I don´t think CC would be a good idea for me. I might snap if I get in a 20 item grocery line and someone ahead of me has a full cart.

What I´d like to do is see the NRA create a map locating a point of light on every single family wth an NRA member. Then they should present the map as "Citizen Safety Zones." The closer you are to that point of light, the more likely it is that you will be safe from gun crime. The second thing I would like to see them do is create an ad campaign (using the Old Uncle Sam "I want you" model) that says "I want wherever YOU are to be the safest place in the world for all of those around you."

The author doesn´t know the difference between a clip and a detachable magazine.

They never do. And we still let them seize the narrative with "assault rifle". No on should ever allow any conversation with anyone to proceed without challenging that false premise.

I watched the first five minutes and finally could not take any more of David Gregory. He really is just too difficult to watch.

Gregory was difficult to watch because he was like a yappy little terrier nipping at the heels of LaPierre. LaPierre should have been an English Mastiff and place a paw on this guy´s mouth, schooled him on the NRA´s 2nd Amendment agenda, released Gregory and bid him a Merry Christmas as he left the studio.
We must control the narrative, or at the very least, get ours out in a timely, succinct way. Stop being on the defense people.

I believe that the dems agree that it takes a good person with a gun or they would disarm the secret service and the Capitol security.

“If it’s crazy to call for putting police and armed security in our school to protect our children, then call me crazy,”

Okay, Mr. LaPierre, you are on. I am calling you crazy. This country went 200-plus years without police and armed security in our schools. We are spending far more money than we have right now; we have a fiscal crisis. Spending even more to put police and armed security in every school is a crazy idea. There are plenty of less expensive solutions, starting with making it easier for a mother like Nancy Lanza, who told a friend that she knew her son was deteriorating, to get said son into treatment. It doesn´t have to be this hard...and it would not cost any money to make it easier to get adults whose mental state is deteriorating into treatment.

Our country is crawling with criminals, Muslims and illegals from south of the border, but the left wants to destroy the Second Amendment. Does anybody wonder why?

#8-I´M glad your not in charge of anything!

Ted in Michigan

The left, who according to themselves, love children [after they survive the killing fields of their first 9 months]is willing to do ANYTHING to stop another school killing.

"Anything" here means anything on a leftard sacred-cow list, such as abortion on demand or gun-control. Like nuclear-free cities, "gun free zones" are now a major leftard sacred-cow and although the facts are that they attract crazy cowards and reduce children´s safety, well, if the NRA points out the obvious they are "crazy."

The left is thus moving their pre-birth attitude towards children up to and beyond puberty.

Hey #8; They used to put crazy people in lock-up but various laws and groups such as the ACLU managed to get all that stuff declared off limits so now the crazies walk the streets. We are reaping those results.

The idea that every school in America needs armed guards to protect children from gun-wielding mass murderers is preposterous. It is an over-reaction. It makes LaPierre sound like a nut case who agrees with the gun control nut cases as to the degree of risk, disagreeing only as to how to deal with it. I wish he would be quiet. I wish the NRA would obtain good PR consultants and let them handle this.

If it were the case that armed guards had to be stationed at every school in the country because of the danger posed by firearms in the hands of mass murderers, more gun control, beginning with banning semi-automatic weapons, would clearly be justified. It would not be EITHER/OR as some seem to think, but BOTH/AND. Armed guards would be necessary UNTIL stricter gun control and other legislation had begun to reduce the risk. LaPierre is making the case for adversaries of the NRA without seeming to realize what he is doing.

Where are the statisticians and public health epidemiologists when we need them? Where are the quantitative data that demonstrate the actual risk to children of being the victims of a mass murder at school? The risk, whatever its precise number, is vanishingly small. The entire public debate is being driven by emotion, not objective facts.

Visit the National Aquarium in Washington, DC. The entrance is blocked by two large round women of color, all decked out as "security guards" with the whole costume. They will be jabbering and laughing about the jabber while making you do the TSA put ally our stuff in the basket game. All of that just to enter a really lousy aquarium. Did that make me feel safer ? No, it made me certain their job was unimportant and only exists to provide make believe jobs to minorities. The same would happen at schools.

How many liberals would put a big sign on their own front door that told all the bad guys "There are no guns in this house"? Well that is exactly what the idiots are doing with our children in public schools. Marking them as unprotected and vulnerable. And they should be judged and prosecuted for doing so.

Does it make any sense for 40% of all gun sales to be made with no background check? If so then why not sell all guns without a background check? Criminals, crazies and even those on terrorist watch lists can buy whatever gun they wish at gun shows with no background check.

While I agree with many points Wayne LaPierre made this morning, the background check discussion was his very weakest and I have yet to hear one valid arguement for no background check before purchasing a gun.

No- except that THAT does not happen. YOU on the ther hand have swallowed a lie from a leftard and are now running with it. I´ll speak only for the state in which I live. EVERY sale by a dealer at a gunshow requires a background check exactly as it would in his storefront. Private sellers of LONG GUNS ONLY can transfer to a buyer so long as they do not have reason to believe the buyer is a prohibited person. Selling / transferring to a prohibited person is a felony. No HANDGUN may be sold or transferred without a background check at a licensed FFL. "Gun Show loophole" is like "assault weapon". Neither one actually exists. And "40% of sales" is a made up figure -imaginary and commonly known as a "lie".

Does the party of unicorns and fairy dust, free stuff and Hollywood violence really have anything of value to add to a discussion about life and death matters ?

These ´habitual blow-its´ need a track record of success before anyone should listen to them.

Add for unintentional omission: Transferring a handgun to another person without a background check is a felony. The only transfer that may occur without a background check is parent to (adult) child of legal age to possess, spouse to spouse, and grandparent to grandchild of legal age to posess. Estates must transffer with background check via FFL. The only people who care about and abide by these laws are people WHO DO NOT BREAK THE LAW. Now what law did you say would be observed by a person iintent on committing a mass murder? I missed that part.

1 other person with a gun could have stopped the killing and the liberals know it.

The Elitist and Looney Left aren´t going like this, but the statistics are in Wayne´s favor even though the MSN propaganda machine will try to skew it. It is not really about health care or gun control, it is about total control of the individual!

#11, you say the left "loves" children but does nothing for the not-yet-born. The right loves the not-yet-born but apparently doesn´t care about getting rid of the assault weapons crazies are using to slaughter those who are already born. Madness. Absolute madness.

Sorry to bust your information bubble #16. Every gun show me and my crazy buddies attend will require background checks. They only take a few minutes to complete and verify that we are not crazy lunatics, but just hunters and patriots. You should really visit a gun show to get your facts straight.

OK # 8 - Yer crazy and here´s why. Apparently it´s OK for celebrities to be armed or have armed body guards- yeah, the same ones that will tell us guns should be banned, but hey they need protection.
All our disingenuous politicians have armed guards, but hey, they need protection. Some of those disingenuous politicians even have a CC license, but shamelessly call for gun control such as the hypocritical Diane Feinstein:
"I know the urge to arm yourself because that´s what I did. I was trained in firearms. I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon and I made the determination if somebody was going to try and take me out, I was going to take them with me."
Go to a football, baseball or basketball game and what´s there? Armed guard called the police.
Go into a bank and what will you see? Yup, armed guards.
So #8 - what you are effectively telling people here is that it´s OK to put a higher value on our celebrities, politicians and even our money in the bank, than we should for our children?

#8 is correct. This is a bad idea. What is needed is to arm the teachers. One cop is not the answer. Armed teachers is the answer. What´s more of a deterrent, one cop or 50 teachers with guns. We don´t need to send in the police every time there is a problem. Just let the people have their right to carry a weapon. It´s cheaper and it will work.

Is Obama still peddling weapons to Mexican drug cartels?

Funny, Obama´s weapons dealings got over three hundred people murdered....

....and David Gregory will never have even ONE question about "Operation Fast & Furious."

So why don´t Republicans, and the NRA, state emphatically that gun shows require background checks too.

We all have the right to bear arms.

We all have the right to live free.

The gov´t should sue the ACLU for allowing mentally unstable people to roam the streets with potential for harming (infringing on people´s rights) you and your family, and friends.

Mental health advocates should join-in.

While I otherwise agree with much of what has been said, I would point out that #17 and #19 is quite mistaken. There is no federal requirement for a background check on a transfer of a handgun from one private party to another. Perhaps there may be such laws in some states, but it is not a federal requirement, and it is surely not the law in Ohio.

Molon labe