TCTI: Too Crazy Too Ignore
 Dave Ross
AP: c1ee41a0-70b5-4ba4-a2e1-10ddffd7ce36
The reaction to the Connecticut school shooting can be seen in gun stores and self-defense retailers across the nation: Anxious parents are fueling sales of armored backpacks for children while firearms enthusiasts are stocking up on assault rifles in anticipation of tighter gun control measures. (AP Photo/The Roanoke Times, Matt Gentry)

Tomorrow is the big day

BY Dave Ross  on December 20, 2012 @ 7:51 am (Updated: 9:04 am - 12/20/12 )

Tomorrow the NRA issues its first statement about the Newtown massacre. It promises to "offer meaningful contributions."

But don't think they'll support any kind of weapons ban.

NRA fundraising letters have warned for years about a secret Obama agenda to ban assault weapons, and last year Wayne La Pierre got up and said, "The president will remind us he's put off calls from his own party to renew the old Clinton gun ban, saying he's actually been good for the second amendment. But it's a big, fat, stinking lie."

So if you think the NRA is going to accept any kind of ban I've got a Mayan calendar to sell you.

But here's what it COULD do.

I was an NRA member for a while. I got a plastic card, and window sticker - better than a security alarm sticker by the way - and I ended up on a mailing list for various special offers.

But there was no initiation, no pledge to sign, nothing.

What if NRA membership stood for a level of personal responsibility. Suppose as a condition of membership weapon owners had to provide proof of training. Suppose you had to pledge to store your weapons securely - subject to inspection by an NRA official. Suppose you had to pledge NOT to attend movies that glorify the misuse of weapons, or pledge to boycott arms manufacturers whose ads play to angry young men, or video games that award points for killing?

The NRA is right - guns don't fire themselves. But when a country's gun culture is as casual as ours has become -- they might as well.

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Dave Ross

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (69)


  • Add A Comment

  • ron prevost wrote...
    And, does ASCAP have initiations and pledges ?
    December 20, 2012 7:59 am
    But, as I've said, the NRA is only one of many devoted to 2nd Amendment rights. .. and, at that, perhaps emphasizing gun safety more than simply defending guns of any kind. ....... Actually, Dave, your suggestion that NRA membership REQUIRE safety training makes sense.

    Of course, the lock step left would never look at such a requirement of program as helping. .. Or (secular non-deity forbid) that there just might be others on the left as well that support the 2nd Amendment. ..... Only a complete ban on guns will satisfy the ideologs.

    So, Dave. were you sent anything else beside your plastic card & window sticker? Like information? Just like guns don't fire themselves, you never leard about anything you don't read.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • AtheisticallyYours wrote...
    Nice idea Dave, but you give the members too much credit!
    December 20, 2012 8:26 am
    Sorry, Dave. As good as your idea is, you assume that the NRA has INTELLIGENT members who actually COMPREHEND the idea that people who own guns should: a.) use them RESPONSIBLY, b.) STORE THEN SECURELY, and c.) not be accessable to those who are mentally unstable! Until NRA members (and/or THEIR OWN KIDS!) are the victims of the NEXT gun-driven massacre, it will still continue to be an organization of PARANOID, high school drop-out dominated REDNECKS who have more fear from an imagined "tyrannical government", then the local whack jobs that have unhindered access to ANY gun they can get ahold of-legally, or IL-legally!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • kato1967 wrote...
    wow
    December 20, 2012 9:11 am
    Somehow we are the ones who are accused of stereotyping others? You sir, are an ignorant jacka88.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Big Zipper wrote...
    Thre Real Problem
    December 20, 2012 8:37 am
    Growing up the NRA stood to protect the rights of hunters and citizens to defend themselves. Somehow they ended up protecting the right to sell, buy, own, military style assualt rifles designed for the battlefield. Not for the household defense, and not to carry for personal defense, and not for hunting. So with the new style of flat black assualt weapons, we have a new breed of cool where millions of young men idolize the weaponry. The mass murderes are all white young men in their 20s. We as a society idolize the killing weapons and look what happened. Can't people see the difference?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • kato1967 wrote...
    It ain't about hunting
    December 20, 2012 9:10 am
    The 2nd Amendment is about Liberty. Can't you see the difference?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    kato1967
    December 20, 2012 9:29 am

    I think BigZippers point is that the NRA is using the second amemdment as an excuse to sell as many guns as possible, it is all about MONEY, not protecting someones LIBERTY, bigzipper is telling you that you are falling for the banana in the tailpipe trick. They are as political as our unions are in the legislative branch. Just like on t.v., death and destruction sells and is profitable

    So if having a weapon is all about LIBERTY as you stated, then you are going to have to extend our rights to be arms to being able to own Apache helicopter, fighter jets, tanks, apc's, hand held rocket launchers, submarines and destroyers equipped with nuclear capability because with these PEA SHOOTERS that we are allowed to carry including the assault weapons is not going to overthrow or hold off SH!!!!!T,lol.

    Now I am for communities, local and/or state storing these type of weapons at designated site in case of attack, but individually, just some fool who likes the power of a deadly weapon in there hand who can now feel 10 feet tall and 500lbs because they are really 4'11 and 99lb dripping wet in reality, who's liberty is he protecting?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    sports-my dad has a cattle ranch. He and every neighbor he has have guns all over the place. Shooting a coyote when calves are small is the difference bettween a small profit or a loss.
    December 20, 2012 10:26 am
    Growing up I had a rifle behind the seat and guns in my room. Every one I knew hunted. NO ONE EVER IN MY DAD'S ENTIRE LIFE IN THIS RUAL AREA USED THEIR GUN TO SHOOT PEOPLE, ROB PEOPLE ETC ETC. Im not saying one couln't find exceptions some place but there are a lot a ranch/farm areas in the US and next to zero gun violence. (Except if a thug broke into an ole boys house-bad news for the thug.) Also I heard a story about some punks shooting a ranchers cows after they cut the wire fence and drove into his land. The rancher the story goes shot both punks and burned the bodies, drove the truck off his property and left it along the road and kept quiet for 20 years until he told a couple of his neighbors. Nothing was ever done or looked into. The rule is dont shoot a guys livelihood.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    logical
    December 20, 2012 11:30 am
    You just gave us an example of a lawless act. We don't go along with vigilante justice in this country.You were doing just fine and presenting a good case up until a rancher took it upon himself to murder 2 guys for killing a cow and cutting a fence.See thats the problem 99.9% can act responsible but the actions of that .1% can result in changes being made.Is that FAIR? Absolutely NOT. But the old saying "Life's not fair" is appropriate.The majority will likely always pay for the sins of the few
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    messiah-I dont defend these ranchers, in fact that is not what I would do. I am merely stating in the last sentence-
    December 20, 2012 1:40 pm
    crinimals should be carefull srewing with gun packing old timers. I also was pointing out the diff bettween farm/ranchers and guns compared to urban dwellers. Big Difference.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    logical open mind
    December 20, 2012 2:53 pm

    I have no problem with people in rural area's and massive amounts of land having weapons. I am originally from the south and everybody carried guns, there are a lot of things to use a gun for in wide open spaces. In an urban area where there are bus loads of kids, people all over the place and more importantly BUSINESS conducting business's, everybody armed to the teeth is not only bad for business, but just bad for a hugely populated community unless it is strictly to protect your urban homestead.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Sports Guy - since when is the NRA in the business of selling guns?
    December 20, 2012 2:42 pm
    Prove the organization gets a cut of arms sales and you've really uncovered a scandal.

    But that's a interesting observation about liberty and the 2nd Amendment. ... In the 18th century, governments had hardly more advanced weapons than the average citizen. Sure, they had cannon, but our forefathers in the Revolution could and did organize to obtain and use cannons. .... And, BTW, it's interesting that our Constitution does NOT prohibit individual cannon ownership.

    SOOOOOO legally and logically, I guess we DO have the right to own rocket launchers and submarines. ........ And that's good, because I've always wanted my own Apache

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    Ronald!!!!!!!
    December 20, 2012 4:10 pm
    Happy to help, here are just a few: TenPoint, Winchester, Brunton hunting, smith & Wesson, legacy quest, benelli, stuff of legends, boyt, weatherby. All have to do with firearms. They don't get a cut of profit, they get money directly to be the lobby for the gun manufactures. Come on Ron, your too smart to be that naive, your really think this is about the 2nd amendment?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Sports - Like I've said, the NRA is only marginally concerned with the 2nd Amendment.
    December 20, 2012 4:36 pm
    Kinda like depending on the JayCees to defend freedom of religion. ..... The NRA gets far too much blame and credit on gun rights.

    But the issue IS the 2nd Amendment, and just what does it mean? ....... And I still do want my Apache.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    kato
    December 20, 2012 11:28 am
    No I see no connection with owning a gun and liberty.My experience is that guns are used often to take away peoples freedoms
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    messiah, thise people who use guns and can limit your freedom are usually called 'cops'.
    December 20, 2012 3:20 pm
    Maybe you and AJ have a lot more in common than you think.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • A True Liberal wrote...
    Chuck's comment " But as Dave points out, all that really indicates is that you have the $50 a year (or whatever the amount might be) to keep up your membership"
    December 20, 2012 8:37 am
    From a black and white point of view, perhaps it's true as you say "You aren't required to know from which end of the gun the bullet emerges, as long as you send in your check." First I don't see how private industry is going to put conditions on one's second amendment rights. But for most normal people, I don't think anyone sends checks to organizations if they do not also agree with what they represent. If a person is donating to the NRA, then unless they just blindly toss money away to whoever, they most likely agree with the principles of the NRA. Responsible gun ownership, training, education on gun safety, etc.. The NRA requiring you to do this, that, or the other is like a church requiring you to be baptized before you tithe there or before you can become a church member. If you're donating to them, then you most likely agree with their cause and practice what they teach.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Zoeller wrote...
    Who as the Moron that posted this heading? Dave? “Dave Ross speculates on what the NRA could have up its sleeve”
    December 20, 2012 9:23 am
    “But don't think they'll support any kind of weapons ban” (This is not a speculation it is a known fact.) Dave you have sunk so far so fast, I hope you hit the bottom soon.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Gate Keeper wrote...
    You libs are funny
    December 20, 2012 10:16 am
    Since POTUS B. Hussein Kardashian O.J. Obama spouted his latest gun grab rhetoric yesterday: NRA membership is at an 8,000 new sign ups per day rate, guns and ammo flying off the shelves in fact Wally World has sold out of Bushmasters and similar rifles. Every time the gummint indicates a desire to overstep it's constitutional restraints more (real) Americans arm themselves and you libtards just don't get it. BTW just because you were born here does not make you an American if you embrace socialist or big gummint Nanny State ideology.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Gate Keeper
    December 20, 2012 11:35 am
    Are you Billy Boys missing Siamese twin? He's afraid of "big gummint" also.Just one question give us your definition of "Right Wing" Oh and is(a) Obama(b) a Commie a Fascist or(c) a Socialist,or D . All of the above.Are you one of those "informed Americans" that knew years ago that Obama had it on his agenda to take our guns away?Why did he wait for his 2nd term?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    "Why did he wait for his 2nd term?"
    December 20, 2012 12:58 pm
    dumb question- he was seeking re election
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 20, 2012 3:56 pm
    I have heard that reason before and it makes ZERO sense.Andyou can't figure out why,your absolutely priceless
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    OK
    December 20, 2012 4:24 pm
    I'd like to read your explanation on why it makes zero sense
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 20, 2012 7:33 pm
    I'll make it simple because your a simpleton.Why would Obama wait when he had little chance of re-election?He had a record deficit and high unemployment
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    messiah, you response to Howdy is a very good example of 'zero sense'
    December 21, 2012 2:30 am
    the high deficit was/is of his own making, as is a real unemployment rate near 15%. Oz can't blame Bush forever.

    But you're right in one sense. Had Obama shown his true agenda too early, he would not have been re-elected.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    Ron
    December 21, 2012 4:39 am
    That's what I said about 5 comments above
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    needed to reiterate for messiah -
    December 21, 2012 5:22 am
    He can't remember that far back
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    ron p
    December 21, 2012 8:12 pm
    Wow common logic goes right by you doesn't it.Read what nut job Howdy said in the post I was responding to ,then get back to me
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    I'm not buying it
    December 21, 2012 4:30 am
    We all know he head more than "little chance" of re election. Besides he was focusing more on campaiging and other power grabs in the previous three years.

    You're really on a rampage with this gun controll thing. Kinda creepy.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 21, 2012 8:14 pm
    If Obama wanted your guns it would have happened in his 1st term.You screwballs are being churned for more donations and more NRA memberships and you don't have a clue that its happening. What a truly pathetic group of losers your side is
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sometimesrock wrote...
    ha
    December 20, 2012 11:52 am
    Thankfully, it's not up to you to decide who is American and who is not.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    Weapons "ban".
    December 20, 2012 11:16 am
    Dems love bans.Dems think a "ban" makes weapons and the threat of weapons go away. Dems love "Magical thinking" issuing edicts atop their unicorns below a rainbow. A "ban" is just a sales "cap" just like the last "ban" it did not do anything. And oh yeah a "ban" on High capacity magazines is "feel good" do nothing too. How about doing the Right Thing for once!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron Spins
    December 20, 2012 11:37 am
    If the bans that you feel the Dems want to put in place don't EVER work why does it bother you?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    "If the bans...don't EVER work why does it bother you?"
    December 20, 2012 1:01 pm
    another dumb question- The bans don't solve the problem but they do affect all of us.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 20, 2012 3:52 pm
    Read Ron Spins post and get back to me
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    Messiah
    December 20, 2012 4:27 pm
    I pretty much repeated what he said in his comment without using the rainbows and unicorns
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    messed up-what kind of nonsense question is that?
    December 24, 2012 10:20 am
    think about what u stated.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • DesertRez wrote...
    There has been
    December 20, 2012 11:38 am
    at least 3 car accidents here in the last 2 days (blue-hair Christmas shoppers). Let's protest AAA. Dumbest article of the day!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Obama said that voting is the best revenge.
    December 20, 2012 12:39 pm
    Now that all these Useful Idiot Left wing Parrots did what the regime programmed them to do, and the Dear Leader not having to worry about being re immaculated again, this is why a second Dynasty of this regime is far more damaging to our nation than the first Dynasty. Obama, like every Liberal, has always wanted to remove the Second amendment and now he thinks he has the perfect opportunity to do so. Maybe because midterms are coming and we Americans will not forget those who try to take away our rights. The Dear Leader no longer has to worry about this but will have no problems throwing members of his own regime under the bus. Obama is UN accountable!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    @Lord Ha ha!
    December 20, 2012 1:44 pm
    Every country that lives on planet earth should be accountable.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Every country that lives on planet earth should be accountable
    December 23, 2012 2:38 pm
    Agreed to this. And if there leaders were accountable to their people, like our leaders used to be, we would see far less violence and war on this planet.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sambra27 wrote...
    Correct me if I am wrong
    December 20, 2012 1:52 pm

    But don't most State Fish and Game departments regulate against semi-automatic and automatic weapons for hunting, and have a strict kill limit? I saw a guy on the news the other day saying he goes hunting, which is fine...but with an automatic weapon? I only question the reasoning behind the need to own an automatic weapon.

    It's me, Ha ha: you talk like Obama has made it his goal from the beginning to take away the 2nd-amendment right of U.S. Citizens, when in fact he has done nothing of the sort, AND him advocating for an assualt weapons and large magazines ban does not take away any one persons right to bear arms, unless they are someone who for some reason only wants an assault weapon.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Saltchucker wrote...
    State by state laws vary.
    December 20, 2012 3:46 pm
    Due to cross border migrations of waterfowl and to deter the old practice of market hunting the federal government limits waterfowling shotguns to 3 shells. Hence the phrase" I took the hunting pin out of this shotgun". Said shotguns may be single shot, side by side, over/under, pump, or semi-auto. Washington states firearm restrictions cover a couple of pages in the hunting regs, mostly to define which methods can be used in each season IE; Modern, Muzzeloader, Archery. In Modern seasons the most restrictive rules involve not having loaded arms or clips in the vehicle, except as provided for disable hunters and those issued concealed carry permits. Fully automatic arms remain against federal law so no further ban is needed for hunting. Caliber restrictions for hunting have more to do with taking game cleanly. IE minimum bore size or arrow weight. The type of hunting the AR style rifles commonly get used is for varmits. Coyotes, prairie dogs and such.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }