NRA chickens out of Town Hall invite / Debate w/ Obama on Guns

[RunInRed 19,668]

Stand up for what you believe. Weak NRA, weak.

The nation's largest gun rights organization declined Wednesday to send official representatives to a nationally televised town hall with President Barack Obama on gun violence -- just days after the president reignited a discussion over this controversial topic.

"The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle organized by the White House," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN, which is moderating the live town hall Thursday evening in Virginia.

...

A CNN spokesperson said that it was the network, not the White House, that proposed the idea of a town hall on guns, and noted the audience would be evenly divided between organizations that support the Second Amendment including NRA members as well as groups that back gun regulation.

...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/06/politics/nra-obama-gun-town-hall/index.html

[AURaptor 1,137]

The NRA is on trial now ? For what, exactly ? Obama has set up a false narrative that the problem in the country is everyone who loves their family and their children vs the NRA.

The NRA has done nothing wrong. Why should they enter a lion's den , a concoction entirely made up by Obama and his Leftist minions in the media ?

The adversarial attitude this President puts on display for conservatives and " the rich gun lobby " is sickening. He shows more vitriol and disdain for his fellow Americans who have done NOTHING wrong than he does for N.Korea, ISIS, and all of militant Islam.

[AUtiger98 24]

I thought a town hall was where the public got a chance to voice their opinions before a law was passed. Appears to be a victory lap.

[AURaptor 1,137]

I thought a town hall was where the public got a chance to voice their opinions before a law was passed. Appears to be a victory lap.

There is no town hall meeting. It's a CNN propaganda/ pep-rally / ratings event, and nothing more. If Obama were serious about doing a town hall meeting, he'd do it in Chicago. HIS " home town ".

Not Washington.

[RunInRed 19,668]

I thought a town hall was where the public got a chance to voice their opinions before a law was passed. Appears to be a victory lap.

You must have missed this part ...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

[AUtiger98 24]

RIR a town hall is usually held before a law is passed or in this case presidential fiat is handed down to the people. That way all opinions are heard. This event Thursday is a celebration of the new order handed down.

Just because those groups are invited doesn't mean they won't decline too. Its my understanding this event was scheduled weeks ago and most people didn't think the fiat would be handed down this week or at least until after the "Town Hall". So maybe they agreed to attend weeks ago and now they don't want to join the president for the victory lap.

The article says the NRA declined Wednesday to attend Thursday's event. Did they send the invitation on Wednesday?

[AUUSN 823]

The Argument

The well-funded NRA and its allies argue that gun regulations only hurt law-abiding gun owners because criminals simply ignore them. They note that since Congress let a ban on assault weapons expire in 2004, violent crime in America has fallen significantly, while fatal and non-fatal shootings are also down slightly. Meanwhile gun-control advocates (some backed by Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP) say limiting weapons will drive down gun-related crimes. Australia enacted strict gun ownership laws after a historic massacre that left 35 people dead in 1996; since, there’ve been zero mass shootings, and the firearms homicide and suicide rates have plummeted. An editorial in the Annals of Internal Medicine said the level of gun violence in the U.S. amounts to a public health crisis; the left-leaning magazine Mother Jones calculated direct and indirect costs of $229 billion a year.

http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/americans-and-their-guns

[AUtiger98 24]

I'll try to get us back on topic. Will Australia's Prime Minister attend the town hall?

[OldNewby 27]

Stand up for what you believe. Weak NRA, weak.

The nation's largest gun rights organization declined Wednesday to send official representatives to a nationally televised town hall with President Barack Obama on gun violence -- just days after the president reignited a discussion over this controversial topic.

"The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle organized by the White House," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN, which is moderating the live town hall Thursday evening in Virginia.

...

A CNN spokesperson said that it was the network, not the White House, that proposed the idea of a town hall on guns, and noted the audience would be evenly divided between organizations that support the Second Amendment including NRA members as well as groups that back gun regulation.

...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

http://www.cnn.com/2...hall/index.html

The linked article's headline is:

'NRA declines to participate in Obama gun town hall'

not

'NRA chickens out of Town Hall invite / Debate w/ Obama on Guns'

unless I missed something.

[RunInRed 19,668]

Stand up for what you believe. Weak NRA, weak.

The nation's largest gun rights organization declined Wednesday to send official representatives to a nationally televised town hall with President Barack Obama on gun violence -- just days after the president reignited a discussion over this controversial topic.

"The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle organized by the White House," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN, which is moderating the live town hall Thursday evening in Virginia.

...

A CNN spokesperson said that it was the network, not the White House, that proposed the idea of a town hall on guns, and noted the audience would be evenly divided between organizations that support the Second Amendment including NRA members as well as groups that back gun regulation.

...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

http://www.cnn.com/2...hall/index.html

The linked article's headline is:

'NRA declines to participate in Obama gun town hall'

not

'NRA chickens out of Town Hall invite / Debate w/ Obama on Guns'

unless I missed something.

Honest Question: What's the difference?

[RunInRed 19,668]

RIR a town hall is usually held before a law is passed or in this case presidential fiat is handed down to the people. That way all opinions are heard. This event Thursday is a celebration of the new order handed down.

Just because those groups are invited doesn't mean they won't decline too. Its my understanding this event was scheduled weeks ago and most people didn't think the fiat would be handed down this week or at least until after the "Town Hall". So maybe they agreed to attend weeks ago and now they don't want to join the president for the victory lap.

The article says the NRA declined Wednesday to attend Thursday's event. Did they send the invitation on Wednesday?

Well, technically speaking, no legislation has been passed. But more to point, it's not like this is a MSNBC orchestrated, one-sided show. If you're a leading advocacy group and an invitation is extended, why not participate in the national discourse?

[homersapien 12,910]

The NRA is on trial now ? For what, exactly ? Obama has set up a false narrative that the problem in the country is everyone who loves their family and their children vs the NRA.

The NRA has done nothing wrong. Why should they enter a lion's den , a concoction entirely made up by Obama and his Leftist minions in the media ?

The adversarial attitude this President puts on display for conservatives and " the rich gun lobby " is sickening. He shows more vitriol and disdain for his fellow Americans who have done NOTHING wrong than he does for N.Korea, ISIS, and all of militant Islam.

Your illness is transparent.

NRA are clearly afraid of being exposed on a national stage. Only cowards and con men would make such excuses for not showing up for a public debate.

After all, if they were treated unfairly, would that not be apparent to all watching and listening? Many of their arguments are irrational - and unpopular - and they know they will be exposed.

[OldNewby 27]

RIR a town hall is usually held before a law is passed or in this case presidential fiat is handed down to the people. That way all opinions are heard. This event Thursday is a celebration of the new order handed down.

Just because those groups are invited doesn't mean they won't decline too. Its my understanding this event was scheduled weeks ago and most people didn't think the fiat would be handed down this week or at least until after the "Town Hall". So maybe they agreed to attend weeks ago and now they don't want to join the president for the victory lap.

The article says the NRA declined Wednesday to attend Thursday's event. Did they send the invitation on Wednesday?

Well, technically speaking, no legislation has been passed. But more to point, it's not like this is a MSNBC orchestrated, one-sided show. If you're a leading advocacy group and an invitation is extended, why not participate in the national discourse?

Stand up for what you believe. Weak NRA, weak.

The nation's largest gun rights organization declined Wednesday to send official representatives to a nationally televised town hall with President Barack Obama on gun violence -- just days after the president reignited a discussion over this controversial topic.

"The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle organized by the White House," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN, which is moderating the live town hall Thursday evening in Virginia.

...

A CNN spokesperson said that it was the network, not the White House, that proposed the idea of a town hall on guns, and noted the audience would be evenly divided between organizations that support the Second Amendment including NRA members as well as groups that back gun regulation.

...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

http://www.cnn.com/2...hall/index.html

The linked article's headline is:

'NRA declines to participate in Obama gun town hall'

not

'NRA chickens out of Town Hall invite / Debate w/ Obama on Guns'

unless I missed something.

Honest Question: What's the difference?

CNN reported. You editorialized.

[RunInRed 19,668]

True. And I stand by my "editorial" opinion.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Your illness is transparent.

Which " illness " ? I'm not the one attempting a public lynching of a organization which has done nothing wrong, but its being castigated by a cry baby community agitator as the villain.

NRA are clearly afraid of being exposed on a national stage. Only cowards and con men would make such excuses for not showing up for a public debate.

Exposed ? For what, exactly ? They've done absolutely nothing wrong. You're the zealot who is acting like a villager w/ the pitchfork and torch, marching off to kill a make-believe monster.

After all, if they were treated unfairly, would that not be apparent to all watching and listening? Many of their arguments are irrational - and unpopular - and they know they will be exposed.

Umm, it is VERY apparent they have been treated unfairly. NONE of their arguments are " irrational " , or unpopular. There's nothing TO " expose ". You're just tossing around empty rhetoric and baseless claims, having been swept up in the hysteria fanned by your dear and fluffy leader, BHO.

[JoeBags7277 760]

No worries. Gun Owners of America- the only no compromise gun rights group in America- will be there to fight the Feelz Army. Never been much of an NRA man.

[AUtiger98 24]

RIR, the time for debate is before the president changed the law. Now that he has changed the law most people expect court cases to be filed on the matter. Therefore it would not be wise to debate in public and save it for the courtroom.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Stand up for what you believe. Weak NRA, weak.

The nation's largest gun rights organization declined Wednesday to send official representatives to a nationally televised town hall with President Barack Obama on gun violence -- just days after the president reignited a discussion over this controversial topic.

"The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle organized by the White House," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN, which is moderating the live town hall Thursday evening in Virginia.

...

A CNN spokesperson said that it was the network, not the White House, that proposed the idea of a town hall on guns, and noted the audience would be evenly divided between organizations that support the Second Amendment including NRA members as well as groups that back gun regulation.

...

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

http://www.cnn.com/2...hall/index.html

I dont much blame them. That's a classic no win situation for them and as far as the 50/50 divide goes, who would make the decision on who was who? Hillary only answers questions from "plants'. I can understand why they'd be very wary of how that could play out.

[homersapien 12,910]

Your illness is transparent.

Which " illness " ? I'm not the one attempting a public lynching of a organization which has done nothing wrong, but its being castigated by a cry baby community agitator as the villain.

NRA are clearly afraid of being exposed on a national stage. Only cowards and con men would make such excuses for not showing up for a public debate.

Exposed ? For what, exactly ? They've done absolutely nothing wrong. You're the zealot who is acting like a villager w/ the pitchfork and torch, marching off to kill a make-believe monster.

After all, if they were treated unfairly, would that not be apparent to all watching and listening? Many of their arguments are irrational - and unpopular - and they know they will be exposed.

Umm, it is VERY apparent they have been treated unfairly. NONE of their arguments are " irrational " , or unpopular. There's nothing TO " expose ". You're just tossing around empty rhetoric and baseless claims, having been swept up in the hysteria fanned by your dear and fluffy leader, BHO.

1. Your ODS. (See last sentence of your #2 post.)
   
2. Exposed for their politically unpopular positions.
   
3. The NRA is being treated unfairly? Oh boo hoo! :-\ Clearly they are afraid to stand up to a fair debate. If they are treated unfairly, that would only help their case. They know that many of their positions are indefensible. Besides, it is Obama that is opening himself for questions:
   

Some of the groups invited to attend the town hall, which will feature direct audience questioning of the president, include Gun Owners of America, American Firearms Retailers Association, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, among others.

[homersapien 12,910]

Many say: "We don't need new gun laws when we don't enforce laws already on the books?"

Is this not doing exactly that?

[alexava 6,999]

Many say: "We don't need new gun laws when we don't enforce laws already on the books?"

Is this not doing exactly that?

i don't see it as new anyway. It is just covering up a spot that was missed. If Obama is hell bent on taking away guns like the batshitcrazies say, he has a whole heck of a lot to do in the next 11 months.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Homer - I disagree with our radically leftist president. That's far from having any sort of DS, as you try to claim.

Expose their politically unpopular positions ? Like what ? Do you even know how infantile you sound ? They have no unpopular positions. Gun safety is pretty darn popular, so spare the demagoguery . No ones buying it.

Yes, Boo hoo that free citizens who have done nothing wrong are being attacked by a petulant crybaby President & his sycophant buddies in the media . Shame I you got backing such clearly unamerican antics.

[AuburnNTexas 7,645]

Look most Americans agree that when you buy a gun a legitimate background check should be run. The problem is the law says a background check must be run if being done by a licensed gun Dealer or something similar to that. The idea was to protect an individual who sells a gun to a friend. Common sense says if you sell a gun a year you are not a dealer and would not have to do the check. Another words an everyday guy like me does not need a license to sell a gun so I don't have to pay for a license and I can't be fined or put in jail for not having a license. I have sold one gun and given away 2 in my 64 years.

When Obama and his attorney General made the announcement about redefining a Dealer. They explicitly said a person who only sold a single gun a year could be considered a dealer under the right circumstances but never layed out what kind of circumstances would qualify a person who only sold a single gun would make the person qualify as a gun dealer. Basically under the new executive order a zealous liberal prosecutor could go after anybody who sold a gun.

Instead of clarifying the existing law he muddied the water to push his agenda of going after anybody who sells a gun so that he can get rid of guns period. By the way according to the constitution the Executive branch enforces the Law, the Legislative branch writes the law, and the Judicial branch interprets the law. Obama is infringing on the Judicial branch when he interprets the law.

Whether you agree with what he is trying to do or not you should be afraid of how he is trying to do it. The Executive branch over the last few Presidents has steadily eroded the power of both the Legislative and Judicial branches of government this should scare people on both the Left and the Right because without the checks and balances built into our constitution one side or the other could eventually have the power of a King or Dictator and we all lose then.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Dealers already are required to run background checks. There is no gun show loop hole . This is a non issue.

[homersapien 12,910]

Many say: "We don't need new gun laws when we don't enforce laws already on the books?"

Is this not doing exactly that?

i don't see it as new anyway. It is just covering up a spot that was missed. If Obama is hell bent on taking away guns like the batshitcrazies say, he has a whole heck of a lot to do in the next 11 months.

That's exactly my point.

I can understand the opposition from folks who don't want any background checks, period, but if background checks are a reasonable proposition - and most think they are - it seems like a logical modification.