Protect MN Press Release : NRA Press Conference

[bstrawse]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Heather Martens (612) 205-7142, Joan Peterson (218) 428-6570, or Leroy
Duncan, Protect Minnesota (651) 645-3271.

PROTECT MINNESOTA RESPONDS TO NRA STATEMENT

ST PAUL, MINNESOTA (December 21, 2012) – In response to the NRA statement
today that every school should have an armed police officer, Protect Minnesota
Executive Director Heather Martens responded that the stance of gun lobbyist
Wayne LaPierre is neither surprising nor in touch with reality.
Martens pointed out that there are about 2,600 public schools in Minnesota,
compared to about 650 officers in the whole St. Paul Police Department, and about
650 agents in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to monitor all of this
country’s tens of thousands of licensed gun dealers.

“What this says is that this NRA top lobbyist would rather we spend billions of
dollars than lift a finger to prevent mentally ill and dangerous people from getting
access to firearms – even assault weapons – in the first place. That is astounding.”
“The bottom line is that we have the right to be safe in our communities. Thanks
to decades of work by the NRA lobbyists, we have the weakest gun laws in the
industrialized world, and the highest rate of gun death by far.”

She noted that Columbine High School had armed guards during the massacre in
1999. “Since then, this country has set laws the way the NRA lobbyists wanted
them. And the devastation their gun policy has caused American families has been
horrific.”

The United States has a rate of homicide 7 times that of other wealthy nations,
driven by a gun homicide rate that is 20 times higher, according to David Hemenway
of the Harvard School of Public Health.

“There are measures we can take that have broad support in the American public,
including gun owners, “Martens said. “That includes background checks before
every gun purchase. There is also wide recognition that high-capacity magazines
and assault weapons do not belong on our streets.”

Currently, only 60 percent of gun purchases are required to go through a
background check. And still nearly 2 million purchases by prohibited buyers have
been stopped by Federal checks since the Brady Background Check Act took effect
in 1994. According to Republican national pollster Frank Luntz, three out of four NRA
members supports a background check before every gun purchase. Overall in
Minnesota, 82 percent of the public supports the idea. In Minnesota, there is also
a local background check, which stops many potentially dangerous people from
getting guns.

“It is time to require background checks for all gun purchases, and to allow law
enforcement to act preventively on a person’s gun access when they encounter
red-flag behaviors by potentially dangerous people. There is no need for the level
of lethal firepower this shooter had to be readily available. It is time to do fix our
broken gun laws,” Martens said. “We need to protect our right to be safe, not the
notion that the right for anybody to buy a gun is more important than everything
else.”

“The more-guns-more-places approach is completely discredited. If that theory
worked, the first victim of Adam Lanza’s rampage, his mother, would still be alive.
Nancy Lanza was a gun collector and accomplished shooter, killed in her own home
surrounded by her guns. None of that did her any good,”

[sabre]

'Only 60% of gun purchases go through a background check' -
I'd like to see where they dug this bogus number from. I guess a lot of people are getting their guns as hand downs from their fathers.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

[Mn01r6]

'Only 60% of gun purchases go through a background check' -
I'd like to see where they dug this bogus number from. I guess a lot of people are getting their guns as hand downs from their fathers.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

60% (3 of 5) guns I own were given to me. I expect I will inherit 10 or so when my dad passes away too. They, like the guns given to me, are all hunting shotguns and .22 rifles. This is a total red herring but I would gladly accept mandatory background checks if that was the only restriction.

[xd ED]

Quite a ramble;
and nothing that will ever begin to keep kids safer.

[igofast]

'Only 60% of gun purchases go through a background check' -
I'd like to see where they dug this bogus number from. I guess a lot of people are getting their guns as hand downs from their fathers.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

60% (3 of 5) guns I own were given to me. I expect I will inherit 10 or so when my dad passes away too. They, like the guns given to me, are all hunting shotguns and .22 rifles. This is a total red herring but I would gladly accept mandatory background checks if that was the only restriction.

But will you accept the fees of the mandatory background check? In California it's $75-150 per gun depending on FFL.

[Mn01r6]

Better than a $75 tax on every 1,000 rounds of 9mm I buy.

And everything costs more in Cali. I am sure they have to have some crazy liability insurance in case of a negligent transfer too.

[Mn01r6]

Not saying I want...just saying if that was the compromise I could live with it and wouldn't quit the NRA over it.

[AFTERMATH]

Love how it they use Lanza's mother as their example of more guns don't work.
I don't think I've ever met a mother who could pull the trigger on her own child - Even if she knew he was the Anti-Christ...

[xd ED]

'Only 60% of gun purchases go through a background check' -
I'd like to see where they dug this bogus number from. I guess a lot of people are getting their guns as hand downs from their fathers.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

60% (3 of 5) guns I own were given to me. I expect I will inherit 10 or so when my dad passes away too. They, like the guns given to me, are all hunting shotguns and .22 rifles. This is a total red herring but I would gladly accept mandatory background checks if that was the only restriction.

But will you accept the fees of the mandatory background check? In California it's $75-150 per gun depending on FFL.

What is the origins of that higher-than-normal price?
Is it CA law, or just what the market bears?
Could an FFL do it @ a cheaper price?

[CraigJS]

Heather you moron.

“The more-guns-more-places approach is completely discredited. If that theory
worked, the first victim of Adam Lanza’s rampage, his mother, would still be alive.
Nancy Lanza was a gun collector and accomplished shooter, killed in her own home
surrounded by her guns. None of that did her any good,”

She was asleep! He could have killed her with a baseball bat!
You can't even come up with good examples.

[igofast]

But will you accept the fees of the mandatory background check? In California it's $75-150 per gun depending on FFL.

What is the origins of that higher-than-normal price?
Is it CA law, or just what the market bears?
Could an FFL do it @ a cheaper price?

I think it has something to do with what the market will bear. Also the FFL has to hold the firearm for 10 days - so there may be some liability insurance. The state gets $25, so it's whatever the FFL feels their cost is above and beyond that.

[LePetomane]

Another non profit flapping their gums.

[Rmfcasey]

Hundreds of politicians are clamoring for more gun control but not one is advocating less armed security for themselves. When Obama disbands the secret service he can talk to me about my guns
Rmfcasey

[Rmfcasey]

Hundreds of politicians are clamoring for more gun control but not one is advocating less armed security for themselves. When Obama disbands the secret service he can talk to me about my guns
Rmfcasey

[xd9]

So I keep reading all over the internet from so called reporters that there WAS armed officers at Columbine High School during that event.

I did a little looking around and found this timeline that looks to be credible.

Sourced from here in various parts and reports...
http://acolumbinesite.com/index.html

At 11:15 AM local time (1815 BST) reports began to come in of two or three masked gunmen entering the school, which has about 2,000 students. Matthew Depew, son of one of the officers, made the first call from the kitchen, hidden so close to the killers he could hear them reloading their guns.

Jefferson County Sheriff's Deputy Neil Gardner - a community resource officer at Columbine High School - was the first to arrive, around 11:24 AM. As soon as he stepped out of his patrol car, Eric Harris fired 10 shots at him. Gardner fired four shots in return, without hesitation. Eric's gun jammed and the gunman ducked into the school to avoid being taken down.

WTF? So there WAS NOT a armed officer in the school after all? So all those so called reporters are lying for an agenda if that is true. This really makes my blood boil how they could lie to the public who don't know better or even care enough to go find the facts! Notice the time? First reports at 11:15 am and the first cop to arrive is at 11:24?
Thats 9 minutes! Hardly in the school as I have been reading.

Examples.....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/12/21/wayne_lapierre_wants_armed_guards_at_schools_columbine_had_an_armed_guard.html
http://www.businessinsider.com/there-were-police-officers-at-columbine-2012-12

It would seem they are all basing this on this....
http://www.vpc.org/press/1212nra.htm

Only problem with this is the 9 minutes no armed officer was on school grounds! That could be the difference. Idiots.