Gun Sales Rise as NRA Fear Mongers Succeed

Gun Sales Rise as NRA Fear Mongers Succeed

1468
14
SHARE

Commentary by James Turnage

What does the NRA truly believe and who do they support? The NRA has no beliefs; it is merely a well-paid lobby representing gun manufacturers and gun sellers; and these are the only entities they support. Other than being lobbyists, the NRA leaders are fear mongers; and because they have created panic over the second amendment rights of Americans, gun sales are on the rise.

Because this article will contain my own opinions on gun control, I must make several items crystal clear. I support all Constitutional Amendments, even the ones we no longer have, such as the fourth amendment. Contrary to what Americans are told by the NRA and right wing extremists, the second amendment was not written for the sole purpose of creating an easily assembled militia. The amendment protected slave owners in the south, and prevented black men and women access to weapons. However, gun ownership is a matter of choice, and will remain so.

The rights of all individuals must be protected, and therefore gun owners have a great responsibility which must be taken seriously. Whether a decision is made to purchase a pistol, rifle or shotgun for home protection or for sport, consideration for the safety of all individuals must be guaranteed.

I am a true Independent; I oppose the existence of political parties. I consider members of a single party to be members of a cult; constantly being told what to believe and how to act by other men. I condemn those who can’t or choose not to think for themselves. (Maybe that’s why so many Democrats and Republicans claim to be Christians; but that’s for another time).

If everyone was truthful about the issue, we all know it to be a fact that assault rifles and high-output magazines are unnecessary. We also know that background checks for all gun purchases should be mandatory for the sake of public safety. At the present time two out of every five gun sales receive no form of investigation into the background of the buyer.

If you choose to own guns, you are responsible for the protection of the members of your family, your neighbors, and anyone else who may be harmed by your weapons. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary was a combination of unlawful purchases and leaving weapons unsecured which were used by a mentally ill young man.

Those who protect manufacturers and sellers of guns are so fearful that record-breaking sales will slow that they will go to any means to protect their billion dollar businesses. Recently a conservative blogger filed for access to an affidavit by former Meet the Press host David Gregory. In 2012 after the massacre at Sandy Hook, Gregory displayed a high-output magazine on his show. He was in violation of Washington’s gun laws, but was not prosecuted. The blogger wants to reopen the case.gun

Conservatives were upset that Gregory’s questions of the head of the NRA Wayne LaPierre exposed the truth. He asked him if 30 rounds in a single magazine was necessary. LaPierre avoided a direct answer by claiming that he didn’t think lowering the capacity would make a difference.

Gun sales in the United States reached an all-time high in 2013, the year after Sandy Hook. Gun advocates were afraid new laws proposed by the federal and state governments would prevent purchase of certain weapons and magazines in the future. NRA fear mongering was successful; at least for manufacturers and sellers.

By James Turnage

Op-Ed

Sources:

Yahoo

CNN

How Stuff Works

Washington Times

14 COMMENTS

  1. “If everyone was truthful about the issue, we all know it to be a fact that assault rifles and high-output magazines are unnecessary.”

    Shows how little you know on the topic. Before writing screeds like this, I suggest you educate yourself on the topic. Assault weapons are NOT in civilian hands, nor have they been used in any of the mass shootings. They are semi-automatic rifles, just like most of the weapons in the country. Your “high output” magazine rant you are talking about are just normal magazines. Sometimes I carry a 13 round magazine, sometimes I carry a 17 round magazine. It makes NO difference what type of magazine I carry because I do not use them to do illegal things. Just like ALL other law abiding people in the country. Your so called magazine restrictions only limit… YOUR own means to defend yourself.

  2. When the 2nd Amendment was adopted, slavery was legal in all the states; there was do such thing as Northern States and Southern States. It had nothing to do with keeping anyone from obtaining guns but keeping the Federal Government from preventing ownership and carrying of weapons.

  3. Re: “two out of every five gun sales receive no form of investigation into the background of the buyer”

    Regarding the 40% or 80% of firearm sales that supposedly transpire without a background check. That figure is incessantly quoted by the anti-guns folks with out providing any source for the statistic. However, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence references that statistic in footnote 124 on page 22 to a 1997 DOJ report which was revised in 2004 that interviewed criminals serving prison sentences to determine where they got their firearms. In that study 39.6% said they got their guns from private sales or transfers from “family and friends” which didn’t require a background check. This begs the question – what are the scruples of the family and friends of a criminal? I don’t know what new law you could pass to close a loophole that would force likely witting family members or criminal cohorts to run background checks on other criminals when all the parties involved will probably ignore any relevant laws. Note, in the same study, another 39.2% said they obtained their guns illegally (which obviously didn’t require a background check) while only 0.7% said they got their guns from gun shows.

  4. Lies and pathological lies should be banned from the 1st amendment, at which point this opinion writer above wouldnt be allowed to post the article of lies above!

  5. The NRA doesn’t represent the interests of the gun manufacturers, it represents the interests of gun owners. These are often the same, but when they differ, the NRA has always sided with gun owners.

    Does no one remember the S&W boycott?

  6. Mr. Turnage, there are a few contradictions present in your piece. The biggest one it that in one paragraph you hold individuals responsible for improper use of their firearms, yet in the very next paragraph, you seem to lament the protections given to manufacturers to protect them from frivolous lawsuits for crimes committed by the owners.
    As for your assertion that assault weapons and “high-output” magazines being unnecessary, I suggest you try selling that to the thousands of police officers who now routinely carry handguns with such magazines and have replaced the shotgun with what they refer to as patrol rifles in their squad cars. Their utility for self defense is validated by their use, in this field and will work just as well for personal protection situations.

  7. Mr. Turnage,
    While you may think the NRA is a “well-paid lobby representing manufacturers and sellers,” they in fact, receive very little of their money from these sources. The organization receives the vast majority of it’s funding from it’s members. THAT is who they lobby for, in protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners in this country. Your attempt to represent them as something else is deplorable.
    Your statement that the second amendment’s purpose was to protect slave owners, and prevent black peoples’ ownership of firearms, demonstrates your total lack of knowledge on the subject. Those purposes arose from the Democrat-proposed, desired, and passed, “Jim Crow” laws….NOT any amendment contained in the U.S. Constitution. Read a book sir….
    You claim that “two out of every five” gun sales are conducted without a “background check.” How many cars, baseball bats, hammers, knives, or cans of gasoline are sold everyday without a background check? Or, is it ok with YOU that these other deadly items are sold between private citizens without government interference, but guns are not? Over a dozen independent, and university studies have shown that “background checks” have NO beneficial effect toward crime reduction. Can you cite ANY credible study that proves otherwise?
    Magazine limits Mr. Turnage? What is your limit, 20…15…10? For the sake of argument, let’s say 10. So, in other words, you’re ok with the first 10 people being killed in a mass shooting? You see folks…? Gun control advocates don’t care what the number initially is, they only want any number to start with. After that, they simply continue to reduce the allowable magazine capacity down to zero. Am I wrong Mr. Turnage? It has already happened in New York.
    For someone who claims to be a “true independent,” you certainly seem to be willing to recite the standard liberal/collectivist meme to try to “control” the law-abiding citizens’ natural, fundamental, civil, and Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Who decides which citizen may exercise their rights, YOU? How about if I get to check backgrounds, and decide who gets to spout their opinion and spread fiction all over these here inter-webs, that I’m sure you claim you have a right to do? Shall I limit such exercise to only so many bullets,…(ooops, I mean WORDS)? Does that seem “reasonable” to you?
    Maybe it does…..I suppose I could have expressed my opinion of your column with just two words….

  8. I don’t need a 30-round magazine, but that doesn’t mean it’s OK to restrict me to ten in my pistol if it was designed for fifteen. Especially not if you see a need to give police an exemption from the restriction.

  9. I already own firearms. How does making me undergo a background check on any additional guns I purchase ‘increase public safety’, exactly? Common sense, indeed.

  10. “The amendment protected slave owners in the south, and prevented black men and women access to weapons. However, gun ownership is a matter of choice, and will remain so.”

    This is an incorrect assertion. Immediately after the Civil War ended during Reconstruction, the federal government and more specifically the military was overseeing the return of the confederate states to the union. During that time, these states tried to enact laws that prohibited or restricted gun ownership bt black men and women. Federal administrators overruled those laws because the understanding was that civil rights applied to all irrespective of skin color.
    It wasn’t until after the federal authorities turned control over to the individual states that Democratic politicians enacted the onerous Jim Crow laws that again restricted the rights of minorities.

  11. Remember guns don’t kill people.. people kill people.. gun ownership it’s your choice, if you want to protect you and your family, you should be aloud too… All these killings in the news, you want to put the blame on the gun…Put the blame where it belongs on that person….If their was no guns… These sick people would use knives….Ban knives…. they would sticks.. Get my point…..It’s that person…..The Government should stop wasting our taxpayer’s money on bullcrap and put it where it will do the most good….. MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS ……… for people who needs it,so they can get help …. BEFORE IT HAPPENS…..Really WAKE UP AMERICA…….stop listening to this anti-gun people forcing their crap on us…. Remember if you don’t like guns .. DON’T BUY ONE … BUT DON’T TELL ME I CAN’T BECAUSE OF YOU……..

Leave a Reply