federally licensed dealers (FFLs). Whenever they conduct a sale at a gun show, it must be done in the same way it is conducted in a brick-and-mortar gun store; ALL sales must be run through a background check! What has some people worried is that gun shows attract private sellers. These are people who already legally own a firearm that they want to sell. Instead of selling it to a family member, friend or neighbor, or listing it online or in the classified ads of their local newspaper, they go to the gun show. Most will sell to a dealer, but some will try to get more money by selling to another private citizen.

Those who want this “loophole” closed suggest forcing all sales to be done through an FFL. This means both buyer and seller must go to a licensed dealer. The problem with this proposal is that an FFL is going to see a private sale as competition, and will charge a fee to run any checks for the seller. This places a de-facto tax on the transaction, discouraging the sale (which is what gun prohibitionists want). Completely ignored in this whole issue is the fact that less than 1% of all recovered crime guns were sold at a gun show! (See: “Firearm Use by Offenders 6” by Caroline Wolf Harlow [Bureau of Justice Statistics, Nov. 2001]). The other 39% were sold between citizens outside of gun shows!

This lack of concern for true public safety, targeting high-profile events like gun shows, reveals this proposal to be more political theater at best, and ignorance at worst. A more comprehensive and potentially effective proposal will be presented below.

4. Registration. Gun control advocates often compare the registration of guns and gun owners to cars and drivers. When applied to the question of violent crime, we must then ask proponents how registration is supposed to prevent violent crimes? Cars are high theft items, and registering them to their owners aids police in returning them if stolen. Registration does not prevent drunk driving or vehicular manslaughter! Registering guns serves no crime-fighting purpose. Not one life will be saved by enacting such a law. The reason why the NRA and other gun rights groups oppose it is because they know that registration can (and ultimately does) lead to confiscation. We have abundant historical examples, including at least two in the United States! Lists of who owns what gives future tyrants a virtual “shopping list,” so they can know what gun a person owns and exactly where to pick it up.

5. Adding the “no fly”/terrorist watch list to the NICS database. When senator Ted Kennedy was delayed at an airport because his name appeared on this list, many observers saw the flaw in the so-called “terrorist watch list”: names are added by unelected bureaucrats in a totally secret process. There is no way to find out who put your name on this list or why. Once on the list, there is no procedure to get one’s name removed. Denying the law-abiding citizen a basic civil right without any due process is unconstitutional and wrong.

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS:
We are fortunate to have the above history, as painful as it may have been to gain. This will allow us to avoid useless legislation that will not save a single life and yet may place great burdens on the law-abiding citizen. We need effective laws that will not benefit criminals while keeping our schools, shopping centers, theaters and other gathering places safe. In this spirit, I propose the following:

• Improve the NICS background check system to enable it to handle higher traffic, and then craft legislation allowing private gun sellers to run background checks on those to which they would sell their firearms. This would effectively stop both the “gun show” and “private sale” loopholes allegedly responsible for 40% of all recovered crime guns. Gun shows remain unaffected and criminals are shut out.
• Create legislation allowing properly trained and licensed teachers, faculty and adult students to carry firearms in schools and on college campuses. This is the equivalent of arming pilots after 9/11. Also, establish parameters for having armed police and security personnel in public schools as well. This is the equivalent of establishing the air marshal program In the wake of 9/11. The NRA endorses this option.
• To support the above, allow National Guard troops to serve in schools as part of their service. This could offer the same improvements in safety while keeping costs down.
• Enact national reciprocity for CCW permits. Real world data show that legal CCW reduces crime. The trouble is, standards vary wildly from state to state. A better approach is to treat CCW permits as we do marriage and driver’s licenses. This would allow states to keep on setting their own standards for their own residents, yet allow visitors from neighboring states to continue using their permit under their home state’s guidelines. So, for example, a permit holder with a 14-round magazine can pass through a state that has a 10-round restriction, as long as said person is not taking up permanent residence. Legal CCW permit holders are statistically better behaved than any other group and provide a virtual secondary police force at no cost to taxpayers. This is true “common sense” legislation.
• Pass legislation allowing mental health doctors to break doctor/patient confidentiality rules under the single condition that they consider a person a danger to themselves or others. This law could possibly alert authorities to a potential killer before a single shot is fired! Given the frequency with which mass murderers are reported to have severe mental health problems, this is vital legislation.
• Install a director for the BATFE and give them the proper resources and manpower to do the job we’ve asked of them! While we’ve been aware of some abuses by the bureau, a better strategy is to write better guidelines under which they’re to operate, not choke them through cuts. This is the front line between government and the gun industry! Legal players can and should have nothing to fear.

[kms]

Excellent article, Glockslinger. No, make that EXCELLENT! Very well written. To update an old saying, "From your computer to God's ears."

I see only one flaw: If he even sees it, Biden will not care one iota what the facts are. (And don't we have any new statistics, other than from 2001 and 2004?) He and his boss want all guns removed from the citizenry. They see and want only one solution: theirs.

I didn't grow up around guns. Not in my house, nor in my friends' houses. I don't hunt. None of my friends hunt. I might have even been considered anti-gun, but I NEVER, EVER presumed that I should have the right to take away OTHER people's guns! It wasn't until my own formerly safe neighborhood started experiencing some armed muggings, break-ins, and such, that I decided, FOR MYSELF, that I wanted to level this playing field, and got a CPL. No one changed my mind... unless you consider the criminals, in which case, yes, someone did influence me.

So don't get me wrong, I'm not throwing in the towel. I'm writing letters, I'm posting comments, I'm talking to friends both pro and against, but I feel like I'm talking to the wall, and I'm getting frustrated... and scared. I just want to know what I can do or say that might make a real difference, and stand a chance of stopping them from their plans to disarm all LAW-ABIDING people? Because that SURELY will not stop the criminals.

There's an old joke often told about politicians (and lawyers):

How do you know when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

And yet now, for some unknown reason, people are willing to believe these same liars when they say all they want to do is stop the bad guys from getting their hands on guns. "Mayors Against Illegal Guns?" Duh! Isn't EVERYONE against ILLEGAL guns?! Bloomberg and his ilk want to stop ALL OF US from having guns.

My friends, we have a monumental fight on our hands.

I haven't watched TV in a few years (and I know I haven't missed anything of substance or value), but recently I've been watching news and some of the talking-head shows: Rachel Madcow (yes, I know how I spelled that) and ED (presumably this one was named after the back-end of the famous talking horse) on MSNBC. I seriously need to watch my language as I start to get angry and mutter obscenities under my breath at these morons who spew lie after lie on the air. At least I can calm down a little when I listen to Hannity make his "anti-" guests look like the fools they are, when they can't produce one honest answer to anything. But then my blood pressure goes up again when I listen to that windbag Gov. Cuomo shout one stupidity after another at a rally. And I cringed when our own Gov. Snyder vetoed SB59. Ouch!

It's this same myopic media, and politicians, who were ever so quick to condemn the NRA for even suggesting such an absurd idea of having armed guards in schools. But then what did the new school in Newtown, Connecticut do? You know, the one where the children finally went back to school. Exactly that! Armed guards! How unbelievably hypocritical can you get?! And yet the stupid people don't see it!

But the fight doesn't end there. We have to fight not only the worst president in our lifetime, and not only all the other crooked politicians, but Bloomberg's bottomless wallet, and a lying media that reports only what they want the sheeple to hear. No stories of guns saving people. No, that just can't happen. Dozens of people I've spoken with have never heard of such news stories.... or Joel Myrick (http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/how-an-assistant-principal-with-a-gun-stopped-a-school-shooter/).

As I wrote before, we have a monumental fight on our hands, like never before.

Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. Now what do we do next?

[XDM 40 cal]

:clap: Great post /letter that you wrote...

I hope its read by someone other than us.

[milkman]

Great information!!

[Drdetroit]

To the OP thank you and very well wrote. Can I get permission to copy this and send to family and friends?

[XDM 40 cal]

STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER!!

Guess our national leaders didn't expect this. On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.

They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness. Following is a portion of the transcript:

"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!


"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America, and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"

- Darrell ScottDo what the media did not - - let the nation hear Darrell Scott 's speech. Pass it on!

[Barrettone]

To the OP thank you and very well wrote. Can I get permission to copy this and send to family and friends?

You certainly may. That goes for anyone else too!!!

[NRA Trainer]

The right discussion is Crime Control and Reducing Violence.
We can take the current national concern and move it in positive ways by making clear the successes that have been had when current laws are actively enforced.
Michigan took the "Safe Neighborhoods" concept to its highest level with Mike Cox and Detroit/Wayne County cooperating in Project Joshua. Implemented in Detroit's 3rd precinct, it dramatically reduced all types of violence, particularly gun crimes. The governor blocked sufficient funding for it to continue.
This is also the right time to ensure every honest American is familiar with Justice Clarence Thomas' concurring Supreme Court Opinion titled "The Ugly Racial History of Gun control". Nowhere is the mechanism of government control of subjugated citizens better stated. Understanding this makes clear the goal of gun control advocates today, subjugation of citizens.
Help make this discussion active, positive and enriching for all America.
~Don McGaffey
NRA Master Training Counselor

[bornyesterday]

NRA Trainer, I looked up the article you referenced... http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/08-1521P.ZC1

[M4Colt]

Good website, helped clear a lot of information I had on this topic.

Thanks again

[NRA Trainer]

Thanks to Bornyesterday for posting the URL for Justice Thopmas' opinion. And thanks to each one of you participating here. Checking on facts, reading original sources, and being clearly in touch with your own emotions are each important parts of having a conversation powerful enough to help others reconsider their position. Missing any of those can make it easy for things to become either an argument or an unwinnable opinion battle.
Tom Selleck became a national hero of those who defend God-given Constitutionally recognized Rights when he would not argue with the TV host who was so furious about our Second Amendment rights she couldn't speak without spitting.
Each of us can be that person. Confident in the Divine origin of our Rights, straightforward in stating facts, and simply refusing to get drawn into a verbal brawl. If each of us does what we can, while the opposition does everything it shouldn't, we will strengthen the voting public in the essential goal of retaining all of our rights.
Share what you're doing to make this happen.
~Don McGaffey
NRA Master Training Counselor

[Jason_G]

Glockslinger and Barrettone,

Is it possible that I could re-post either of your posts in another forum?

I currently live in CT, although I'm planning to move back to Michigan later this year. We have several wonderful pro-gun organizations and forums over here. Many pro-rights groups are writing our representatives and having a few well thought out arguments like those you presented would be very useful to our cause.

Thanks,

-Jason

[kms]

Tom Selleck became a national hero of those who defend God-given Constitutionally recognized Rights when he would not argue with the TV host who was so furious about our Second Amendment rights she couldn't speak without spitting.
Each of us can be that person. Confident in the Divine origin of our Rights, straightforward in stating facts, and simply refusing to get drawn into a verbal brawl. If each of us does what we can, while the opposition does everything it shouldn't, we will strengthen the voting public in the essential goal of retaining all of our rights.


I completely agree with you. That's why when I saw Alex Jones' tirade on Piers Morgan's show, I cringed. I thought he presented as a raging lunatic, making each and every one of us look like gun-toting maniacs. I was embarrassed. I understood his passion, but he came across too fanatical, in my opinion.

[Barrettone]

Glockslinger and Barrettone,

Is it possible that I could re-post either of your posts in another forum?

I currently live in CT, although I'm planning to move back to Michigan later this year. We have several wonderful pro-gun organizations and forums over here. Many pro-rights groups are writing our representatives and having a few well thought out arguments like those you presented would be very useful to our cause.

Thanks,

-Jason

You may reproduce my comments for any pro-gun argument.

[Nek]

Ruger makes it SUPER easy to contact all your state legislators all at once. Fill in your personal info on the Ruger web site, they stuff it into a form letter and email it to several state reps all at once and I think you can uncheck any you dont want it to go to.
http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/ (http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/)

[Jason_G]

You may reproduce my comments for any pro-gun argument.

Thanks.

-Jason