NRA President: “I do not think that there is going to be a ban on so-called assault weapons passed by the Congress”

Posted by on Jan 11, 2013 at 8:28 am

We like that he references “so-called assault weapons” since most of the media has no idea what classifies anything as an “assault weapon” to begin with. It’s just a made up term by the anti-gun crowd  dating back to the early 1990s. He’s also signaling the GOP that they better not turn weak in the knees during the relentless assault on the Second Amendment.

On the Today show this morning, NRA President David Keene predicted to show host Matt Lauer that Congress would not successfully pass an assault weapons ban in 2013.

“I do not think that there is going to be a ban on so-called assault weapons passed by the Congress,” Keene declared, after Lauer asked him if the NRA was powerful enough to block the legislation.

Lauer questioned Keene about whether the power of the NRA was “eroded” after the school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

Lauer and these other media schmucks are standing on the graves of the dead in order to promote their agenda and it’s only going to get worse. Obama and his minions will be exploiting Sandy Hook victims as long as they can (can’t wait for the SOTU, huh?) in order to shred your Second Amendment rights.

There must be resistance, no matter how much gun owners are demonized. If the GOP knuckles under do they actually believe they’ll be treated fairly thereafter?

Any doubts about the left’s agenda? Well, look how the NRA was treated when meeting with Biden and the gun grabbers.

We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment.  While claiming that no policy proposals would be “prejudged,” this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners – honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans.  It is unfortunate that this Administration continues to insist on pushing failed solutions to our nation’s most pressing problems.  We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be blamed for the acts of criminals and madmen.  Instead, we will now take our commitment and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation about what works – and what does not.

Tags: ,

33 Responses to “NRA President: “I do not think that there is going to be a ban on so-called assault weapons passed by the Congress””

  1. glorious socialist utopia with a cool rockstar messiah on 11/11/13 at 9:12 am

    Hitler actually came up with the term assault rifle when he called the MP-44 the sturmgewehr. Since this reverse gun lust is all about control don’t tell the libs their precious laws wouldn’t have stopped what happened in Connecticut. I love their delusional view that because they passed a law in their infinite wisdom the problem is solved.

  2. Prefounder on 11/11/13 at 9:23 am

    On the brightside, no I don’t mean Matt’s shiney head okay yes I did anyway forgot where I was going Matt’s head sure is shiney.
    Gun confiscation yes right Matt’s head sure is shiney.
    The faith of the those who despise the right is that we are honest moral people. They can lie, Matt’s head sure is shiney.

  3. Prefounder on 11/11/13 at 9:27 am

    I am wondering if digital enhanced video of Hitler would also show his head to be shiney, there is no doubt he was a swooper. He was also short like matt.

  4. Joe Mama on 11/11/13 at 10:33 am

    “I think that there is going to be a ban on so-called assault weapons passed by Executive Order”


  5. Mephitis on 11/11/13 at 11:04 am

    I think this article is correct. Congress will never even put the idea on the table of banning a wide group of weapons. Too many defeats in the next election if that were to happen, and they are all basically on the job only to try and be re-elected rather than representing the people in their districts. (oops, sorry I forgot they also represent the big business interests that pay for their campaigns … and it’s almost worse in the fly over states and the farmer and agri-business special interests)

    But the president … now that’s a different story. I hope he declares an immediate ban on all things that use gunpowder. He can do it via exec order.

    Of course he won’t. It will be the liberal’s grand story for the last 80 or 90 years … a steady erosion of liberty via a thousand cuts … each one a minor nuisance and not the hill to die on.

  6. Mephitis on 11/11/13 at 11:14 am


    I’ll make a specific prediction. The far left party will implement the same ban on high capacity magazines and the same restrictions as the former Clinton ban that has expired. Some minor changes, but within 10%. That’s not risky for them.

    But also they will take the advise of the NRA and put armed guards in all schools, at the expense of the Federal Government. And they will demand LOTS of new taxes to pay for that. It’s a win / win for them. A new bunch of unionized thugs with weapons … ready to put down any ‘social uprising’ … and TAXES and further takeover of daily life by the Feds.

    Can you spell “TSA at the schools” Get ready for nekked scans of all your children on a daily basis. Which will of course will never be viewed by anyone outside the office of the safe schools czar.

    See it’s a three-fer Something for the gun grabbers, the Tax and Control bunch, and the perverts. Almost the whole voting base.

  7. Rich K on 11/11/13 at 12:21 pm

    I don’t have kids and I don’t give a damn really but all it takes is locked doors after school session starts to stop these Losers from gaining access.ITS ITS THAT SIMPLE PEOPLE.And there is no reason a teacher or administrator can’t monitor entry pre start.They already get paid so make them earn it .

  8. styrgwillidar on 11/11/13 at 12:49 pm

    Actually, ‘Assault Weapon’ is a legal term. That is, it has very specific definition(s) in the law in various states. Of course, the legal definition is not consistent across the states- in CA, for example, it includes some shotguns as well as defining some semi-auto rifles/pistols as assault weapons.

    Originally a term by gun banners to confuse semi-auto non-military grade weapons with true ‘Assault Rifles’ which are military grade rifles of medium caliber capable of firing both in semi-auto or full auto modes (including burst fire).

    Civilian weapons capable of full auto fire (capable of or easily modified or the components to modify a weapon to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger) were frozen under Reagan in ~1986. No new full auto weapons have been sold to civilians since then.

  9. Ken on 11/11/13 at 2:57 pm

    @Rich K…

    The maniac shot his way through through a locked door. IT’S THAT SIMPLE!

    To everyone else that’s freaking out over “losing your guns”, think of the 20 little kids that will never grow up to share in your glorious right to own military grade weapons. Your constant whining about being persecuted is pathetic. Your lust over SUPER 2nd Amendment Rights is perverse and evil. As long as you have unfettered 2nd Amendment rights, the rest of us are at far greater risk of losing all our other rights. Namely: LIFE.

    Those of us that want to see reasonable limitations are standing by the graves of the victims of gun violence. You’re desecrating them.

  10. Rob Crawford on 11/11/13 at 3:51 pm

    Ken, your LUST to disarm people makes me wonder what you’re planning.

    And what about the LUST for letting the insane wonder the streets? That has much, much more to do with the 20 graves you’re dancing on than “military grade weapons”.

  11. Ken on 11/11/13 at 4:01 pm

    Rob… No, I believe everyone that owns or wants to own a weapon capable of slaughtering 20 children in minutes should be tested for mental illness.

    Reagan cut funding for mental health in the 80’s. President Obama wants healthcare (mental and physical) for all. I support that.l.

    So who’s side are you on?

  12. Rob Crawford on 11/11/13 at 5:05 pm

    ” No, I believe everyone that owns or wants to own a weapon capable of slaughtering 20 children in minutes should be tested for mental illness.”

    So anyone with a car should be tested for mental illness? Anyone owning the wrong household chemicals? Anyone with a particularly sharp rock?

    “Reagan cut funding for mental health in the 80′s.”

    Liar. 1) Reagan didn’t write the budgets (Congress does that), 2) states had started letting loons run loose long before the 80’s — which was the genesis of the “homeless problem” the left tried to hang on Reagan.

    Some of us were around then, dipshit. We remember what happened.

    ” President Obama wants healthcare (mental and physical) for all.”


    No, he doesn’t. He wants government control over healthcare so the “Independent Payment Advisory Board” gets to decide who lives and who dies — no appeals, no pleas for charity. He wants government control over healthcare so the busybodies can come up with endless reasons to micromanage our lives.

    I’m on the side of the people who would have seen a man breaking a window to get into a school and would have shot the son of a bitch.

    You’re on the side that wants everyone rendered defenseless so we can be slaughtered like sheep.

    Why don’t you emigrate to Great Britain? They already have what you want to force down our throats.

  13. Ken on 11/11/13 at 5:07 pm

    Prefounder… Rhetorical question. I know what side most of you are on. The side of the muder culture perpetuated by the NRA and the gun industry. You’re a bunch of selfish, paranoid extremists that would rather see the world bleed and burn before you admit you are a part of the problem.

  14. Voice A. Reason on 11/11/13 at 5:46 pm

    The paranoia of the gun culture extremists never ceases to amaze me. And I don’t mean all the law-abiding gun owners who think possession of a firearm carries with it the responsibility of reasonable regulations regarding its ownership and use. I mean you people who think you need to be bristling with military-grade weapons because you are convinced that someone is out the “get” you.

    Do you really think the “gubmint” is watching your every move? Better get off the ‘net and crawl into your bunker… them beeg black gubmint helicopters are coming especially for you with their giant Suck Ray to suck up all your guns.

  15. Ken on 11/11/13 at 5:49 pm

    So Rob… I guess Reagan’s Office of Management and Budget (an Executive Office) had nothing to do with the budget that stripped the Mental Health Systems Act of 1980? I’m such a liar.

    Chemicals and rocks aren’t designed with the express purpose of killing people. Fortunately there have been great strides in raising red flags when people start to amass chemicals to create explosives. Sadly, the same can’t be said for people that order thousands of rounds of ammunition on the internet or buy weapons illegally at gun shows (ALA the Columbine killers).

    Death panels? My God. FEMA camps can’t be far behind.

    I’m on the side of wanting to see people slaughtered like sheep? Project much? You’re the enabler buddy.

    I’m not forcing anything down your gun loving throat. You’re the one waving your insecurities in everyone’s face.

    I want sensible regulation. There has to be some common ground between a butter knife and a nuke on what is reasonable. Unfortunately, you seem to have no reason.

  16. pat on 11/11/13 at 5:50 pm

    Ken on 11/11/13 at 4:01 pm

    Perhaps it would be better if you knew what you profess.
    President Carter both lobbied for and signed the Mental Health Systems Act that prevented or made extremely difficult the forced institutionalization of the mentally ill. Reagan cut Federal spending in the 1980s, but this was a miniscule part of the body of treatment, the vast amount of which were State institutions. Without incarcerated mentally unstable patients, all of which were put on the street, circa 1978, the State institutions had to close.
    Again we have a liberal canard that has no basis in reality. in fact this was another liberal program that has failed completely so the blame was laid at Reagan’s feet.

  17. US Army (retired) on 11/11/13 at 5:56 pm

    Ken, answer these with a reasoned answer devoid of talking points and ad hominem attacks:
    1. 2nd Amendment “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
    Infringe – to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. (Merriam-Webster)
    2. “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” -Patrick Henry
    3. “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” -Thomas Paine
    4. “The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” -Samuel Adams
    5. “Americans have the right and advantage of being armed; unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” -The Federalist, No. 46, James Madison
    6. “Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” -George Washington
    7. “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Cesare Beccaria – On Crimes and Punishment, quoted by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book
    8. “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” — Thomas Jefferson
    9. “One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.” — Thomas Jefferson
    10. “When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, –who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them…” -George Mason, The Virginia Ratifying Convention.
    11. “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? It is feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American . . . . [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” -Tench Coxe
    12. “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original RIGHT of self-defense” — Alexander Hamilton
    13. “The RIGHTS of conscience, of BEARING ARMS, of CHANGING THE GOVERNMENT, are declared to be INHERENT IN THE PEOPLE.” — Fisher Ames, Massachusettes Representative

    The main reason for the 2nd Amendment was NEVER hunting, it was to affirm the God-given right to defend our lives and to protect us from a tyrannical government and people like you. You rant that we are bloodthirsty, crazed nuts that want to kill. You are wrong. I spent 24 years in the US Army protecting your right to free speech. I NEVER want to have to use a weapon again to take a life, EVER! I own guns and I taught my children the safe and proper use of them. They own guns and have not yet had to use them to defend themselves but their right to self defense is NOT yours to take away!

    LASTLY, Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. Talk sense to a liberal (leftist) and they call you a hater, racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, denier, wingnut, teabagger, terrorist, hillbilly, redneck, Republican, extremist, angry mob, greedy capitalist, religious bigot, etc, etc, ad nauseum. This is because they CANNOT debate on the MERITS of their position and fear what may be heard if it continues so they can only resort to attacking you with profane slurs, ad hominem attacks and wild labels in hopes that you will SHUT UP.

  18. Ken on 11/11/13 at 5:59 pm

    Pat… Reagan’s Office of Budget Management also helped defund the National Institute of Mental Health. Didn’t he also try to redefine the criteria of people eligible for SSI? That didn’t help the problem.

    I’m not saying the entire mental health ball of wax is Reagan’s fault, but he was a major player in the state of things today. Funny how I’ve never seen gun lovers so upset over mental health until now.

  19. Ken on 11/11/13 at 6:03 pm


    Thank you for your service. I will answer all your questions with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

    “I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” – Thomas Jefferson

  20. MT Geoff on 11/11/13 at 6:57 pm

    Howdy Ken
    Yours at 6:03 sounds like you’re ready to call the Founders the “barbarous ancestors”. You’ll get little traction here that way.
    There are 300 million firearms in the hands of 150 million households in the US. Very few of them are used to commit crimes and very few to act negligently so as to cause accidents. Some are, of course. There are criminal laws to address those tragedies.
    We 150 million are not bloodthirsty nor trigger-happy nor careless. We are apt to bristle up when accused of being so.
    We are also apt to listen to people like Hillary Clinton and Diane Feinstein when they say, in so many words, that they do intend to take our firearms. We take such threats seriously.

  21. Voice A. Reason on 11/11/13 at 7:37 pm

    I would like to see a reliable, primary source that quotes those “so many words.”

    I understand having guns to protect you from home invasion and personal protection. I understand having guns for hunting or target shooting. I understand having guns in the hands of law enforcement personnel and the military. I fully support the right of citizens to own these weapons, provided they are used lawfully, safely and with proper training.

    Military-grade firearms, invented for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time, are not needed for the protection of a home. Or for fending off a mugger in a dark alley. Or for killing animals for food. I do understand that there are some paranoid Bunker Bobs out there who love to entertain their doomsday-prepping-worst-case-scenario fantasies. If you are one of those trigger-happy conspiracy freaks who are convinced that you are going to need to overthrow the United States government in hand-to-hand combat when they all come out to “git” you personally, then you are mentally unbalanced, and have no business having such a weapon.

    I DON’T want to ban guns. I would rather ban mentally unbalanced jerks who have such a paranoid, twisted view of the world that they think blowing 20 six-year-olds to bloody bits is acceptable “collateral damage.”

  22. Funeral Guy on 11/11/13 at 8:29 pm

    Did the libs all get together and decide that “military grade weapons” was going to be the new catch phrase? I guess polling found that “assault weapons” was insufficiently scary.

  23. Voice A. Reason on 11/11/13 at 8:46 pm

    OK, I concede.

    Assault weapons, invented for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time, are not needed for the protection of a home. Or for fending off a mugger in a dark alley. Or for killing animals for food. I do understand that there are some paranoid Bunker Bobs out there who love to entertain their doomsday-prepping-worst-case-scenario fantasies. If you are one of those trigger-happy conspiracy freaks who are convinced that you are going to need to overthrow the United States government in hand-to-hand combat when they all come out to “git” you personally, then you are mentally unbalanced, and have no business having such a weapon.

  24. quiet man on 12/12/13 at 12:58 am

    I believe that most of these folks that suggest what we do and don’t need have never experienced a fubar situation, I don’t believe that everyone should have a firearn either. These people obviously don’t and I congratulate them on having lived in pleasantville for their lifetime and forseeable future. I have not been so fortunate and consider that it is better to have it and not need it that to need it and not have it. I also think that the most effective weapon is the one that you don’t have to use
    I think everyone is familiar with the sound of a pump shotgun? If the sight of a firearm is enough to prevent one from having to pull the trigger, it is the best one to have. I also lived through the LA riots and saw that the only thing that stopped a mob were people willing to protect what they had worked and saved for. In the aftermath of those incidents when people tried to sue the cities for not providing protection, it was shown that they have no OBLIGATION to protect you, it is a service. Also try and remember that those police officers had their own families to worry about. (whose home would you have protected first? )
    I won’t argue with these folks or try to get them to change their minds because it isn’t my job and I just wish they would extend to me, the same courtesy. I see a lot of name-calling here and it may make them feel better, but it doesn’t make them sound brighter. Those of us with similar opinions don’t need to respond with anger, “never mudwrestle with a pig, you’ll never win and the pig likes it”

  25. Prefounder on 12/12/13 at 9:46 am

    after 24 hour rule am thinking a cerrtain poster has a shiney head like Matt.
    Do only wooden bats kill baby sea critters?
    FEAR alum these and many more absurd positions coming to a blog near you.
    What will be Gore’s new scam Jammie? shall we take bets?

  26. Toejam on 12/12/13 at 10:46 am

    Emotional reaction never, ever solved any problem.

    But, The naive Liberals believe they, by having so-called assault rifles banned, believe the criminals and mentally desturbed will abide by their pipe dream solution.

  27. Slats Grobnik on 12/12/13 at 11:59 am

    When his imperial majesty Emperor Hussein bans guns and anything he does not like a glorious rainbow utopia will commence. Oh you don’t care about guns and don’t own any or want to? Don’t worry there will be something you like that will make its way onto the verboten by imperial decree chopping block. When that law is passed angels will commence singing and everyone will have his own rainbow, unicorn and chocolate fountain provided by a benevolent government that loves you and only wants to keep you safe and warm. It will be glorious comrades, glorious like the great leap forward! And it will be cool too! Cool like a faculty lounge marxist rockstar professor!

  28. Prefounder on 13/13/13 at 10:36 am

    There will be no weapons banned. There will be no change is how WE buy guns. REFUSE to accept any changes to mental stability laws what exists suffices. Lest anyone forget thy enemy is handing out PTSD discharges like candy….
    with goal to remove guns from Vets.

  29. dookhh on 14/14/13 at 10:37 am

    Yes they want a ban on assault rifles but not handguns, when handguns cause 90+ percent of the deaths in the US and rifles of all types is a few percent. That is like 90+percent of auto fatalities being caused by VW bugs and then trying to ban pickup trucks…? It is not about public safety, obviously.
    The whole thing is a ruse, all they want is to force gun registration on everyone so they have a list of who has the guns to come and get them all. I would rather see an assault and high capacity clip ban than any registration effort- dictators throughout history have not needed bans on specific shapes of weapons, but have instead been delighted to take comprehensive list to their enemies house to break down the door, take all the weapons, shoot or imprison resistors, and load the rest into cattle cars, never to be seen again.

  30. MT Geoff on 14/14/13 at 12:50 pm

    Re Voice A Reason @24: No, I don’t have the exact citation handy, but Ms. Feinstein was quoted as saying (my paraphrase) “If I had my say, I’d say, Hand them in, Mr. and Mrs. America.” Ms. Clinton has said something similar.
    The primary function of the 2nd Amendment is to make the people stronger than our government. It always has been. It’s also to provide for the militia, what Tolkien called the hobbitry-in-arms, to defend our communities at need. These two reasons are why the Supreme Court held that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to own weapons suitable for military service — which is to say, semi-automatic weapons with large magazines.
    The militia is not meant to be armed at the will or the expense of any government, but by the members’ own means.