Posted on 09/21/2010 3:34:36 AM PDT by South40
Paul Helmke and Dennis Henigan -- spokesmen for the beleaguered Brady Campaign these days -- are old enough to know what a phonograph record is, so for their benefit we'll put it this way: At the risk of sounding like a "broken record," gun ownership has risen to an all-time high, and violent crime has fallen to a 35-year low. Coinciding with a surge in gun purchases that began shortly before the 2008 elections, violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, according to the FBI. This included an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery.
Since 1991, when total violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. The murder rate, less than half what it was in 1980, is now at a 45-year low. Throughout, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about four million a year, including record numbers of the two types of firearms that the Brady folks would most like to see banned -- handguns and the various firearms they call "assault weapons."
Predictions that increasing the number of guns would cause crime to increase have been proven profoundly lacking in clairvoyance. One of our favorite gems comes from the Brady outfit, when it was known as the National Council to Control Handguns: "There are now 40 million handguns. . . . the number could build to 100 million. . . . the consequences can be terrible to imagine," the group warned in the mid-1970s.
"Terrible consequences" indeed, for gun control supporters. The number of handguns has reached almost 100 million; waiting periods, purchase permits, and prohibitions on carrying firearms for protection have been dismantled in state after state; gun ownership has soared; and violent crime has plummeted.
Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
The gun grabbers should just STFU!! From now on and GO AWAY!
All NRA artilces should be banned from Free Republic while they endorse Harry Reid and a number of Democrats in Congress - who are liberals in every sense, but vote for the NRA. This is the lowest form of action - when not endorsing would give them money to fight real enemies of gun rights. /rant about NRA politics off
*More Guns, Less Crime*
Seems pretty logical. It’s a shame that the Leftists don’t have the common sense to see it.
The NRA did not endorse Harry Reid.
So that it’s easier to lie about the NRA just like you did just now?
Hey Jim, what are the chances that Free Republic can replace the NRA after all the lies on this website?
http://www.fieldandstream.com/forums/announcements/nra-endorses-harry-reid
They justified it as Harry being the least unfriendly to gun owners give the fact that if Harry loses, Chuck Schumer will take his place, an avid, anti-gun advocate.
some folks should do their homework. the NRA is in the business of endorseing incumbents and many Freeper articles have so stated that fact and that gun owners are leaving the NRA for that reason.
How about this from Field and Stream - They justified it as Harry being the least unfriendly to gun owners given the fact that if Harry loses, Chuck Schumer will take his place, an avid, anti-gun advocate.
Yes, they should. It took me less than 3 minutes to find and post these links for you.
- This news follows closely on the heels of the NRA donating money (almost $5,000) to establishment left-wing politicians like Harry Reid (D-NV), while remaining completely silent on Senator Reid’s opponent, 100% pro-gun challenger Sharon Angle (R). Though the NRA claims they have not endorsed Harry Reid, their donation, as well as their magazine's full-page photo layout of NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre with Reid, leave little doubt as to their intentions.
How about this from Field and Stream - They justified it as Harry being the least unfriendly to gun owners given the fact that if Harry loses, Chuck Schumer will take his place, an avid, anti-gun advocate.
I knew of the $5000 and knew of the article. I also know they did not endorse him. There is no doubt they had planned to but wisely did not after hearing from countless members like myself who wrote them threatening to cancel our memberships if they did.
The vote on Elena Kagan's confirmation to the Court, along with the previous year's confirmation vote on Sonia Sotomayor, are critical for the future of the Second Amendment. After careful consideration, the NRA-PVF announced today that it will not be endorsing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for re-election in the 2010 U.S. Senate race in Nevada.
Well there is an old saying, “Put your money where your mouth is.” I think a full page story and $5,000 looks like they are in favor of Mr. Reid. It is not what they say but what they do that matters. To me - it is my opinion based on these FACTS - the NRA likes people that may fit into a category that makes the NRA closer to a CINO than to a REAL conservative organization.
Cheers
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.