Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

March 6, 2014 - 12:46 pm

National Rifle Association chief Wayne LaPierre told the Conservative Political Action Conference today that he sees a changing America with eroding freedoms in which people will need to assert the right “to protect our families with all the rifles, handguns and shotguns we want.”

LaPierre noted that this time last year pundits were “calling me about every nasty name in the book” for putting forth a plan for armed responders in schools in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting.

The NRA leader didn’t specifically address the gun-control legislative efforts that have since fizzled in Congress, but said “freedom has never needed our defense more than now.”

“You know it in your gut; something in our country has gone wrong,” LaPierre said, listing “core values” that are “eroding” from the “freedom to work, to practice our religion, raise families way we see fit.”

“They are core freedoms that have always defined us as a nation,” he said. “We feel them slipping away… we fear for the safety of our families.”

“More Americans buy firearms and ammunition not to cause trouble but because America is in trouble.”

LaPierre rattled off a list of crimes that people need protection from, including terrorists, knockout-game assailants and rapists. “We are on our own, that is a certainty,” he said. “When you’re on your own, the surest way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

“All we believe in and fight for, it’s really become a metaphor for all freedoms that we want preserved,” he added, encouraging new NRA signups at the CPAC booth.

“The Second Amendment makes us stronger than other countries, it makes us better than other countries,” LaPierre said.

He predicted a “bare-knuckle street fight” in 2014 headed into 2016. “They’re laying the groundwork to put another Clinton back in the White House,” the NRA chief said, and have an ultimate goal to “fundamentally transform America into an America you won’t recognize.”

“The NRA will not go quietly into the night; we will fight, I promise you that.”

More from CPAC:

Lee: ‘Before Conservatives Can Celebrate Victory, We First Must Deserve It’

Bridget Johnson is a veteran journalist whose news articles and opinion columns have run in dozens of news outlets across the globe. Bridget first came to Washington to be online editor at The Hill, where she wrote The World from The Hill column on foreign policy. Previously she was an opinion writer and editorial board member at the Rocky Mountain News and nation/world news columnist at the Los Angeles Daily News. She is an NPR contributor and has contributed to USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, Politico and more, and has myriad television and radio credits as a commentator. Bridget is Washington Editor for PJ Media.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   

I wouldn't be too quick to sell the NRA short. Sure, they have a little bureaurocrat-itis, but they have been one of the few effective civil rights organizations on our side of the issues for a long time. Rather than recounting all they have done, just think about this: All the leftist caterwauling about "the gun lobby" wouldn't be happening if they weren't effective.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The NRA funded my suit against the school dist. for threatening my son with expulsion for wearing a shirt with a shooting org logo on it. We won. I will be a member and give them the money I can afford
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
It was the NRA that fought, and funded, the fight that resulted in Heller; and it was the NRA's attorney, not Alan Gura (who I admire tremendously) that had the winning argument before SCOTUS on why the DC law(s) were unconstitutional - Gura's argument was only supported by one Justice, and last time I looked, you need five.
But, the point is, you can criticize the NRA all you want, and put all your resources behind GOA if you wish, but the NRA is 4-5MM men, women, and children who are in the front lines of this fight.
Remember, if we don't hang together, we shall certainly all hang separately.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (30)
All Comments   (30)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
We've always been on our own. That's precisely what the Democrats, and the government doesn't like.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
One issue that has been ignored about the school shootings is what causes these shootings in the first place? I should point out that children have had "access" to repeating firearms since their invention back in the 19th Century. Cartridge repeaters have existed since the time of the Civil War. Semi-auto cartridge firearms since before the start of the 20th Century. High capacity cartridge firearms since the Second World War. Prior to 1968, firearms could be purchased via mail order.

That this proves is that the "means" to shoot up a school has existed for a long time. However, except for rare isolated events, school shootings were almost unknown until recent times. As the means have been available for a long time, it is not the "means" that is of stake here, but the "cause". What has changed?

The dosing of children with powerful antidepressant drugs is relatively new. Today large numbers of children are given these drugs with the idea of "calming them down". In effect the drug controls your emotions. The drugs are used to control childhood misbehavior. Which they do quite effectively in most cases. The drugs "pacify" the children. They become less emotional, less likely to "create problems". Doctors will gladly write prescriptions for these drugs. They are seen as being a "solution" to dealing with restless, trouble making children.

However, there is one serious problem with the use of these drugs. When the drug is suddenly stopped, a "rebound" effect occurs. The child becomes restless, emotional, paranoid, and sometimes violent. I have myself witnessed this effect. It was in fact rather "scary" to see. My stepmother was on heavy doses of these drugs for years. One night she "went off the deep end". She obtained my father's .45 pistol, got hold of our dog (German Shepard boxer mix) and announced that the Nazis were after her and that she was going to kill as many of them as she could. The police were called, they very carefully were able to disarm her, and she spent the next month in the hospital as a mental case under constant watch. She eventually recovered, but she wasn't ever the same. This what can happen if someone is on these drugs for several years. If the medical records of those children involved in school shootings could be obtained, it is very likely that most if not all of them were on these drugs.
(show less)
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am a member of NRA and need to look into GOA. Maybe it is a good idea to support both.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The NRA is not alone, as many of us freedom loving citizens stand with them, which is why I shelled out for a life membership in '08'.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
LaPierre must be reading HotAir and DailyCaller. I've posted the same idea...

"Face it folks, as Citizens, we now have an ineffective intelligence community, a Congress embattled against itself, and a delusional President.

We. Are. On. Our. Own."
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. And those police far too often today are surly, threatening, and feel far greater kinship with Big Brother than with the average citizens they supposedly protect.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
And in many states will be harder on the person defending himself and others than on the aggressor.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The NRA funded my suit against the school dist. for threatening my son with expulsion for wearing a shirt with a shooting org logo on it. We won. I will be a member and give them the money I can afford
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Were you the case from Logan County, WV? I'm up in Barbour County, WV, and I could hardly believe the nonsense going on down there.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Ed, here in the U.S., the courts have consistently, and unambiguously held that police have no affirmative duty to protect any person, regardless of the circumstances. So that 30 minute delay? No problem. You can't win a suit against them.

How does that play in Canada?

32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Amen to that.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yes, I'm sure that even as he spoke, the fund-raising mailers were being readied to stuff into the mailboxes fit to burst.

Too bad that when it comes down to the nitty-gritty, the NRA prefers it's lucrative advocacy gig over real and substantive change...as they demonstrated in the Heller v. DC decision.

Kinda like RINO's...they say all the right words, but don't actually dance the steps when they get the chance.

For my money, it's the GOA. NRA can keep right on giving out pins, stickers and patches to convince people that they're accomplishing something.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Think of this before you go off half-cocked. Bill Clinton took on the NRA directly and by name and paid by losing the entire Congress, Without the NRA you would have had a President Al Gore.

Except in the bluest of states or districts no Democrat would dare to take on the NRA by name. The Gun Owners of America is a fine organization worthy of support but their ability to effectively end the political career of many a gun-grabbin' politician is like a water pistol compared to the NRA's artillery. Also, the NRA's behind the scenes organizing and support of shooting education and events is enormous and well established and respected even internationally. The GOA is virtually non-existent in that regard.

Has the NRA capitalized on legal trench work done by the GOA and appeared to claim it as its exclusive own? Yes, and to its discredit. But personally, I can't get too worked up in support of a gun advocacy group that the general public has essentially never heard of in these perilous times. Like it or not, without the NRA our progressive government would squash the GOA like a bug.

Yooper
NRA Life Member

32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yooper, I was still in the NRA during all of that and for years afterwards.

The fact that Clinton even floated the AWB, let alone got it passed, was a testament to the NRA's absence and incompetence in the political arena in the years leading up to 1994.

Our civil liberties, especially the RTKBA, are too important to play "catch-up" with.

Look, this is "inside baseball", but you know good and well that NRA membership automatically includes "mailbox fatigue". And the cost of their incessant mailings and stickers, pins and patches could be BETTER
SPENT on effecting substantive change.

Such as...lobbying American gun manufacturers to move their operations OUT of gun-unfriendly states and INTO states where people are not inclined to demonize their lawful products.

32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
NRA may not be the most efficient method of protecting gun rights, but they are a heckuva gorilla, and they get good stuff done.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment

I wouldn't be too quick to sell the NRA short. Sure, they have a little bureaurocrat-itis, but they have been one of the few effective civil rights organizations on our side of the issues for a long time. Rather than recounting all they have done, just think about this: All the leftist caterwauling about "the gun lobby" wouldn't be happening if they weren't effective.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
thank God, I'm not the only one who sees the NRA for what it is - a lobby group, they exist to enrich themselves and their droogies in Congress, the NRA doesn't really give a hang about the 2nd anymore, they will claim they do, their rank and file misguidedly believes they do, but they don't.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
If the NRA doesn't defend the 2A, who will?
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Shoey77 - Oh, you mean like the ACLU? ...a lobby group, they exist to enrich themselves and their droogies in Congress, the ACLU doesn't really give a hang about the 1st anymore, they will claim they do, their rank and file (all lawyers) misguidedly believes they do, but they don't.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Say, you wouldn't be talking about all the many, MANY times the NRA has torpedoed strong 2A supporters in favor of incumbents who are, at best, squishy on the 2A, are you?

Nah, couldn't be that.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The NRA weighs the actual votes of squishes stronger than the pledges of challengers, too many of whom "grow" once in office and become squishes or worse. That is, they weight deeds higher than words.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Lina,

While I appreciate the "Slayers" reference in your name choice, I have my own experience with my "A" rated NRA supported Senator Joe Manchin (D) in my state to show that the NRA gets backstabbed on occasion due to party politics comming before NRA loyalty.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Press release hogwash.

In many cases, they have supported incumbents with very bad 2A records against challengers with very GOOD 2A records in other offices.

32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
It was the NRA that fought, and funded, the fight that resulted in Heller; and it was the NRA's attorney, not Alan Gura (who I admire tremendously) that had the winning argument before SCOTUS on why the DC law(s) were unconstitutional - Gura's argument was only supported by one Justice, and last time I looked, you need five.
But, the point is, you can criticize the NRA all you want, and put all your resources behind GOA if you wish, but the NRA is 4-5MM men, women, and children who are in the front lines of this fight.
Remember, if we don't hang together, we shall certainly all hang separately.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
It was the NRA that fought, and funded, the fight that resulted in Heller; and it was the NRA's attorney, not Alan Gura (who I admire tremendously) that had the winning argument before SCOTUS on why the DC law(s) were unconstitutional - Gura's argument was only supported by one Justice, and last time I looked, you need five.
That is flat out wrong dude. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Gura's argument helped NRA's argument seem more "reasonable." There are advantages to this sort of triangulation.

Yes, NRA initially opposed the Heller, because it seemed very risky. (It was very risky.) But they did eventually get behind it.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
After first trying to kill Heller, sure.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All