Washington, D.C. -- At the NRA's national convention in Pittsburgh this week, look for the speakers, presidential hopefuls and ardent supporters to rally around the fairy tale that America is a gun-loving country. But don't believe it.
Gun ownership in the nation is at the lowest level ever recorded by the General Social Survey, according to an analysis issued Tuesday by the Violence Policy Center. The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago has been surveying the American public on gun ownership since the early 1970s. Far from representing the mainstream sentiment of Americans, the NRA's gun-in-every-home-and-hollow mantra is resonating with fewer and fewer of us.
In most households, people choose not to own guns. In 2010, less than a third of households reported having a gun in the home. This is better than a 20-point drop from 1977, when 54 percent of households reported having guns. The drop in gun ownership came despite the millions of dollars the firearms industry gave the NRA to push looser gun restrictions across the nation. Rather than accept the limitations endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its definition of the Second Amendment right, the NRA is pushing for the unfettered prerogative to carry a gun into just about any place a gun owner chooses, including schools, churches, workplaces and bars.
This doesn't empower average Americans, most of whom rightly recognize that more guns in more places inevitably lead to more gun violence. Rather, the NRA's gun-pushing stance promotes the interests of its firearm industry partners, who profit outrageously at the expense of Americans who are under the constant threat of gun violence.
Of course, there will be no overt reference at the NRA conference tying weak gun laws to fattened profits for firearm manufacturers and dealers. Historically, the NRA has insisted that it is not directly allied with any firearms or ammunition manufacturers or dealers. Yet, the organization's balance sheets tell another story.
An April 13 Violence Policy Center report found that since 2005, contributions to the NRA from gun industry "corporate partners" totaled between $14.7 million and $38.9 million. The donors include some of the biggest names in the gun business: Beretta USA Corp., Browning, Glock, Inc., Remington Arms Co., and Smith and Wesson Corp.
According to the report, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre promises in a promotional brochure that the "partners" program "is geared toward your company's corporate interests."
That is what the show in Pittsburgh is all about. The NRA drapes its pro-gun message in sloganeering about freedom and the American flag, but that is primarily a smokescreen.
The NRA doesn't support any common-sense regulations allowed by the Second Amendment. It heavily promotes the idea that guns should be easily available, and it profits from the sales. Fortunately, most Americans don't believe in this "guns everywhere" vision of America.
Significantly fewer households and individuals now have guns. This information should make members of Congress less likely to fear the gun pushers and more likely to approve sensible gun laws, such as U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy's bill, H.R. 308, to ban large-capacity ammunition magazines. The Tucson shooter used a gun holding such a large-capacity "assault clip" in January to kill six and wound 13, including Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Though the gunman's bullet nearly took her life, the congresswoman is recovering remarkably well from the brain injury, so much so that she will be able to watch her husband, Space Shuttle Commander Mark Kelly, lift off Friday aboard the Endeavour craft.
Although one of its congressional members was so recently caught in gunfire, too many federal lawmakers continue to suppress their best instincts for common-sense gun regulations.
Public safety ought not be up for sale -- not ever. Americans deserve to live in a country where gun violence is rare. As show-time in Pittsburgh continues for the next few days, Congress should understand the need -- and its responsibility -- to ban assault clips, require universal Brady background checks, strengthen law enforcement's ability to crack down on rogue gun dealers, and do what it can to help reduce gun violence in this country.
Paul Helmke is president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Follow the Brady Campaign on Facebook and Twitter.
This and past entries can be found at the Brady Campaign blog page.
Dennis A. Henigan: Tough on Terror? Only If It's OK With the Gun Lobby
Self answering question-he does not care about gun violence. His metric is only that which inconveniences law abiding gun owners. Why else celebrate a perceived decline in lawful gun ownership?
http://www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national/law-and-public-interest/brady-center-to-prevent-gun-violence-in-washington-dc-1136
If you want to make an informed decision about which organization is doing more meaningful work, just go to an NRA gun safety or "refuse to be a victim" class. Then see what Mr. Helmke has to offer - nothing but laws that keep law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves.
Ask yourself this question: Are you willing to put a sign outside of your home that says "There are no guns in this house"?
If the answer is "no" and you don't own a gun, go to an NRA gun safety class, then go buy a gun for home defense. And don't forget that you are allowed to have fun when you take it to the range to practice. All of a sudden, you will begin to understand what it means to take responsibility for your own safety and security. Makes you proud to be an American.
http://www.ironwordranch.com
http://www.boatmanbooks.com
In the lost paradise of our species, every man, woman and child was armed to the teeth with the finest state-of-the-art killing machines society could produce, and all was well. As man grew more sophisticated and his weapons grew even more effective at protecting weaker citizens from stronger ones, the first evil caveman genius saw that, as a precursor to the enslavement and destruction of his intended victims, all who would dare resist him must first be disarmed. In the name of peace. In the name of social harmony. In the name of common sense. To save the children. Evil geniuses, and evil idiots, have been singing that tune ever since. And the more gullible among our species have all too often danced to it.
“In a democracy, citizens are supposed to act as partners in enforcing laws. Those forced to follow rules without being trusted even for a moment are, in fact, slaves.”
Even the Dalai Lama, Nobel Peace Prize and all, said in May of 2001 during a speech about “nonviolent resolutions to conflict” to 7,600 Oregon and Washington high-school students - “But if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” So said the Dalai Lama.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. The right of the people TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS shall NOT be infringed. The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. What part of NOT do the illiterates out to subvert the Constitution NOT understand?
The Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania (adopted September 28, 1776) allocated more words to make the point even more unmistakable: “XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”
"An April 13 Violence Policy Center report found that since 2005, contributions to the NRA from gun industry "corporate partners" totaled between $14.7 million and $38.9 million. The donors include some of the biggest names in the gun business: Beretta USA Corp., Browning, Glock, Inc., Remington Arms Co., and Smith and Wesson Corp."
Industry profits from the declining ownership are so bad that they can only contribute $38.9 Million to supporting the rights of US citizens. While his handlers have only contributed how much to disarm everybody that they are afraid of?
Paul, you are a talented speaker, why don't you get an honest job instead of being a paid Judas Goat?
The NRA does not have a vision of "There should be guns everywhere". The NRA's vision is people have a right to own firearms, and those rights need preservation.
If less than a majority of people choose not to own a firearm, that does not imply that they are willing to forego their right of ownership. We do not live in a democracy where majority rules. We live in a constitutional republic where the rights of a minority are protected.
Also, whose press secretary was Brady?
Turn off the AM radio and get a life.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/27/gun-grabbers-grasp-at-straws/
"The NRA doesn't support any common-sense regulations allowed by the Second Amendment. It heavily promotes the idea that guns should be easily available, and it profits from the sales."
Exactly what restrictions does the Second Amendment allow? Simply slapping the words "common-sense" on the front of some idea does not make it so.
Saturday night specials: affordable guns
Assault rifles: anything that looks scary
High powered sniper rifles: basically any hunting rifle that fires a round equal to or bigger than a .308.
Cop killer bullets: any bullet that can penetrate armor (almost any rifle round) and hollow points (which are terrible at penetrating armor).
High capacity magazines: Any magazine.
Automatic: semi-automatic.
Excessively large caliber: .50 or larger but also conviently outlaws most muzzle loading rifles.
There are also some leaps in logic that end up being self fulfilling prophecies, such as the claim that guns are useless for self defense. The typical response is to outlaw guns most suited for personal or home defense (handguns and shotguns) and to make it impossible to use them in time to prevent a crime (weapons kept with trigger locks, disassembled, unloaded, and in a safe)
So there you have it.