Gun owners grill Obama at town hall, NRA sits it out

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

US | Fri Jan 8, 2016 5:09am EST

Gun owners grill Obama at town hall, NRA sits it out

FAIRFAX, VA. | BY JEFF MASON

President Barack Obama fielded tough questions from gun owners at a televised town hall on Thursday, defending his move to tighten gun rules as he sought to elevate the issue of gun control before the November 2016 election to replace him.

A series of mass shootings has punctuated Obama's time in office, and after he failed to convince Congress to toughen up gun laws, the president said he wanted to have a national debate about guns in his final year in office.

Obama, who said he had never owned a gun, has blamed Congress for being beholden to the National Rifle Association, a powerful lobby group that fights any action that might infringe on Americans' constitutional right to bear arms.

Guns are a potent issue in U.S. politics. The NRA is feared and respected in Washington for its ability to mobilize gun owners. Congress has not approved major gun-control legislation since the 1990s.

The NRA sat out the town hall, aired live on CNN from a university just miles (km) from the group's Virginia headquarters, calling it a "public relations spectacle."

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-obama-guns-idUSKBN0UM0AU20160108

[deathrind]

1. The NRA had too.

They have painted themselves into a smaller and smaller corner because of their absolute stance and the disastrous press conference after Sandy Hook.

[branford]

2. Yea, the NRA is obviously on the run.

I doubt they'll survive the year with their ever increasing (and dues paying) membership likely topping 5 million. complete shut down of all gun control measures in Congress and most states, unanimous support among Republicans and some Democrats, with their control of Congress and most state governments, near perfect election campaign record, numerous legal victories, record levels and ever increasing gun purchases and ownership, and polling trends demonstrating historic and majority support for gun rights. Wayne must be trembling...



Moreover, after Sandy Hook, NRA membership and contributions swelled and polls saw an increase in support for gun rights. I don't believe "disastrous" means what you think it means. Be careful of confirmation bias

President Obama keeps complaining about the NRA, not because they're weak, but rather because they and other gun rights proponents are winning.

[deathrind]

4. ummm....ok

If you say so it must be true.

[DonP]

3. "Congratulations you are the 1000th post predicting the fall of the NRA!"

Every election cycle a handful of DU gun control supporters confidently predicts the fall of the NRA as a lobbying and political power.

I'm pretty sure they just save and re-post the same confident prediction of how they don't really have that many members, they won't have any impact, they don't really have any voting impact blah, blah, blah.

Problem is, the politicians don't believe it. Oh, that and it always turns out to be wrong.

But I'm sure that all that has had no impact on two successive disastrous mid-terms. So we can afford to piss of a bunch of people that vote, along with all their friends and families and 80 million other gun owners.

I'll leave it for you to explain how all this has nothing to do with our losing 10 more statehouses in the last round of mid terms.

[deathrind]

5. See post above.

[branford]

6. Would you care to post any actual evidence other than your own impressions

demonstrating the weakening or diminishment of the NRA or any other major gun rights organization in the country.

Are they losing large numbers of members? Are donations slowing? Losing elections of preferred candidates? Have gun control measures passed Congress or most states, even after their purportedly "disastrous" performance after Sandy Hook? Are gun purchases on the decline?

I'm not a member or even supporter of the NRA. However, I would need to be both ignorant and blind to believe the NRA has become anything but more powerful in the last few decades. The obvious empirical evidence and current polling speaks for itself, no matter have repulsive or upsetting you may find the organization or its support of broad gun rights.

Again, the President and gun control leaders constantly complain about and attack the NRA because, despite only officially representing about 5% of gun owners in the USA, they have become the de facto spokespeople for gun rights, and as the abject lack of gun control legislation, pitiable futility and weakness of the president's executive orders, historic and increasing firearm sales, and current polling with an ever increasing majority supporting gun rights clearly indicate, the NRA and gun rights are unequivocally winning virtually all pertinent political and legal battles.

[deathrind]

7. The fact that:

The NRA passed on free airtime on CNN in a town hall debate to debate their view of expanded firearm controls and state their case against it speaks volumes. Instead the most prominent push back comes from two women who's backstory is one that can only be sympathized with. If the NRA really felt they were on solid ground here they should be front and center with their case.

The NRA has been silent since Sandy Hook. Yes, gun sales are up but not because of new customers it is mainly repeat business out of fear. One person buying a million copies of a book makes it a best seller in the newspaper... only.

As for polling:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211321-poll-most-gun-owners-support-universal-background-checks

As for membership:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/nra-membership-numbers

[branford]

8. Sigh..., you're drawing conclusion based upon preconceived biases.

The NRA didn't attend the CNN "debate" because it wasn't a real debate and they had nothing to gain. The CNN "town hall" was a choreographed event for the benefit of the President, coordinated with CNN and its gun control support positions, and containing a hand-picked selected audience. Despite offers in the past to actually debate the president and top Democrats in more academic or objective settings where the administration didn't have complete control, all were refused for precisely the same reason why the NRA didn't show-up to CNN. Note also that NRA representatives often appear on CNN when they are actually afforded an real opportunity to speak on a relatively equal footing. For instance, they appeared all the time with Piers Morgan despite his rabid gun control positions. Ironically, his show is now extinct, and the NRA continues to garner new members and donations.

NRA Membership: Assuming arguendo Mother Jones is correct (which many dispute and the article is from 2 years ago), and further assuming the NRA has not added a single new member in two years, they would still have over 3 million actual dues paying members! If you believe that's a sign of their near death, there are multitudes of very prominent liberal organizations (including ALL gun control groups) who would desperately love to be in such "bad" shape.

I also already noted that the NRA only represents about 5% of gun owners. However, this doesn't change the fact that the organization is still the de facto spokesman for gun owners and gun rights policy, with no major opposition or competition (although the Second Amendment Foundation has taken the lead in firearm litigation with the full support of the NRA). If this wasn't the case, the NRA wouldn't be referenced so frequently by the president and other gun control supporters. More importantly, if they and their positions were a fraction as weak as you imply, gun control would be the law of the land. That is obviously not the case.

Alleged support for universal background checks is also a very minor aspect of the overall polling that supports gun rights and is increasing. In fact, I would argue that if the Democrats weren't so patently foolish to advocate for and attach such unpopular measures like a new assault weapon ban and magazine to the UBC bill after Sandy Hook, it would be the law today. Gun control advocates are often their worst enemies, demanding too much, and getting nothing.

Here's some more recent and pertinent polling and related articles for your review:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/24/5-facts-about-the-nra-and-guns-in-america/
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-have-no-impact-on-support-for-gun-rights-in-the-us
http://www.gallup.com/poll/179213/six-americans-say-guns-homes-safer.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/179045/less-half-americans-support-stricter-gun-laws.aspx
http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-rights/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/opinion/charles-blow-has-the-nra-won.html


Of course, you are still free to wait for the NRA's extinction and the golden age of strict firearm regulation. We've heard this tune for decades. Besides the Second Amendment problems with most gun control dreams in the USA, I wouldn't hold your breadth waiting for the NRA's demise.

[DonP]

9. Like I said, welcome to the "NRA Deniers" club

We get some new person that declares ignorantly that the NRA is dead and/or dying every election cycle.

We also get the favorite Gun Control urban myth of "No new gun owners" on a regular basis too. It makes most of us laugh at both the concept and the desperation with which gun controllers cling to the myth.

So ... maybe you'll be the one to explain that with "no new gun owners" why Illinois had to issue 2.1 million NEW FOID cards in the last 2 years? The number of FOIDs, required for any gun or ammo purchases and ownership, jumped from 5 million to 7.1 million. No renewals in there, just new cards for new, first time gun buyers.

Or maybe ... deep blue, run totally by Dems, Illinois is an anomaly? All the other states have no new gun owners but Dem Illinois for some odd reason, has this huge new group of gun owners?

I'm sure the NRA is shaking in their boots at anything Mother Jones or you have to say about them. Most sources identify 5 million dues paying members now, so Mother Jones is a little behind the times there, just like you. But they keep getting most of what they want in terms of legislation and the court decisions are definitely not running the control way.

Oh, and as a committed gun control fan; which of the gun control organizations do you pay dues and contribute to? How many days of your time have you given up to support your beliefs and meet with your legislators? How many local Town Halls have you gone to to speak out against concealed carry, a new gun store or shooting range? Marched in your state capitol against a gun law? How about starting petitions to repeal the 2nd amendment? Anything? Something?

We just need to know if you have some real credibility on this issue or if you're just another online whiner?

[benEzra]

15. If the NRA membership is 5 million,

then there are about five times as many "assault weapon" owners as there are NRA members, two or three times as many carry license holders as NRA members, and twelve or fifteen times as many owners of over-10-round magazines as there are NRA members.

If the NRA disappeared tomorrow, the backlash against attempts to outlaw the most popular guns and magazines in U.S. homes would not abate; it would just find a different outlet. My money would be on the Second Amendment Foundation at the national level, though most pro-gun advocacy is through state-level organizations (like Grassroots North Carolina in my state, or the Virginia Citizens' Defense League).

[Eleanors38]

23. "Speaking volumes:" The NRA doesn't need to speak for 2A supporters...

...2A supporters can do it for themselves. That is the core and essence of a strong community supporting the RKBA. I have from time-to-time publically questioned persons re the Second. The NRA is somewhere else, as far as I am concerned. If the audience is a free-for-all, I imagine President Obama will face the same kind of questioning -- no orchestration necessary.

Truth: The RKBA is widely and deeply supported. Who needs the NRA?

[Eleanors38]

25. I wonder, deathrind, was free air time offered any other 2A group?

Narratives, being the way they are, might dictate that the NRA be offered that time; any other group or individual may have suggested a much bigger and more diverse "gun community." I find it ironic that pro-gun groups, rarely offered free time for anything, even refused time when offering to pay up front, that some big deal is made over this political act of charity.

[stone space]

10. The NRA are a bunch of cowards. (nt)

[GGJohn]

11. Now there's an intelligent statement right there.

[stone space]

12. At least we agree about something. (nt)

[GGJohn]

13. I guess I should have added this for the sarcasm impaired.

[stone space]

14. Ah, so the NO-SHOW was an act of bravery.

[GGJohn]

16. No, it was an act of common sense,

it was a choreographed event put on by the Pres and CNN, the NRA knew the cards were stacked against them so why even show up for a useless event.

[stone space]

17. You are excusing cowardice. (nt)

[GGJohn]

18. You are lying about what I'm doing, again. eom.

[stone space]

19. OK, call running and hiding "courage" if it makes you feel better. (nt)

[GGJohn]

20. Running and hiding?

As usual stone, you're wrong, again.
The NRA knew it was pointless to show up at a choreographed event, so they chose not to, which was the wise thing to do.

[stone space]

21. It's what you call "courage".

Running and hiding?

[GGJohn]

22. LOL, you wouldn't know what courage is if it bit you on the backside stone. eom.

[beevul]

26. You sure are...

Running and hiding?

It's what you call "courage".

You sure are um...courageous.

[Eleanors38]

24. Look, Ma, no NRA. 2A supporters don't need 'em.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. Had the NRA appeared they would be criticized for opportunism.

Had they remained silent they would have been criticized for defeatism.

Had they spoke up they would have been criticized for propagandizing.

The one constant is, they would be criticized, which betrays the disingenuous nature of the critics.