Moms Group Slams NRA Response to Sandy Hook Shooting

A group called MomsRising offered sharp criticism of the NRA's push to have armed guards in every school

The following statement was issued Dec. 21 by the group MomsRising:

“Today, Wayne LaPierre blamed everything except guns for the tragic deaths of 20 children and seven adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He even went so far as to suggest arming school personnel to avoid gun violence, and putting armed security in every school in the nation. 

Read the NRA's statement here.

Instead of putting guns in our schools and forcing our children to live in fear every day, we should let them focus on learning -- and demand that our leaders worry about keeping dangerous weapons off the streets, out of schools, and away from our children.

All of Mr. LaPierre’s arguments and finger pointing are merely ways of deflecting the primary source of gun violence in our country. That source is guns. That’s why MomsRising is renewing its call for Congress to pass common sense gun policies. 

Today, the NRA once again abdicated its responsibility for the gun violence that plagues our country by bringing to bear every resource it has to oppose even minimal, low bar, common sense efforts to improve gun safety, like ending the gun show and internet purchasing loopholes, and taking deadly assault weapons and high capacity magazines off the streets.

Putting more guns in schools isn't the answer, as LaPierre so cynically recommends.  We need common sense gun violence prevention laws that include:

  • Universal background checks for all gun purchases, including gun shows and on the Internet.
  • An assault weapon ban, which also limits high capacity magazines.
  • A federal gun trafficking statute with real penalties to stop the illegal sales of guns between state-to-state and international jurisdictions.

Wayne LaPierre asked why we don’t cherish our children more than money. We absolutely do. We cherish our children above all else. We want to know why Mr. LaPierre does not cherish our children more than his guns.
At MomsRising, we have more than a million members, many of whom are also members of the NRA.  We're hearing from people across the political spectrum that it's time for more logical thinking about our gun safety policies.
Today, we got an unequivocal message from the NRA that it is not truly committed to ending gun violence and will do anything it can to continue to support the manufacture and sales of the guns that are killing our children. We send back an unequivocal message that we will not give up until common sense gun laws prevail.”

Jason Smythe December 22, 2012 at 03:45 AM
The Bolsheviks had guns. The Maoist had guns. Pol Pot had guns. Their respective ascension to power resulted in some of the worst genocides in history. Guns are not necessary to protect civic rights or to affect and preserve positive social change. Mahatma Gandhi stood upto and overthrew one of the most powerful and heavily armed empires of the time without firing a single shot or brandishing any fire arms. Food for thought for those of you who believe only fire arms are the solution to preserving freedom.
Amend December 22, 2012 at 03:57 AM
@Ben- I think you're missing my point. I'm nit against responsible people being armed. We have a firearm in the house. My brother is a police officer. We were both boyscouts and were well acquainted with firearms at a young age. That isn't the standard. I'm not even against armed security gaurds. What I'm saying is that the NRA should have come forward with a dialogue that calls for measures that reduce gun violence, not for militarization. They should be pressuring the government to do all that they can to make sure that only responsible people have access to firearms, and that those firearms, and all transactions of firearms, are regulated and recorded. They're response was to pressure the government to militarize our schools. Personally, and as a gun owner, I'm not comfortable adding more guns to the equation when we struggle to manage the number we already have. I feel the same way about cars. Any jackass can get a liscence. It doesn't mean they can drive well or at 65mph in heavy traffic or that their mental state is conducive to operating a motor vehicle in a group setting. Anywho, I'm all for responsible gun ownership. If that means we raise our expectations about gun ownership and fewer people end up having guns due to that, well I'm not offended by that at all.
Amend December 22, 2012 at 04:15 AM
@Ben- you have your service experience which sets you apart. You aren't the average gun owner. I would like to think that we take the mental health of our vets seriously, and that you are being taken care of. I hope that is the case. All my respect to you and your service. Most people can distinguish from a mental disorder based on biology or circumstance and someone who might pose a danger. you seem reasonable, so I feel confident in the assumption that you would surrender your weapons if you felt you should. you aren't the person I'm discussing when I say it's too easy to obtain a gun. Again, thanks for your service. Truly.
Amend December 22, 2012 at 05:05 AM
@Ben- there are more people out there who think like I do than you might be aware of. I promise you that. Merry Christmas to you as well. Peace to you and yours this holiday season.
Judy Johnson December 22, 2012 at 12:34 PM
I believe the biggest issue here is mental health and this is the issue our nation should be addressing.The absence of affordable and timely mental health care is the real crime.
Mary Anne Looby December 22, 2012 at 02:09 PM
How do I join this group.There is no reason on God's earth for anyone other the military or police to have semi automatic guns, assault rifles, or machine guns. Hunters do not need them, gun sportsmen do not need them, and the average American wanting to protect their family or themself does not need them. A revolver is more than capable of protection. It can also be used for sport shooting, and hunters certainly do not need to shoot multiple bullets a second. People who want and have these guns have issues. Are they mental issues yes, are they serious mental issues sometimes, but either way the people who want to carry weapons or own them are just plain off. In the case of Adam Lanza he didn't own a gun. They were his mothers. He was mentally ill, she knew it.I don't know if she tried to get help for him, but I do know that the mental health laws in the country suck. She should never have had guns in the house.Obviously, there was something off with her. Mothers, Grandmothers we need to step up and get on our congressmen and demand that laws be put into effect We must demand that they stop kissing the ass of the NRA and gun lobbys. Putting armed guards in schools in insane. Do they have any idea what it will do to mental state of the poor kids seeing this everyday.This country is going to hell in a handbasket. We need to do something and we need to do it now. Let's make 2013 the year that Americans start thinking right. Let's take action now before it is too late.
Maynard G Krebs December 22, 2012 at 02:12 PM
What has changed, you ask? The country is awash in guns & any crackpot, psycho, or jihadi can walk into a gun show & walk out with an arsenal, no questions asked. For that you can thank the twisted, paranoid NRA that thinks the "libburls" are going to seize everyone's guns, which is nonsense. --Proud 2B a Lefty
Mary Anne Looby December 22, 2012 at 02:27 PM
Most shootings that occur on the street are gang or drug related. These things do not affect the average american. Unfortunatly there are good people who live in these neighborhoods who get shot by accident. Gangs and drugs are not going to be stoped by gun laws, but the Adam Lanzas of the world will be. We have to start somewhere. If we shut down secondary markets of gun sales gangs wont have them. No more gun shows, no more internet sales. Sales of guns should only be done through a authorized licensed dealer who follows the rules and does the backround check. if they don't put them out of business. Again, it has to start somewhere. I don' care how many people are put out by banning guns. We ban smoking in public places because it causes cancer and cancer kills. What the hell do guns do? Gun lobbys talk in circles and never answer direct questions. If they do their answers are so ludicrous it is crazy. the NRA does not control this country. It has to stop. No one, other than then the family members of gangs care if they get killed.give all of them guns and let them kill each other. That solves problem.What happened in CT and at Columbine has nothing to do with gangs.It is mentally ill people who have access to the weapons of mass destruction because their parents or a family member own them.These kids (and in my opinion Adam Lanza was a kid, 20 is not far from 17 esp when the person has mental health issues) could never have gotten those guns on their own.
Martha Cox Popichak December 22, 2012 at 02:32 PM
The NRA is about protecting the GUN INDUSTRY. Wayne LaPierre is PAID to protect his guns. Plain and simple, the NRA puts guns before children. The amoun t of money the NRA has to promote its gun-toting political candidates contributes to the inability to pass rational legislation. The NRA is a fear-mongering group. It is akin to the McCarthy-era tactics. It's time they were brought to their knees.
Amend December 22, 2012 at 02:32 PM
@Joe- only a child would try to "call someone out" on an online forum, and yes I would say it to your face. Should I be concerned if I did, and if so doesn't that reinforce my opinion of your demeanor? This isn't a political issue. It's a systemic issue. My point about drugs was that prohibition hasn't worked to stop their use, yet we keep trying anyway. Why shouldn't the same logic apply to gun control? Or conversely, if prohibitions don't work, like many on these threads have been stating as a defense against gun control, then why should we continue a failed policy like the war on drugs? Either prohibitions work or they don't. My larger point was that a vast majority of gun violence is related to drug prohibition. I stand by my assertion that there are too many guns in the hands of irresponsible people. That is just an observation of the facts, not some bs liberal agenda that you're so quick to try to assault.
Maynard G Krebs December 22, 2012 at 04:02 PM
I do not not intend 2 B kept in line, thank you very much. Isn't it interesting that the libertarian right sees the need to keep other people in line. I do agree about drug prohibition & gun violence. Have a MK&HNY.
WILFREDO G. SALCEDO, Sr. December 22, 2012 at 04:28 PM
Simply said, if there are no guns available, then no one could have one...No gun for goons (bad guys), no gun for civilians (good guys)...Save the guns for the militia and the hunters.
Amend December 22, 2012 at 05:19 PM
@Joe- I'm with Maynard, I don't need keeping in line. I also don't need a label, tho I did sense an undercurrent of humor in your last comment so no worries that I took offense. As for my identity, that's not really relevant to the debate, is it? One of the first things I learned about having an online presence was to use your real name only when absolutely necessary. Especially on politically charged ones such as the Patch. Glad to know tho that we found some common ground. Merry Christmas to you as well. May peace and prosperityfind you this holiday season.
Eric Harding December 22, 2012 at 05:24 PM
If you are going to take away the guns from the people then you must take them all. Good guys, bad guys, your neighbor, your police officers and the military. That is the only way what you want will work. Personally, as a Veteran of the United States Military I will do what I swore to do, I will uphold The Constitution of the United States and obey the orders of the President so long as he doesn't trample all over The Constitution. I will defend my right to own and possess firearms to the death. I will say again, guns aren't evil. People are evil and use guns as intrument of their actions. There are other ways to achieve better control of the weapons that people legally obtain and possess. How about training classes? Hunters have to go through those to hunt. Why shouldn't a person unfamiliar with a firearm have to go through something similar in order to obtain said firearm. Basically, what this boils down to is that you are taking away liberties and safety by banning guns. The time will come where you too will see evil happening, and then only will you see the err in your ways.
InFloodZone December 22, 2012 at 10:06 PM
Truly an ignorant response. I bet you have an equally ignorant answer as to why are there no shootings at police departments, rod and gun clubs, shooting ranges or even NRA board meetings?
CM December 23, 2012 at 04:17 PM
MomsRising=ignorant idiots
Carl W December 24, 2012 at 12:10 AM
"Ben," a lot of people internationally (especially Bienvenidos, Colombia,where many drug submarines are loaded), work for drug dealers, simply 'cause it's the only way they can afford to feed there families. Same thing on the streets of U. S.
Carl W December 24, 2012 at 12:14 AM
If you have a better idea, put it out here. HOWEVER, if it fails, shoot yourself. That's not a joke - put YOUR life on the line. Further gun control is a way to TRY to improve safety, NOT touted as 'THE' way. I applaud the Liberals, who are also looking for any wholesome methods to create a safer country.
Carl W December 24, 2012 at 12:21 AM
Good for you, "Amend." U. S. Coast Guard offers cost-only course on "Boating Skills & Safety," teaching boaters the rules & laws of the road. Also, special safety precautions & emergency dealings. Yet 80% of boaters don't take it, and kill themselves & others. If we don't make laws, people much more likely to kill!!!
Carl W December 24, 2012 at 12:29 AM
Present gun controls - hunters take their beer along, and we haven't talked in years about how many people accidentally killed by hunters. Hiking clubs avoid some 'hunting' days, and in Penna, we LEGALLY have to wear at least 20% APPROVED bright clothes during hunting season. And people want to cry "Leave our rights alone"? We are not fighting the Revolutionary War anymore. We also have very effective non-bullet defense weapons (stun guns, tear gas & pepper sprays), and these groups called "Police" Depts, & alarms!
Ed B December 24, 2012 at 12:54 AM
By your own viewpoint "D. Wag", you don't have the right to free speech when it comes to the Internet and this site, either. Nothing other that the manual printing press was in existence at the time.
bill burr December 25, 2012 at 07:03 AM
Guns don't kill people!!! People kill people. New Jersey and New York have some of the strictest gun laws in the nation yet have more gun crimes and deaths from guns than states like Pennsylvania that let their citizens open carry and carry concealed. explain that???? Liberals use these tragedies to push their agenda. I say ban alcohol because alcohol kills more people each year than guns do. I don't drink so why not ban it???? Lets see you liberal asses defend alcohol vs guns. You are almost 100 times more likely to be killed by a drunk driver rather than shot to death by a crazy oerson carrying a gun, which he probably got illegally. Laws don't stop illegal guns only good law abiding citizens from defending themselves from bad guys!!!!
bill burr December 25, 2012 at 07:10 AM
Carl W With Obama in Office anything is Possible!!! Heres a question I want you to answer please--- Is a government more likely to use force when their citizens are armed or when they are unarmed??? The moment our guns are taken away whats to stop our government from abusing their power. Thats what the 2nd ammendment is form not for hunting or target shooting. The whole idea of the 2nd ammendment was to have a free standing militia that has equal stength as our government so that our government can never ever become to powerful plus to defend our country from outside invaders. Ever heat the answer why the Japanese never invaded the main land USA???? He said because they have guns and lots of them.
bill burr December 25, 2012 at 07:13 AM
Taking our right to own and bear arms is fundmentally changing our country. We might as well burn the constitution and let our government deicde what rights we should have. Heres an example Do you think a criminal will break into a home that he knows the homeowner is armed or do you think he would rather break into a home where the homeowner has to wait for the police to be called and show up????
Mary Anne Looby December 25, 2012 at 02:27 PM
Statistics show that an ALAMRED HOME will be passed by a criminal. AN ALARM DOES NOT PUT ANYONE IN DANGER. Alarms are cheaper than guns and safe by a mile. Do you want your kid shot in the cross fire between you and a criminal? Think about what you spporters of gun are saying. Get an alarm, and be religious about setting it. It will keep your family safe from criminals, and fire. Use you head people.
Mary Anne Looby December 25, 2012 at 10:04 PM
@bill burr, if you really believe what you write you have been drinking the koolaide way too long. Do you really believe that the United States of America needs a free standing militia, or is this just another one of the excuses you gun people put out there.
bill burr December 26, 2012 at 06:20 AM
@Mary Anne Looney Yes I do to protect us from our own Government. With Obama in office yeah I really do. Go back too sticking your head in the sand. Our government can force churches to provide day after pills, birth control and pay for abortions its not that big of a stretch to think we should have a free standing militia aka private armed citizens that in an emergency can form some kind of organized unit to protect their community. Its kind of like neighborhood watch with guns.
bill burr December 26, 2012 at 06:26 AM
Alarms are not cheaper than guns!!! Obviously you like speeking from your ass. Alarms are not fool proof either. It also takes the police an average of 15-20 minutes to show up for a alarm call. Check your facts. Criminals know how to beat alarms. watch 20/20. And if someones sole purpose is to cause you bodily harm now alarm will stop them. If a criminal wants you dead you will be dead unless you have the means to defend yourself. What are you gonna stay awake 24/7 and never leave your house. I have my concealed weapons license I carry my gun everywhere.
Peter December 26, 2012 at 01:08 PM
"primary source of gun violence in our country. That source is guns."...that is the most foolish statement i've heard in this debate.
Peter December 26, 2012 at 01:09 PM
a house around the corner from mine was broken into while the alarm sounded...that event convinced me that alarms are useless.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something