Yeah, just look at how they managed to defeat Obama and take away all those Democratic seats this year! Oh wait…
Seriously, it’s in the middle. The NRA is a respectably powerful lobby, but not all-powerful. Politicians can and have defied them, and survived. We need a few more like the ones quoted above to show some balls and take that risk.
I never said that they were all-powerful. They can, and have, influenced the outcome of elections at the both the national and state levels. My point is that woofing from a politician that they are illusory is exactly that: woofing.
I hate to be this blunt, but I wonder if there’s a way to counter their attack by tying them to the slaughter of children?
I mean, I’m usually not one to feel Recreational Outrage, but this incident has really made me angry.
As logical and accurate as tying drunk driving deaths to homebrewers.
You mean the NRA? I doubt it, unless you have pictures of Wayne LaPierre helping the shooter gun down the children.
The NRA is big, well-funded, well-organized lobbying group with millions of members. They very seldom, which is not to say never, make a mis-step in the political arena. I can see both sides of their absence on this.
Any comment they might make while emotions are at their height will be seized on, chewed over, and misconstrued in the most damaging possible ways. Not saying anything immediately is not necessarily a bad idea.
OTOH, there is the perception, visible in this thread, that silence is a de facto admission of being in the wrong and also of cowardice.
Wheras when people are screaming for blood, their emotions throwing logic out the window and they’re desirous of distorting and attacking everything you say, the only answer is Silence.
The world very plainly gives a rat’s ass about 20 dead children and how they were killed, or haven’t you noticed. That’s what this is all about, not you.
The NRA is slinking away because it has no defence other than, “Yabut…freedom”, kind of darkly ironic after the freedom of 20 kids was blown away by the product it promotes.
I think it was a political mistake for the NRA and pro-gun Congresspersons to avoid the Sunday shows and generally lay low in the aftermath of this tragedy, but that position is pretty much forced on them given their political strategy over the past 15-20 years.
The modern NRA, quite simply, is an industry-lobbying group that has worked to increase sales of their product. The fact that rank-and-file NRA membership supports several gun-safety measures pretty much shows where the preference of NRA-leadership lies. They know who butters their bread, so they can’t really afford any concession that might limit gun sales.
But it’s ultimately a losing strategy, since it pretty much guarantees that the debate over whether there should be most gun restrictions is politically over. And given the NRA’s vocal support for increased gun ownership and the state-by-state legislative agenda they’ve pursued, they’re essentially out of the debate regarding how guns will be restricted in the near future (everybody knows they’ll oppose it, so their argument will be dismissed). That may not be entirely fair–who knows, they may have some objectively good ideas–but it is a dilemma entirely of their own making. Think of it this way: Would the public trust any suggestion Phillip Morris would make to curb smoking, regardless of how good it might be?
Funny you mention that because the very same day a knife wielding maniac attacked a school in china and it resulted in 22 INJURED children. Getting to the point that crazy people have to resort to using knives in this country would be a major fucking victory.
Seeking to keep military weapons out of the hands of mentally unstable people = gun grabbing.
Gotcha.
I will caution you not to carried away with your predictions here. Similar dire predictions were made when the NRA did not cancel their 1999 convention in Denver, Colorado. FTR, they did cancel the social events and exhibits, but carried on with the “parliamentary” activities that are also a part of the convention. At the time, it was mercilessly spun as the NRA pissing on the graves of the Columbine victims. Better than a decade has passed with the NRA still very much a part of the gun debate. Do not confuse what you wish would happen with what, realistically, might actually happen. The NRA is still going to have millions of members, be highly organized, and be the most influential gun lobby going.
Apparently reading comprehension goes out the window, because the first line above was in response to something you quoted from me where I very clearly said the world didn’t care about me either.
To your first point;
1> First world problems. I’m sure the people of North Korea, Syria, Bangladesh are all worked up over these deaths. In other words, don’t proclaim that “The World” cares just because you woke up to it.
2> Media frenzy. Can’t look at a news page without it being full color splash.
3> Did YOU care about these kids when they were alive, or is it just their deaths that makes you suddenly care?
To your second, thanks for underlining his point. People like you are NOT looking for discussion, you’re looking for people to scream at.
Things do seem different this time. Perhaps it is the fact that it was a classroom full of kids. Maybe it’s a .cumulative effect. For me, Aurora and Newtown struck two very personal fears of mine, with this last one being especially devastating.
The next one is guaranteed to happen before very long, and I suspect we will see that the overall narrative has actually changed pretty significantly.
Chimera, do you seriously not care that twenty 6- and 7-year olds were gunned down on Friday? You’re able to just shrug it off? And you’re surprised that people actually do care? Because I think that might make you a sociopath or something.
No, not surprising. You know what their position is, so they would rather just leave it unsaid instead of providing an opportunity to create damning TV ads.
Take it to the BBQ Pit, both of you.
Nowhere did I imply that I did not care about this.
What I said, if you care to go back and read it, was that the mentally ill people who do this sort of thing are trying to make the World listen to them, because they think no one cares about them. The fact is that in the larger scheme of things, no one does care about them, or you, or me. Attacking “the World” and harming innocent people who had fuck-all to do with their pain is an act of TERRORISM, and we should be treating and discussing it as such.
Exactly right.
This time the victims were children, white, and from a well-to-do suburban town, presumably Republican-oriented. They cannot be written off as “those people”, “those types of areas”, “tsk, tsk”, not this time. This time there just may have been enough shock to break through. Manchin has been shaken into sanity, no doubt others who aren’t yet willing to say so. And did I mention these were *white *kids?
The casual assumption that gun control is not a winning issue, and is even a hot rail, no longer is so obvious.
That describes many of these types of mass shootings.