ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

How the NRA Undermined Congress’ Last Push for Gun Control

We reconstruct how the NRA advanced two measures long on its agenda in the wake of the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting.

« Return to Story

Sort by: Oldest Newest  <  1 2

Rich

Jan. 28, 2013, 2:21 p.m.

More selectivity I see….

you:“but do think we should strengthen the background check system (as do about 92% of Americans), then tell him you don’t support one, but do support the other.”

Ruger: “Your focus should be on strengthening mental health care and improving the quality of data supporting NICs checks (National Instant Criminal Background Check System).”

Conflict of interests is unavoidable. Im completely fine with some if it will help support my beliefs. Ruger is an amazing company even if it didn’t make guns, its customer service is top notch.

Some one seems a little upset that Ruger created an easy and ingenious way to contact all the representatives.  No need to scour gov. website for email address. Here an expert from one of the many responses:

“I do not doubt Senator Feinstein’s and Rep. DeGette’s sincerity, but I believe these standards are best left to state and local governments.  However, I am in favor of improving the federal gun background check system through legislation that would strengthen the screening process for people who have a record of past criminal activities or mental illness. “

Contact your reps!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

carolyn

Jan. 28, 2013, 3:26 p.m.

Perhaps it might be helpful to go to the primary source of concerns regarding white house efforts to promote legislation geared towards improving gun safety. When we get our information second hand, we expect to get an interpreted (biased and shortened) version unless sources are cited and the recipient actually reads through it for content and validity.

It will take 33 minutes, 31 seconds to watch: “Fireside Hangout” with Vice President Biden on Reducing Gun Violence”

A question and answer format with the questioners focusing on different aspects of the debate, including assault weapons, mental health issues, law enforcement concerns, video games and lack of research to determine whether they’re causal in violence, lack of funding, hamstrung abilities to do the research needed, extended clips, the need for states to take initiative and not rely on national (central) government for all solutions, etc.

carolyn

Jan. 28, 2013, 4:25 p.m.

“Some one seems a little upset that Ruger created an easy and ingenious way to contact all the representatives.  No need to scour gov. website for email address.”

Not ingenious in the slightest. Ruger has taken their playbook from activist organizations which have all long employed “easy” access and prepared messages which directly and routinely target and bombard our reps:

“Move On”, “People for the American Way”, “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”, “The Daily Kos”, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence”, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence”, “The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence”, and many, many more.

What separates these organizations from Ruger is the fact that ALL organizations which support measures to increase legislation to promote gun safety are NON-PROFIT. They need supporter donations to survive.

Ruger is a corporation. They don’t ask for or need your money to promote their message. The costs of running their website campaign is chump change. They want your support to serve their own interests which is continuing business as usual.

Rich

Jan. 28, 2013, 8:56 p.m.

Old Joe? He showed his ignorance of facts….

“A shotgun would keep you a lot safer – a double barrel shotgun – than the assault weapon in somebody’s hand who doesn’t know how to use it, even one who does know how to use it.

You know. *Points to the camera*

It’s harder to use an assault weapon to hit something than it is a shotgun. So, if you want to keep people away in an earthquake, buy some shotgun shells.”

HAHA! That keeps making me laugh. Thanks for bringing it up again.


You know what really separates those website from Rugers Take Action Now set up? Not a single one you listed has easy access to contact all my reps all the way up the entire line, if at all. I didn’t see any obvious links, let alone something so perfectly set up as what Ruger did.

You’re just upset and its getting funnier.

Track Feinstiens bill with me and we can watch it fail together ;)

10% chance of getting past committee.
1% chance of being enacted.

(type www. then paste)
govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s150


Contact your reps!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

carolyn

Jan. 29, 2013, 1:24 p.m.

The purpose of your Rugers “Take Action Now petition” is to contact your congressional representatives - thus the automatic contact process is included. Once you provide your zip code, they know who your reps are and they do all the legwork. When you visited the websites I suggested, you didn’t find petitions - thus have no clue as to how they’re conducted - thus concluded, without any evidence, that they’re not as efficient and easy to use as your Ruger petition. The recipients of petitions aren’t always the same. Some are directed to senators only, some are directed to all reps, including state reps. Again, all of our representatives are identified through the use of our zip code. The PURPOSE of the petition determines WHO will be contacted. Once you’ve submitted your email address, the organizations behind the petitions come to your inbox. You no longer need to go find them.

Here are three of the many, many petitions out there which might help you educate yourself. The Brady petition directs concerns to senators. The other three are directed to the white house. 

The Brady Campaign: “Contact Your U.S. Senators
Take Action, Support Efforts by Senator Feinstein and Congress to Reduce Gun Deaths” My name is on it.

The Daily Kos began the petition which asked Obama to start the conversation about gun control. It’s not closed even though the objective has been reached. “Daily Kos Now is the time to talk gun control” My name is on it.

The “We the People” White House Gun Control Petition Became the Site’s Most Popular Ever “Immediately address the issue of gun control through the introduction of legislation in Congress.” (The petition is closed since the objective was reached. My name is on it)

What you may find interesting is that the “We the People” petition process is the ability for any one of us to start a petition on the White House site. You might find the one created by an anti 1st amendment NRA Nut which got a lot of traction: “we petition the Obama administration to: Deport British Citizen Piers Morgan for Attacking 2nd Amendment” (Anger at CNN reporter Piers Morgan because he’s a Brit and had the audacity to use his CNN perch to compare the high gun violence rates in this country to the low rates in England). (It’s was closed after Obama responded to it.) Obviously, I did not sign it. I suspect you may have or would have if you’d known about it.

There will be many more petitions coming up. It’s a hot topic. :)

Rich

Jan. 29, 2013, 2:06 p.m.

“thus concluded, without any evidence,”

LOL


Why are you even arguing with me about that? I’ll admit its entertaining, but you pick some odd battles….You even said they take the legwork out…making it easier, more efficient, and more personal than signing a petition.  Ruger sends the letter with your personal email as the sender, I’ve gotten replies from every recipient with my name in their response. Now I send them all a more personal note.

Much more effective than a petition.

Good luck with those by the way!


Track Feinstiens bill with me and we can watch it fail together ;)

10% chance of getting past committee.
1% chance of being enacted.

(type www. then paste)
govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s150


Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

Kerri Hudson

Jan. 30, 2013, 9:38 a.m.

@carolyn

Please read this article: “The calculus of genocide” Acceptance of gun control and registration have historically proven to be a stupid and suicidal move by the masses of a free land.

You fear the gun because you are not familiar with them, probably never even held one. You should come to terms with your fear and realize that they are a lot less scary when they are the last thing between you and a concentration camp.

Inline with previous requests to folks like you, I ask that, once you succeed in destroying my constitutional right to keep and bear arms, you permanently wear a shirt that states, ” I Hate John Wayne”. When they come to round you up, all gun owners that are left will know not to waste a bullet trying to save your treasonous hide.

http://libertyhollow.weebly.com/1/post/2013/01/the-calculus-of-genocide.html

Michael Long

Jan. 30, 2013, 11:46 a.m.

Funny Kerri mentioned John Wayne. Was just reading Gunfight on DC vs Heller. In it the author covers quite a bit of gun history, including the fact that nearly every western town in the late 1800’s had strict gun control bans, including “notorious” towns like Dodge and Tombstone.

You checked your guns at the town limits, or often left them with your horse at the stable.

As such, and in it’s worst year, Tombstone had exactly 8 deaths due to firearms, and that included the OK Corral. Not exactly the picture of an independent and wild but polite society based on a well-armed populace that we’ve been fed by Hollywood.

John Wayne strutting around with two-six-shooters in a double holster and carrying a rifle, Liberty Valance-style? Nope. John would have been thrown in jail.

In short, the “masses of a free land” have long had regulations controlling exactly when, where, and what you could carry.

carolyn

Jan. 30, 2013, 12:26 p.m.

Kerri has come late into the conversation and has addressed me with some assumptions. I have had guns in the past (rifle and shotgun) and, having lived on a farm then, used them on large livestock, predators, and game. Since I now live in an urban area, I no longer own any guns. Perhaps reading through what has been already been said here might be useful, since nothing has been said by any of us which indicates we want to take away all your guns nor brought up the possibility that we’ll all end up dead or living in concentration camps.

John Wayne was a movie star. I have no idea why I would be compelled to either love or hate him. He played roles based on scripts written for him by hollywood screen writers. I wasn’t fond of his politics. If we’re into picking out Hollywood personalities who echo our politics, I would probably pick George Clooney. Definitely didn’t like Charleton Heston, or that “Make my Day” guy who yelled at an empty chair during the GOP convention.

” When they come to round you up, all gun owners that are left will know not to waste a bullet trying to save your treasonous hide.” Who are “they”, and what is “treasonous” about my point of view? Oh, I get it… YOU’RE the guys who’ve determined we’re treasonous.

Joe Painter

Jan. 31, 2013, 7:54 p.m.

As a Virginia lawyer and an acknowledged expert on firearms law, I can tell you that it is not true that someone can get their firearms rights back, after being ordered by involuntary commitment to in-patient treatment or being ordered to mandatory outpatient tratment, by writing to the state. It requires a petition to the General District Court where they reside and senting a copy to the Commonwealth’s Attorney. See Section 18.2-308.1:3, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended.  The New York Times is quite simply in error. It is time to issue a retraction.
By the way, Virginia leads the nation in mental health reporting.

Joe Painter

Jan. 31, 2013, 8:15 p.m.

I have read the New York Times article you reference.  There is nothing about people being able to get their gun rights restored by writing the statte. If you were in court and made such a statement under oath we would call it perjury.

It is people like you that are dangerous.  You state falsehoods and cite in error sources to make your argument.

The Times article refers to a county next door to me.  I know the judge and the Commonwealth’s Attorneys involved. It refers to a hearing before a General District Court judge; just like I mentioned above.

I cannot help but wonder how many people have fooled by your article.

Joe Painter

Feb. 2, 2013, 10:14 a.m.

Mr. Sapien:  When are you going to admit that you misrepresented the law in Virginia?  All I can say is for shame.

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 10:52 a.m.

“Senate Democratic leaders expect a gun bill to move to the Senate floor that includes most of the proposals backed by President Barack Obama, with the notable exception of a ban on military-style, semiautomatic weapons, a top aide to Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.”

-Wall Street Journal

The lefties do something first look at effectiveness second plan is transparent and failing hard. I love it.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

http://ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 10:53 a.m.

“Senate Democratic leaders expect a gun bill to move to the Senate floor that includes most of the proposals backed by President Barack Obama, with the notable exception of a ban on military-style, semiautomatic weapons, a top aide to Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.”

-Wall Street Journal

The lefties do something first look at effectiveness second plan is transparent and failing hard. I love it.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

Michael Long

Feb. 6, 2013, 11:24 a.m.

@Rich: You’re on the record as saying…

“There will be no Assault Weapons ban, probably won’t be a magazine ban either. It does not have the support need[ed]. Universal background checks, probably, and for good reason.”

So. You’ve said an AWB is stupid. I’ve said it was stupid. And it appears that they’re not doing it.

They are doing universal checks and several other things, which I’ve been promoting and to which you’re quoted as agreeing with both here and on another article.

In short. They’re doing what we think they should do.

So why slam “the lefties” for doing what we both agreed that we should do, and why the continued link to a site whose default letter says “do nothing at all”?

Or are you just a NRA shill?

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 12:52 p.m.

Im slamming them for the original agenda, not whats happening now, re-read for comprehension.

And since you haven’t notice, I really don’t care what you perceive me as, it entertains me to get any response, thanks for strolling right in again.

They also aren’t doing what YOU think they should do, so stop acting like that’s all you wanted to see happen…I won’t quote your extensive list….Universal background checks may not even happen either.


Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

carolyn

Feb. 6, 2013, 1:59 p.m.

Michael, I admire you for continuing to try to work with Rich through the use of impeccable logic. It’s rather obvious by now Rich prefers conflict to resolution, does not read for content in his own posts (much less that of others) thus attempts at conversation to find common ground are circular and pointless.

My concern lies with how future legislation is debated. Legislation will have to go through the Senate - and as you know, Harry Reid, who has an “A” rating with the NRA, recently caved in on filibuster reform.

Today The Daily Kos sent out a petition to ask Reid to re-open filibuster reform in view of recent GOP threats to filibuster any nominee to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unless Democrats agree to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s power to actually protect consumers.

It’s been my opinion that Harry is fearful of the gun lobby, and that the upcoming Senate gun control debate had everything to do with his decision to do nothing about filibuster reform.

Michael Long

Feb. 6, 2013, 2:05 p.m.

I’m not trying to “convert” Rich. I’m simply pointing out the inconsistency of his various positions to all of the others who might read them or follow the conversation.

And I agree about the legislation. If you care about the matter write (don’t email) your representative, Reid, and others. Or even better, call them.

Email petitions are a dime a dozen.

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 2:40 p.m.

Hey you have someone who admires you for something your not really trying to….haha I love it.

Dime a dozen my bootay, I got a phone call FROM my rep to talk about the issue. Another separate reply asking to set up a meeting for lunch or coffee to discuss it.

Both of your frustrations are showing through hard now. Keep it coming.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 2:47 p.m.

If either of you really wanted to make gains together, you would have emailed each other and continued this conversation there. Instead you come back when I want you to in attempts to grand stand your position and logic against my endless comments transparently out of pure frustration.


Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 2:48 p.m.

Oh snap I got links to work…carolyns mind is about to explode!

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 2:49 p.m.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

carolyn

Feb. 6, 2013, 3:14 p.m.

Online petitions in a variety of forms can work. A woman in her 20′s started a petition to get Bank of America to stop its plan to charge a $5 fee for debt card users, More than 300,000 people signed it (I was one of them), and the fee plan was eliminated.

The petition process educates people, and more of us are more aware of more issues as a result of petitions that end up in our inboxes.

The “Move Your Money” campaign a few years ago actually got me off my duff, prompted me to do what I had long known I should. So I went through the process involved in switching from BOA to a non-profit credit union bank. I was only one in hundreds of thousands who joined in that same effort.

Public pressure via properly done online petitions work, especially when the signee provides his/her full name and address. EG: Common Cause petition to tell corporations to withdraw from ALEC. If you google “List of members of the American Legislative Exchange Council” and look up “Former Corporate Members” you will find the huge list of companies which recently resigned membership - and a few of those are denying ever having been members. I doubt the NRA (long a member in good standing) will succumb to any pressure from Common Cause to disassociate itself.

Yes, effective petitions to government requires our disclosure of full name, address, and require us to follow up by making phone calls to the right reps. A lot of us do just that. They are a valid part of the entire process in educating ourselves on the issues and following through with action.

Michael Long

Feb. 6, 2013, 3:18 p.m.

“Instead you come back when I want you to in attempts to grand stand your position and logic against my endless comments transparently out of pure frustration.”

Project much?

And from my perspective, you’re the one who keeps returning… (grin)

Michael Long

Feb. 6, 2013, 3:28 p.m.

Well when petitions are in favor of something you want, they work. When you are not in favor of something they call for, they don’t work at all and are a dime a dozen.

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 3:36 p.m.

lets see…will you reply to this comment? I bet so…did you reply on this section before I did? Nope….so it must be you who is returning…will you argue with me about that? Most likely….HAHAH your both hilarious.


this website is inconsistent with its link screening lol.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

Rich

Feb. 6, 2013, 3:54 p.m.

How could I be frustrated anyway, this whole issue is going the direction i’ve been pushing for. Silly.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

Rich

Feb. 8, 2013, 11:25 a.m.

what a stupid comment! Its actually kind of funny.

“He added that the private sales of the missile launch tube and other weapons illustrate the need for comprehensive background checks as proposed by President Barack Obama”

Because the missile launcher was originally obtained legally right? and a background check would have prevented that…

Maybe the military should just keep tabs on its missile launchers better.

No assault weapons ban, no high capacity magazine ban, no universal background checks. They won’t happen and you know it.

Contact your reps! Protect your 2nd amendment rights!

Google:

“Ruger Take Action Now!”

You can contact all your reps within 2 minutes or less.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.