LaPierre challenges zero to gun debate

[TRICKSTER]

IMHO, this is incompetence or mismanagement. The NRA could, and SHOULD use some of their money to mount a well designed campaign using popular spokes people to get the issues out there. LaPierre seems to have a napoleon complex or whatever but he is the wrong guy for PR, there are tons of good PR agencies who could handle this problem and he should hire one.

This is NOT rocket science.

EXACTLY the problem. Worst strategy is to make it look like one guy "calling out" Obama because that's what he wants. t should be a BUNCH of people all stating facts about guns, gun laws, etc and not aimed at anybody in retaliation. Obama wants it to look like it's him against the NRA.

Then why doesn't the NRA tell that clown to shut up and hire some effective speakers on our behalf?

All this from a person that refuses to join the NRA and get involved.

[ordc]

They need R. Lee Ermey as NRA President and he can be the face of it during his term.

I actually have been more enthusiastic with NRA the past couple years. They used to give in way too much, now they do not yield and double down on pro gun stances.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dozer wright]

As long as it's not a spelling contest...

Where was the hat made?

[six seven tango]

IMHO, this is incompetence or mismanagement. The NRA could, and SHOULD use some of their money to mount a well designed campaign using popular spokes people to get the issues out there.

Why waste good money on "popular" spokes people? We need someone who know what they're talking about. Not someone "popular". Wayne may not be the best public speaker, but at least he knows the subject.

LaPierre seems to have a napoleon complex or whatever but he is the wrong guy for PR, there are tons of good PR agencies who could handle this problem and he should hire one.

Why hire a PR agency? I think the NRA does a pretty damn good job of being it's own PR agency. In all likelihood, this was discussed by the board prior to Wayne making his statement.

EXACTLY the problem. Worst strategy is to make it look like one guy "calling out" Obama because that's what he wants.

Why is that a bad strategy? Zero is only one person. Wayne is not calling for a debate between himself and 10 anti's. He's calling for a one on one debate, that zero is unlikely to accept. How, exactly, is it a bad thing if zero refuses to debate the very organization that's he is accusing of being his nemesis?

Obama wants it to look like it's him against the NRA.

News Flash...It is.

Then why doesn't the NRA tell that clown to shut up and hire some effective speakers on our behalf?

Why should we? We elected him as President of the NRA. That means that we elected him to speak on our behalf. If you're not an NRA member, then, just like you have no right to complain about an elected official when you didn't vote in the election, you have no right to complain about LaPierre.

[JustEd]

The challenge should be extended to Hillary Rodham Clinton

[Chunky_lover]

trump for nra president 2016

[juelz919]

If Obama accepted it this would be terrible for us lol. Obama is terrrribly gifted at debating and public speaking. Anytime he ever gets backed into a corner he makes a joke out of ig flashes his smile the lefties go nuts and just pretend they didnt just see him get pinned.

You honestly think it would change a single antis mind? Mainstream media would report in favor of obama no matter what so if you didnt watch it live you would just double down that guns are bad and gunowners are crazy.

[six seven tango]

You honestly think it would change a single antis mind?

No, but I do think it has a very good chance of changing the minds of a lot of fence sitters. You put the truth out there, backed up with facts, not emotion, and people will start to see the lies for what they are. I personally have seen many people have an "ah ha" moment when presented with facts. I've watched them go from not really caring one way or the other to "hey, wait a minute. They really are trying to take our rights. This needs to stop." If we can do that on a national level, don't you think it's worth a shot?

[juelz919]

No, but I do think it has a very good chance of changing the minds of a lot of fence sitters. You put the truth out there, backed up with facts, not emotion, and people will start to see the lies for what they are. I personally have seen many people have an "ah ha" moment when presented with facts. I've watched them go from not really caring one way or the other to "hey, wait a minute. They really are trying to take our rights. This needs to stop." If we can do that on a national level, don't you think it's worth a shot?

I agree with part of what you say. I am not what you picture when you imagine your average conservative or gun owner. I think it gives me an edge of credibility and lets there walls down. So i can explain it to them and i'm not just some old white guy. That with a combination of facts and logic i have convinced a bunch of antis the needs for guns and other conservative ideals.

BUT

As far as people on the fence IN MY HUMBLE OPINION the type of argument that will come from a president of a pretty large lobbyist group will not sway them.
1.) because he is an old white guy who obviously doesnt have the americans best interest at heart they see him as an overpaid gun nut lobbyist
2.) because to people on the fence background checks and licensed firearms sales isnt that unreasonable.

Again that is my opinion i am open to the idea of being wrong

[bountyhunter]

As far as people on the fence IN MY HUMBLE OPINION the type of argument that will come from a president of a pretty large lobbyist group will not sway them.

It will prejudice them AGAINST it. What will sway people is hearing from people who are NOT lobbyists or paid by the NRA when they say:

"I own a gun and here's why...."

or

"Here's why people sometimes need a gun...."

Coming from the NRA, it has no credibility.

[bountyhunter]

Why waste good money on "popular" spokes people? We need someone who know what they're talking about. Not someone "popular". Wayne may not be the best public speaker, but at least he knows the subject.

Why hire a PR agency? I think the NRA does a pretty damn good job of being it's own PR agency. In all likelihood, this was discussed by the board prior to Wayne making his statement.

Why is that a bad strategy? Zero is only one person. Wayne is not calling for a debate between himself and 10 anti's. He's calling for a one on one debate, that zero is unlikely to accept. How, exactly, is it a bad thing if zero refuses to debate the very organization that's he is accusing of being his nemesis?


News Flash...It is.

Why should we? We elected him as President of the NRA. That means that we elected him to speak on our behalf. If you're not an NRA member, then, just like you have no right to complain about an elected official when you didn't vote in the election, you have no right to complain about LaPierre.

Whatever. If you can't see what I stated is so obviously correct, I don't care. You "elected" LaPierre to be the head of the NRA? Good, then let him head it up by hiring persuasive spokesmen to get it's message out. And like I said: If you think making it look like a "mano a mano" dispute between the NRA and Obama is smart, you are clueless on the topic. Obama wants to cast himself as the man standing tall against the NRA, your strategy is to help him do that. The NRA should cast itself as the group putting out accurate info, not "taking on" people. If you can't understand why, not fixable because you think we would "win" by attacking individuals instead of proving facts to those who will listen.

[glbtrottr]

Like a fart in a private toilet - nothing will come of this. The spin is - they had their shot - they didn't show- boo hoo.

Lapierre may have a great platform, but as others have said, he's not the guy to convince the ideological desperate housewives of pick-your-California-county. They would just as soon stuff their gullets through People Mag, Pinterest, Facebook and Justin Bieber than be educated voters and good citizens because "someone else" is responsible for their safety, trained men, not my creepy untrained internet ninja.

Such are the majority women and "new Americans" of our times, people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[six seven tango]

Whatever. If you can't see what I stated is so obviously correct, I don't care.

What grade are you in again? That really sounds 3rd gradish or younger.

You "elected" LaPierre to be the head of the NRA? Good, then let him head it up by hiring persuasive spokesmen to get it's message out. And like I said: If you think making it look like a "mano a mano" dispute between the NRA and Obama is smart, you are clueless on the topic. Obama wants to cast himself as the man standing tall against the NRA, your strategy is to help him do that. The NRA should cast itself as the group putting out accurate info, not "taking on" people.

Last I checked, and you're free to double check, I said debate, not dispute. One reason to have a debate is to put out accurate info and to expose false info. If you don't at least know that much, then you are the clueless one.

If you can't understand why, not fixable because you think we would "win" by attacking individuals

I never said anything about attacking anyone. Please get your facts straight.

instead of proving facts to those who will listen.

A debate will get those facts out to those who will listen. We're not trying to convert zero...that's a lost cause.



Zero is the one who keeps blaming the NRA for all his woes. Since you seem so willing for the NRA to roll over and not defend itself, please, put your head back in the sand where it's been, because you are obviously not willing to be a solution to the problem.

[hardcore4sure]

I said I'll go...on some real My Cousin Vinny type ish!
"Did you get your grits from the same guy that sold Jack his bean stalk beans, are you sure about that 5 minutes"?

[Ugly Hombre]

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/01/19/breaking-judge-rejects-obamas-fast-and-furious-executive-privilege-claim-n2106790

So King- the court has decided that you must give up the documents about your fast and furious gun running operation.

"After significant deliberation U.S. District Judge Amy Berman has struck down Obama's assertion of executive privilege over documents pertaining to Operation Fast and Furious, the Department of Justice program that allowed the sale and trafficking of thousands of weapons to violent Mexican drug cartels. Berman was appointed to the Court by President Obama in 2011."

Produce them- then we can debate your anti 2nd policies and plans.

Thank you,

The American public.