Oh no, not again.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Shaun @ Tru6

I am disappointed in the NRA. It is the self-proclaimed protector of the Second Amendment and the foremost firearms education organization in the country. It has a lobbyist arm second to none.

Where is it on the issue of mentally unstable citizens legally acquiring guns and killing people?

Why is it not out front as the best champion of gun owners with ideas and solutions on how to fix this truly critical issue?

It is the single best equipped organization to offer concrete solutions but it's silent.

Disappointed that the entire debate is purely reactionary with no proactive engagement of the public and of government to fix this problem.

You must not be a member. Or at least not an active one paying attention.

The NRA has been very actively addressing these very issues for, oh, at least a couple of decades. As a matter of fact, their inability to affect change on these fronts speaks more to their "lobbying power" than their successes on the firearms rights front.

Our "ace in the hole" regarding firearms rights is well and truly the Second Amendment. Without that, we would have lost this fight 40 years ago. Without that "big stick" and courts that still recognize our Bill of Rights for what it is, the NRA would not have a leg to stand on.

That is where we stand with regards to these other issues. HIPAA is a great example wherein there is no over-arching Constitutional authority on which to base the fight. The NRA has lobbied quite aggressively to bring mental health history to the forefront of the whole "background check" issue, and has failed miserably. There is a massively entrenched liberal ideology surrounding the medical privacy of folks, engendered by some rather embarrassing, questionable behavior of many groups liberalism supports (ask any medical professional practicing at the time - HIPAA grew largely out of the AIDS epidemic, and the stigmatization of HIV positive folks at that time).

The NRA has lobbied tirelessly (and for the most part, futilely) for tougher sentences for firearms related crime. The NRA helped craft the "Three Strikes" legislation that many states use to lock up felons for good on their third felony conviction. Alas, many liberal governors, who disagree with such "harsh" treatment, have commuted far too many of these sentences on "humanitarian" grounds. We tried...

The NRA has pushed for mandatory minimum additional sentencing if a firearm is used in a crime. Some states have adopted these kinds of laws; most have resisted. I believe it's Virginia that was actually sued by its neighboring states on the grounds that its mandatory firearms "plus time" sentencing was so tough that its criminals were crossing state lines to ply their trade, driving up neighboring states' violent crime stats.

We also provide, free of charge, the best, most effective primary and middle school gun safety course available - the "Eddie Eagle" training program. We will go to your grade school or middle school to teach this program for free. Again, however, liberals have shown remarkable resistance to this program, fighting to keep the NRA out of their schools and away from their children. Funny, liberals are all for "sex education" at this age, recognizing the futility of preaching abstinence, recognizing the natural curiosity of youth (and they are absolutely correct). When it comes to firearms, however, our liberal friends suddenly become as Puritan as it gets, hoping their preaching of abstinence will somehow work.

So, yes, the NRA has very actively lobbied for both increased disclosure of mental health problems to public databases that can be used in background checks, and for far tougher sentencing when firearms are used in crime. The left has steadfastly resisted these efforts for decades. We've heard all of the go-to justifications for this resistance, including the notion that it is somehow "racist" (because blacks commit an enormously disproportionate rate of violent crime), to the hopelessly naive, coddling, "everyone deserves another chance" mantra - even a three strike violent felon.

It is interesting to note that our nation's hotspots for violent crime are, without exception, liberal utopias wherein the NRA has little influence or presence. Conservative folks who hold the kinds of values on which the NRA is founded have been driven out by their uber-liberal neighbors with their crazy, clearly unworkable uber-liberal ideals and philosophies. How ironic that the very folks who have driven us out then decry our inability to "do something" in the neighborhood cesspools of their own making. We work in our own neighborhoods, and what we do clearly works in our neighborhoods. Yet we are, for whatever reason, not welcome in yours...

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Hey Jeff, while I'm a gun owner, I don't belong to the NRA.

I have never seen Wayne say anything about or suggest solutions for the mentally ill on Fox News or CNN.

So if he has said anything, he didn't call the press. Which is the point really. No one should have to be an NRA member to know what their position is on, and solutions for, gun ownership and mental health. It would be part of a national dialogue. Indeed, it isn't, so someone should let Wayne know he needs to hold a press conference with solutions.

Because the NRA is the only organization qualified to fix this problem.

And it's not fixed yet.

[Jeff Higgins]

Sorry Shaun, the NRA is in no way qualified to fix this problem. That is not our charter, nor do we have the means or expertise to fix mental health issues in America. And, like I pointed out, we have lobbied tirelessly to address them in the context of firearms ownership, but to no avail. We have pushed very hard for tougher "gun laws" with respect to how we treat criminals who use them, again to very little avail. Cock blocked by hand wringing, feel good liberals at our every effort. You can't have it both ways - fight us tooth and nail, deny us access to schools, etc. then blame us for not doing anything. Doesn't wash.

And yes, sorry, you do need to be a member, and an interested member at that, to remain apprised of the NRA's position on the issues. Relying on the mainstream media is simply laziness. The MSM will only supply you with its spin on the NRA - for the unaltered truth, you have to have at least enough gumption to read the material that the NRA itself publishes. I know that's hard, and it's far easier to think about the NRA in terms that a hostile third party has instructed you to think of us in, but it's the only way you will ever come to understand what the NRA really stands for.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

It looks like we disagree on the NRA being the only qualified organization in the U.S. capable of suggesting real solutions for this critical problem, and then being able to lobby Congress to enact those solutions.

So I have to ask you Jeff, who will fix the problem of the mentally ill legally purchasing guns?

[fintstone]

I don't know...the shooter has only two connections on his Myspace page. One of the two looks to be (and claims to be) middle eastern although he apparently lives in LA...shooter grew up in nearby Torrance...and has posted a large number of Islam and Islamic fighter-related photos on his page. Could it be a coincidence? It seems unlikely.

[GH85Carrera]

On Congress can write the laws or change the current laws to solve the issues. Gun control will work almost as well as drug control laws.

On changing the mental health laws and access to that information.

[cashflyer]

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Shaun @ Tru6

It looks like we disagree on the NRA being the only qualified organization in the U.S. capable of suggesting real solutions for this critical problem, and then being able to lobby Congress to enact those solutions.

So I have to ask you Jeff, who will fix the problem of the mentally ill legally purchasing guns?

We actually do not disagree at all, Shaun. I don't know how else to put this - I've said time and time again that the NRA has lobbied extensively on our proposed solutions to these problems. We have "suggested" solutions ad nauseam. They are very "tough" solutions, that liberals have vehemently rejected, while offering nothing viable of their own.

Our solutions, proven effective where adopted (re:Virginia, as mentioned earlier):

Far tougher sentences for gun crime -mandatory "bonus" sentences. More open access for regulatory authorities to mental health records. "Three Strikes" laws. The NRA has lobbied for these measures for decades, and liberals have rejected them out of hand. How hard is this to understand? I've mentioned these proposed measures several times. You keep ignoring them in your efforts to claim we are doing nothing.

[berettafan]

Higgy thanks for the very informative posts. Good stuff!

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

On Congress can write the laws or change the current laws to solve the issues. Gun control will work almost as well as drug control laws.

On changing the mental health laws and access to that information.

Agreed, but GC laws can't even approach the effectiveness our asinine DC laws imo. Like it or not, we are a violent gun loving nation, and we will defend ourselves, and any attempt to prohibit us from what IS part of us and ABSOLUTELY guaranteed. Like many, I simply don't worry about mine, they're not going away no more than someone can be stopped from smoking pot. 'Cept the pot smokers don't have NEAR the support of the other....and I mean that in a serious way. I've owned guns since I was a kid, but I'm not opposed to more stringent controls either. As far as the NRA goes, I differ from Jeff, I'm not a member, but am against powerful lobbys in DC too whether banking, tobacco, or the NRA. Never been a member of any and believe they ARE part of the problem, but I won't go there. I'm not changing Jeff's mind, and he's not changing mine, and that's OK. I do know where he's coming from but I truly am just a bit more moderate on something he and others' are passionate about....and good for them...WE/THEY are NOT the problem however.

What is? Some things pop to mind....

I've owned guns since I was eleven (with dad's supervision), played cops & robbers, army, etc, and was outside, playing, "killing my buddies", but I am not MENTALLY unbalanced either, locked in my room, and living my life on the Internet.

I absolutely believe there is a "roulette" going on with prescribed drugs...

There is absolutely a breakdown when a lot of these truly "off the deep end" folks have legally acquired guns (but you can't fix stupid mothers either).... how DO we fix it?

That 's just a start...

I've pretty much tuned this out since yesterday morning, but the local TV news was focused on the guy who was shot several times rushing the shooter as he has local ties...yep, a REAL hero, but that's just what some American's do with no regard for personal safety...all the time, every day....so there is hope.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

We actually do not disagree at all, Shaun. I don't know how else to put this - I've said time and time again that the NRA has lobbied extensively on our proposed solutions to these problems. We have "suggested" solutions ad nauseam. They are very "tough" solutions, that liberals have vehemently rejected, while offering nothing viable of their own.

Our solutions, proven effective where adopted (re:Virginia, as mentioned earlier):

Far tougher sentences for gun crime -mandatory "bonus" sentences. More open access for regulatory authorities to mental health records. "Three Strikes" laws. The NRA has lobbied for these measures for decades, and liberals have rejected them out of hand. How hard is this to understand? I've mentioned these proposed measures several times. You keep ignoring them in your efforts to claim we are doing nothing.

Hey Jeff, good to hear. Is it possible to post official NRA press releases or other documentation showing exactly what was proposed? I would love to see it. And any counterpoint material.

If indeed the NRA has made proposals to help with the problem of mental illness and gun ownership, and they haven't been effective in enacting legislation, my point is proven: the NRA needs to lead on the subject and make it a public debate. The fact that the NRA's activities on the subject is not widely known means they are ineffective in publicizing that message. Blaming the media is not an option.

The NRA has a real chance to lead the nation on this topic and they aren't. They need to be as they are the only qualified organization in the country to do the job correctly.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

You must not be a member. Or at least not an active one paying attention.

The NRA has been very actively addressing these very issues for, oh, at least a couple of decades. As a matter of fact, their inability to affect change on these fronts speaks more to their "lobbying power" than their successes on the firearms rights front.

Thanks for the information. You have to look hard to get that from the NRA. Here is the landing page of their web site. I have to wonder why, if firearms control legislation is such a big issue for them, they don't mention it on their landing page. The NRA does not appear to try to appeal to people interested in gun safety. Perhaps their inability to effect these changes is due to a lack of trying.

[HardDrive]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

Thanks for the information. You have to look hard to get that from the NRA. Here is the landing page of their web site. I have to wonder why, if firearms control legislation is such a big issue for them, they don't mention it on their landing page. The NRA does not appear to try to appeal to people interested in gun safety. Perhaps their inability to effect these changes is due to a lack of trying.

Or perhaps you're looking at the wrong website and making broad proclamations based on faulty information?

The NRA's political wing is the ILA, Institute for Legislative Action. You can find them here: https://www.nraila.org/

[mreid]

Let's get real about this for a second. The fact that cities with the highest incidents of gun violence have the tightest gun restrictions is true, but...

...this is a smokescreen used by those paranoid, conspiracy theorists in an attempt to scare people into believing their delusion that the government is coming to get them. Facts are that if it wasn't for unrestricted access outside these controlled areas, some of these restrictions could actually work. Here's my plan:

1. Mandatory national background checks paid for by the individual wanting to buy a gun. Includes finger printing and screen for criminal history.

2. You want to buy a gun? You waive your HIPAA rights to have your mental health history reviewed as part of the background check.

3. Mandatory two week waiting period to allow the background check to be completed.

4. National concealed carry law that doesn't make me a criminal when I CCW across state lines even though I'm fully licensed in my current state (as part of this you must complete item 1 above even if you already have a CCW license).

5. All of the above work in concert to allow sane, law abiding American citizens the right to protect themselves from criminals who will pay no attention to any of the above.

Signed - a lifetime member of the NRA and proud citizen of the United States.

[island911]

Because more bureaucracy would have stopped this nut-job.

Wait wait, what stopped him?

Oh yeah, a guy with a gun.

[HardDrive]

#2 in this list is a thorny issue. What disqualifies you from buying a gun? Being a schizophrenic, adjudicated as mentally ill, prior involuntary commitments, etc....that stuff is obvious. But what about a person who went to their doctor for depression? What about a person who went to their doctor for depression 10 years ago? What about soldiers with PTSD.

I do support a more invasive background check system. And a more complete and unified set of record keeping requirements. But I want that implemented at the state level.

2 week waiting period? Why? If I've already got 5 shotguns at home, and I've already repeatedly been screened by some new and more invasive screening process, why should I have to wait?

Originally Posted by mreid

Let's get real about this for a second. The fact that cities with the highest incidents of gun violence have the tightest gun restrictions is true, but...

...this is a smokescreen used by those paranoid, conspiracy theorists in an attempt to scare people into believing their delusion that the government is coming to get them. Facts are that if it wasn't for unrestricted access outside these controlled areas, some of these restrictions could actually work. Here's my plan:

1. Mandatory national background checks paid for by the individual wanting to buy a gun. Includes finger printing and screen for criminal history.

2. You want to buy a gun? You waive your HIPAA rights to have your mental health history reviewed as part of the background check.

3. Mandatory two week waiting period to allow the background check to be completed.

4. National concealed carry law that doesn't make me a criminal when I CCW across state lines even though I'm fully licensed in my current state (as part of this you must complete item 1 above even if you already have a CCW license).

5. All of the above work in concert to allow sane, law abiding American citizens the right to protect themselves from criminals who will pay no attention to any of the above.

Signed - a lifetime member of the NRA and proud citizen of the United States.

[island911]

Originally Posted by HardDrive

2 week waiting period? Why? If I've already got 5 shotguns at home, ...

Because it's like ribbon-cutting ceremonies for politicians. ...a big ol' feel-good nothing-burger.

Great FB write-up, btw.

[speeder]

I like #2 on the list but it would require some pretty specific wording in the restrictions.

[island911]

You are guilty of the future crime of...

[Concestor0]

]Here's my plan:

1. Mandatory national background checks paid for by the individual wanting to buy a gun. Includes finger printing and screen for criminal history.

2. You want to buy a gun? You waive your HIPAA rights to have your mental health history reviewed as part of the background check.

3. Mandatory two week waiting period to allow the background check to be completed.

4. National concealed carry law that doesn't make me a criminal when I CCW across state lines even though I'm fully licensed in my current state (as part of this you must complete item 1 above even if you already have a CCW license).

5. All of the above work in concert to allow sane, law abiding American citizens the right to protect themselves from criminals who will pay no attention to any of the above.

Signed - a lifetime member of the NRA and proud citizen of the United States.

These are good suggestions. The two week wait period could be flexible based on factors including existing ownership, handgun vs rifle, etc...

I reluctantly say this but defense is going to have to play a major role in reducing mass shootings in the States, the vast number of guns in the country already and the ease of acquiring these guns makes legal gun control policies much less effective.

Armed security guards and carefully selected armed citizens may be the only way such a heavily armed country can protect it's citizens.