NRA: Don't read this

Matt Westerhold
Dec 23, 2012

But most people cannot look away. They can only watch and grieve for those families, for those parents whose lives will never again be normal.

For now this tragedy is embedded in the American consciousness. For now. Perhaps the images of those beautiful children and courageous educators will stay embedded and we won't forget. And as a nation, maybe, just maybe, there will be forward movement that begins to address this persistent problem; this persistent debate.

The National Rifle Association weighed in on Friday, suggesting the solution to the epidemic of mass shootings should be addressed by placing armed guards at every school door. If it's a war you want, it's a war the NRA is willing to back.

The founding of the nation came from the end of a musket, and the fascination with weapons is natural and has grown. There is little need to regulate the very clear right of law-abiding citizens to own weapons. Yet there is still a need.

*Get the Sunday Register today at a newsstand near you or buy the e*Paper here for the rest of the column.

Most people would agree that private individuals should not be allowed to develop their own arsenal of nuclear weapons. By way of the NRA's logic in it's support of semi-automatic weapons and 60-round magazine ammunition, that's a violation of the Second Amendment.



@ Mr. Westerhold:

Armed security at schools is not a new idea.

"In Texas, the tiny Harrold Independent School District has allowed employees to have guns on campus for the past five years if they have a permit, have completed training and have received approval from the school board."


Children have enough real and/or imaginary fears without adding the thought of attending school to the mix.

Kudos to Peggy Noonan:

The Big Dog's back

Did that work at Columbine?


Okay! I'll bite. Please specifically state the new law that, if in place, would have stopped this tragedy. I am dying to know what law would have protected these children from a deranged person that stole fire arms to commit this attrocity.


I think Columbine had an armed officer. Read that single armed officer. Even that trained member of law enforcement was no match for those kids armed and ready to go to war.


The armed guard at Columbine was not initially present:


Then since 1 armed guard wasn't enough to stop Columbine I guess we should have what...5?...8?....10?....armed guards per school.....really?

John Harville

@Contango... and that's what Harold ISD chose to do. And that's how it should be. Interesting that all the BIG GOVERNMENT foes now want the government to put an armed guard in EVERY school at a cost of some $5 billion.... which will result in an increase in taxes.
Do you people ever read yourselves?


Here we go again: It's the gun's fault! It's the high-capacity magazine's fault! It's the NRA's fault! REALLY???

What about the declaration of "gun-free zones" where victims are sitting ducks because they're law-abiding and are, indeed, "gun free?" What about crazy people who should be restrained, but who are excused again and again and AGAIN with, "Let's try another pill," or "Yeah, but he'd never go THAT far!" or "But he's SICK! We can't blame him for THAT...!"

As for your editorial, Matt, you're right down there with other reporters who apparently have virtually zero clue as to what a semi-automatic is and isn't and how one works. I'm sure you'd have us all go back to muskets or revolvers (the latter, by the way, can be fired as quickly as any semi-auto weapon by somebody who knows what they're doing), and then gradually take THOSE away from decent people, too.

Meanwhile, you can't be bothered to report on almost-massacres like Pearl, Mississippi where a gun-toting whack job was stopped by (are you ready?) a law-abiding teacher with a gun. You don't discuss what would have been an even HIGHER body count at Virginia Tech because the shooter there was stopped by (oh, imagine that!) a student with a gun. Whatever else you think about the NRA, one thing rings true. The only thing that effectively stops a bad guy with a gun is a GOOD guy with a gun.

"The War on Guns." Brought to you by the same people who prosecute "The War on Drugs." Yep, make it illegal, and it will just go away as a problem! Maybe we should just make shooting innocent little kids a crime so nobody else dies! Oh, wait...


It's not the video game's fault either!


Should we arm the 6 year olds? More guns are not the answer. The lack of action on the part of the government says something about our society. The NRA spouts off a mindless chant like "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" and the gun nuts (sheep) get all excited. HOw about the only thing that will stop a mentally afflected psycho with a semi automatic rifle with a 30 round clip, is to make it a little more difficult for him to obtain one,

Matt, I want to make one thing perfectly clear, I don't like you at all, however I agree with your editorial.

Dr. Information

@dont care. What you fail to realize, like every other liberal, is that he wasn't able to get a gun. He tried and the measures in place stopped him. So, what did he do....stole some from his mother.

Besides a background check (which they do at every licensed gun vendor), what else do you want everyone to do?


What you don't seem to realize because you only listen to things that support your view of the world is...he did get a gun and shot 26 people with it. I didn't say he walked into walmart and bought it. A lady, his mother, legally owned the gun, he took it. Don't say he didn't get a gun he obviously did. The word buy, bought, purchased, was never used. In summary the gun was purchased legally by someone, a nutjob "got" the gun and a tragedy ensued. You can take you 2nd amendment misinterpretations, and NRA rhetoric and feed it to the rest of your paranoid wannabe saviors of the republic. You are the best argument for gun control.

Dr. Information

So what you are saying is the current laws worked! He wasn't able to, buy law, obtain a gun, he had to steal it. Thanks for backing me up.


The gun was used against the legal owner, which is typical


if the current laws worked they need to be changed

John Harville

He got the guns because his responsible gun-owner mother who knew of his mental problems and was trying to commit him didn't get the guns out of the house or put them where he couldn't get them.
And you are the one misinterpreting the Second Amendment which was prompted by Shay's Rebellion in 1787 emphasizing the need for a standing army...or a militia in each state that could be called up by the president to put down rebellions by 'the people'. It was all Washinton's idea.


I'm sorry but in light of your exact words - it would appear that the background checks they did on the mother did absolutely NOTHING to keep him from getting a gun. If the gun wasn't there in the first place - he wouldn't have gotten it. Most guns that criminals have are stolen from a "responsible" legal gun owner. Or, as in the case of the Movie Theatre shooting, they criminal was actually the legal owner of the guns.

The bottom line is that the current system in place does not work - until it can be made to work something else has to be put into place. I would totally agree to single shot rifles and shotguns available for hunting - all other guns - get rid of them. The first amendment has been soo distorted it is difficult to read it with a straight face anymore - at least for the gun nuts. I grew up hunting with my grandfather - I never remembered him hunting with an assault weapon OR a handgun. Someone earlier wanted to know the plan - remove assault weapons and handguns from circulation - begin a REAL registration process for the hunting guns and stop all sales outside of registered gun dealers - INCLUDING private sales. Private sales can be done at legal gun shops after the proper registration process has taken place. Simple as that. Then the police arrest anyone they see with an illegal gun anywhere. A buy-back program can be put into place like they did in Australia 15 years ago - and they never had another mass shooting in 15 years. They were doing something right. Were they not? Japan is another good example of working gun control.

Dr. Information

The current laws worked. He couldn't get a gun so he had to steal one. So y'all want to blame the NRA for theft now? How about blaming this idiot murderer than the guns. You will never stop private sales. You plan will never work.


Not quite understanding why things can't work that work in other countries. And, no I am not blaming the NRA for thefts, I'm blaming those who purchase "legal" guns and then let them be stolen. I'm blaming the NRA for insisting that we need weapons of mass destruction. I'm blaming the right people, you just don't want to blame the right people because those people are claiming your "need" for high powered guns - with no reasonable explaintion as to why you need them other than a want for them. Excuses like they are already there is a real lame stupid excuse if you ask me. Do not use the self-protection excuse either because a 22 rifle or a 12 gauge shotgun will defend y our property just fine as well as allow for hunting of most animals. There are no african lions or elephants here to hunt. Just because someone was able to steal a gun, doesn't mean that the gun should be legal. And I do believe that private sales can be regulated in some way - OR someone gets arrested for illegally selling a gun. If you believe that guns should be purchased without registration requirements, then you are honestly telling us you have something to hide from the government. And does that indicate that you are not fully honest, a criminal, or something is going on. What are you afraid of that you wouldn't want registration and stricter laws regarding the availability of guns? I'm very confused. The excuse that criminals don't follow laws is also one I'm not interested in hearing - becaue if laws are passed and you don't follow them than you are, in fact, a criminal as well - and you are proving that you aren't following the laws either so - in this case, you may be right - criminals won't follow the laws. Something needs to work - and spending billions on school protection - locking up anyone with a mental condition or whatever is NOT the solution to this problem.

John Harville

Background checks at gun shows. Waiting periods (which is why he didn't buy a gun). Inventory. Prevent irresponsible persons from getting guns. Despite all the NRA rants, no one has said 'take away all guns'.

John Harville

@ Samadams.... you need to check your facts. Three students were killed in Pearl and two others injured. The assistant principal kept the kid from driving away by holding the revolver on him while police arrived. And where did you get your Virginia Tech information? But, why bother with facts or investigation.

John Harville

@SamAdams. Wrong. Nobody says it's the guns. Nobody says it's the ammo. Nobody says it's the NRA>
Cuz guns and ammo and the NRA don't kill people. Dum basses with guns and ammo kill people. Well... guess we have to leave the NRA in the mix.


the nra is taking some heat for their position at this time. but, can any one dispute the following. kids get home from school and play their gaming systems that, a majority of games sold, have extreme violence. go to the movie theatre a violence abounds. turn on the tv and violence is everywhere!

the nra is merely suggesting that if you are going to look at gun control then you must look at those violent avenues as well.

The Big Dog's back

They are not suggesting that at all. They are saying NO NEW GUN LAWS.

John Harville

@Mikel. Yeah I'll dispute that kids.....blah blah blah. Again you decided to blather on and on and don't give any facts to support your contention.
So I can play your game. Can anyone dispute the following: gunowners get home from work and get out their guns to stroke and polish them and get stimulated by them and go out and shoot a few rounds into the air or shoot a few cans and then go inside and sit down with their gaming systems that, a majority of games sold, have extreme violence. Gun owners can go to those r-rated films with arms shot and violence abounds. Or they sit down with their case of beer to watch porn and violence on TV or from their private stash of videos.
Wow. See what can be done with generalizations?


Perhaps one needs to look at the common theme in all these mass shootings which is the use of psychotropic prescriptions.


Oh, okay NRA, thanks for placing blame on the schools that don't have armed guards at ALL the entrances of schools, stores, banks, theaters, water parks, golf courses, sporting events, concerts, funerals, church services, hospitals, etc....... Hey NRA, if it's a war you want, then move to the Middle East! Here in the USA we still like are peaceful streets. Tougher and common sence gun laws are forthcoming. Not a thing you can do about it either! Here's one I heard the other day, and if it were law then those babies would still be alive today.......the owner of a gun that is used in a crime will receive the same punishment as the assailant. In this case, the gun owner might not have been so lacks with their weapons and might have had them locked up!


The owner of the gun recieved the same sentence, She is dead. "Tougher and common sence gun laws are forthcoming." Great, The criminals can ignore them as well! Lets try a little common sense, Why don't we blame the idiot who shot the kids instead of the entire society?

The Big Dog's back

So you apply the same theory that why tax the rich, they will just pass it down, as you do for new gun laws. Oh boy.


? I guess I am getting rusty in liberal speech, What do you mean? You want new gun laws so criminals can ignore them too? Or do you want to blame everyone in a different class to show off your victimizational skills, I know it comes natrally to racist to lump entire sections of the population together as to be able to hate them easier, But who are you actually trying to blame besides affluent white guys?