It's a lie about most of it coming from small donors.
Slightly less than half. Not an insignificant amount of their overall budget. Don’t forget, they actively fundraise with letters to their present and past membership proclaiming Obama, Hillary, Chuck or Nancy, or whoever the liberal boogeyman of the hour is, is going to come and take away their guns. I’m sure they sell those email and mailing address lists to political campaigns they support as well. Don’t underestimate the collective power of small dollar, individual donations. It worked for both Obama and Bernie.
It's a lie about most of it coming from small donors.
Slightly less than half. Not an insignificant amount of their overall budget. Don’t forget, they actively fundraise with letters to their present and past membership proclaiming Obama, Hillary, Chuck or Nancy, or whoever the liberal boogeyman of the hour is, is going to come and take away their guns. I’m sure they sell those email and mailing address lists to political campaigns they support as well. Don’t underestimate the collective power of small dollar, individual donations. It worked for both Obama and Bernie.
I'm a little confused. The numbers you are quoting, they are self reported right? Because of their tax exempt status, I don't think they have to announce membership numbers, origin of the money or anything.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) and its wide-ranging influence is back in the spotlight after the massacre in Las Vegas, with Democrats renewing their push for gun control measures that the gun rights group has long opposed.
The group is among the most powerful lobbying forces in Washington, with clout that extends far beyond campaign contributions.
Here are some key figures to keep in mind.
$336.7 million
The amount of revenue that the NRA took in during 2015, the most recent year for which tax forms are available. Of that total, $165.7 million came from membership dues.
A one-year membership to the NRA costs $40. A lifetime membership costs $1,500.
The number of members the NRA has, according to the group. A Pew Research Center report in June pinned the number far higher, at 14 million, but the NRA said it’s typical for nonmembers to express support in polling.
“We have millions more Americans who support us and will tell pollsters they are members, even when they are not,” the NRA Institute for Legislative Action said in a blog post after the numbers dropped earlier this summer.
“For some, it could be that their membership has lapsed and for others, they might consider a family member’s membership part of their own,” the group said. “Even more to the point, the simple fact is that our support runs much deeper than among our members alone. Gun control advocates know this to be true, and that’s why the NRA remains the most powerful political force in America.”
More than $54 million
The amount the NRA and its affiliates spent on independent expenditures (IEs) in the 2016 election cycle, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records.
Independent expenditures go toward supporting and opposing candidates and causes, with the money spent on political television and digital ads, yard signs, NRA booths and mailers, among other things.
The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action helped primarily Republican candidates by spending $33 million on IEs, while its traditional PAC spent an additional $19.2 million on IEs, according to FEC records.
The PAC also gave $1 million to federal candidates and party committees in the 2016 election cycle. Its members contributed an additional $67,700, including $10,550 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). (The group itself donates almost exclusively to Republicans.)
$31.194 million
The amount the NRA’s outside groups spent helping to elect President Trump in 2016.
Trump was the biggest beneficiary of NRA cash in the 2016 election. Here’s the top 10:
Donald Trump — $31,194,646 Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) — $6,297,551 Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — $3,298,405 Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) — $3,105,294 Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) — $2,888,132 Former Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.) — $2,529,305 Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)— $2,319,755 Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)—$650,745 Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.)—$215,786 Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)—$167,411
These numbers, compiled by CRP and calculated by The Hill, include only the NRA’s outside spending. It encompasses the money spent to help get the candidates elected and defeat their opponents. For example, included in Trump’s total is the $19.8 million the NRA used on ads and other IEs to oppose Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton.
More than $66 million
The amount the NRA spent electing 249 members of Congress and 54 senators as well as defeating their opponents, according to a spreadsheet compiled by CRP.
The totals represent the amount spent over the lawmakers’ career, with the data going as far back as 1989. The total includes donations and IEs from the NRA’s PAC, its super PAC, and directly from NRA members.
Tax forms show that the group also gives to state-level causes, including $192,650 to the Republican Governors Association in 2015, the most recent data available publicly. The NRA also contributed $145,000 to the Republican State Leadership Committee and $103,860 to the Republican Attorneys General Association.
$3 million
The amount the NRA has spent, roughly, on lobbying each year since 2011.
But the NRA will vastly exceed that amount in 2017. During the first half of 2017, it spent $3.2 million.
It successfully lobbied for a resolution overturning an Obama-era Interior Department rule restricting sport hunting on national wildlife refuges in Alaska, including banning hunting from planes and killing predators like bears and wolves while near their dens or their cubs. President Trump approved it in April.
It's a lie about most of it coming from small donors.
Slightly less than half. Not an insignificant amount of their overall budget. Don’t forget, they actively fundraise with letters to their present and past membership proclaiming Obama, Hillary, Chuck or Nancy, or whoever the liberal boogeyman of the hour is, is going to come and take away their guns. I’m sure they sell those email and mailing address lists to political campaigns they support as well. Don’t underestimate the collective power of small dollar, individual donations. It worked for both Obama and Bernie.
I'm a little confused. The numbers you are quoting, they are self reported right? Because of their tax exempt status, I don't think they have to announce membership numbers, origin of the money or anything.
501c3s are required to file tax returns listing their donors and dollar amounts. Just like the Clinton Foundation. And the best part? Its a tax deduction charitable contribution.
I was okay with gun ownership a couple years ago. I never would want to own one myself but understood the reasons people would want to own one.
But listening to you gun nuts not want to give a damn inch has made me 100% change my opinion and I say take all the guns. If you can't compromise just a little bit to try to save some kids' lives than I'm sorry, you blew it. Let's get some legislation to take all of your guns you self-absorbed, uncaring, and scared scared scared scared scared scared scared scared people.
I can think maybe 1 person who doesn’t want more gun restrictions here. Every source I’ve ever seen puts it at 85-90% of gun owners want change. so where are you getting this idea from? Are you basing this statement from one poster on a single forum and applying it to all gun owners? And I’ve also seen said many times “no one wants to take your guns”. But your about the 4th or 5th person this week to say so.
If so many gun owners want more restrictions then why aren't there more restrictions?
Yes, if this 85% - 90% estimation is accurate, then you'd think that the NRA would have lost 85% - 90% of its millions of members. Instead, gun sales and NRA membership purchases increase after every mass shooting, and NRA members are not dropping out. There was 10% increase in NRA memberships after Newtown alone. And I figure that those members who refuse to acknowledge how complicit the NRA is when it comes to this crisis in America, then they are also complicit. Anyone who claims to support increasing gun restrictions and continues to be an NRA member actually doesn't support increasing gun restrictions at all.
Very few gun owners are NRA members, something around 5% I believe. So if every single NRA member was against more regulations, that does very little compared to the majority who do.
Approximately 2.3 million based on your belief of 5%. Maybe if they’d stop paying their NRA dues and contacted their elected representatives and advocated for meaningful gun control reform, things would change? But hey, it’s only 5%.
I don't know where this 5% number comes from. True to its sinister ways, the NRA refuses to reveal how many members it has, but even 5 years ago it claimed to have 5 million members. Now that might have been true, and it might not have been true, but I think it's easy to assume that their membership has only increased since 2013. I also think it's just as likely that they gave a low number as it is that they gave a high number (and maybe they gave a real number). Now, why does the NRA keep how many members it has secret? And how is it even legal for them to do so? Wouldn't their tax records reveal their income from membership dues??
I didn’t know they were secret about it. I’ve seen the 5 million reported a few times, never had a reason to doubt it was accurate. Maybe it is. My point still was the NRA and their unwillingness for change doesn’t represent the majority of gun owners, whether it’s 5, 10 or 15%.
Since the majority of gun owners are silent and don't push for any kind of gun reform then the NRA sure as shit represents the majority of gun owners. They just sit back and let the NRA do all the dirty work.
Absolutely. And let's remember ALL gun owners actually support the NRA one way or another, whether they go out of their way to do it or not, and whether they want to or not. Really, every gun sale in America and every comment against more gun regulation is another point for the NRA. Just because our actions aren't direct ones, it doesn't mean they don't have in impact elsewhere.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I was okay with gun ownership a couple years ago. I never would want to own one myself but understood the reasons people would want to own one.
But listening to you gun nuts not want to give a damn inch has made me 100% change my opinion and I say take all the guns. If you can't compromise just a little bit to try to save some kids' lives than I'm sorry, you blew it. Let's get some legislation to take all of your guns you self-absorbed, uncaring, and scared scared scared scared scared scared scared scared people.
I can think maybe 1 person who doesn’t want more gun restrictions here. Every source I’ve ever seen puts it at 85-90% of gun owners want change. so where are you getting this idea from? Are you basing this statement from one poster on a single forum and applying it to all gun owners? And I’ve also seen said many times “no one wants to take your guns”. But your about the 4th or 5th person this week to say so.
If so many gun owners want more restrictions then why aren't there more restrictions?
Yes, if this 85% - 90% estimation is accurate, then you'd think that the NRA would have lost 85% - 90% of its millions of members. Instead, gun sales and NRA membership purchases increase after every mass shooting, and NRA members are not dropping out. There was 10% increase in NRA memberships after Newtown alone. And I figure that those members who refuse to acknowledge how complicit the NRA is when it comes to this crisis in America, then they are also complicit. Anyone who claims to support increasing gun restrictions and continues to be an NRA member actually doesn't support increasing gun restrictions at all.
Very few gun owners are NRA members, something around 5% I believe. So if every single NRA member was against more regulations, that does very little compared to the majority who do.
Approximately 2.3 million based on your belief of 5%. Maybe if they’d stop paying their NRA dues and contacted their elected representatives and advocated for meaningful gun control reform, things would change? But hey, it’s only 5%.
I don't know where this 5% number comes from. True to its sinister ways, the NRA refuses to reveal how many members it has, but even 5 years ago it claimed to have 5 million members. Now that might have been true, and it might not have been true, but I think it's easy to assume that their membership has only increased since 2013. I also think it's just as likely that they gave a low number as it is that they gave a high number (and maybe they gave a real number). Now, why does the NRA keep how many members it has secret? And how is it even legal for them to do so? Wouldn't their tax records reveal their income from membership dues??
I didn’t know they were secret about it. I’ve seen the 5 million reported a few times, never had a reason to doubt it was accurate. Maybe it is. My point still was the NRA and their unwillingness for change doesn’t represent the majority of gun owners, whether it’s 5, 10 or 15%.
Since the majority of gun owners are silent and don't push for any kind of gun reform then the NRA sure as shit represents the majority of gun owners. They just sit back and let the NRA do all the dirty work.
Absolutely. And let's remember ALL gun owners actually support the NRA one way or another, whether they go out of their way to do it or not, and whether they want to or not. Really, every gun sale in America and every comment against more gun regulation is another point for the NRA. Just because our actions aren't direct ones, it doesn't mean they don't have in impact elsewhere.
I think that's too broad of a brush. I am a gun owner but completely despise the NRA and any absolutist on the issue.
I was okay with gun ownership a couple years ago. I never would want to own one myself but understood the reasons people would want to own one.
But listening to you gun nuts not want to give a damn inch has made me 100% change my opinion and I say take all the guns. If you can't compromise just a little bit to try to save some kids' lives than I'm sorry, you blew it. Let's get some legislation to take all of your guns you self-absorbed, uncaring, and scared scared scared scared scared scared scared scared people.
I can think maybe 1 person who doesn’t want more gun restrictions here. Every source I’ve ever seen puts it at 85-90% of gun owners want change. so where are you getting this idea from? Are you basing this statement from one poster on a single forum and applying it to all gun owners? And I’ve also seen said many times “no one wants to take your guns”. But your about the 4th or 5th person this week to say so.
If so many gun owners want more restrictions then why aren't there more restrictions?
Yes, if this 85% - 90% estimation is accurate, then you'd think that the NRA would have lost 85% - 90% of its millions of members. Instead, gun sales and NRA membership purchases increase after every mass shooting, and NRA members are not dropping out. There was 10% increase in NRA memberships after Newtown alone. And I figure that those members who refuse to acknowledge how complicit the NRA is when it comes to this crisis in America, then they are also complicit. Anyone who claims to support increasing gun restrictions and continues to be an NRA member actually doesn't support increasing gun restrictions at all.
Very few gun owners are NRA members, something around 5% I believe. So if every single NRA member was against more regulations, that does very little compared to the majority who do.
Approximately 2.3 million based on your belief of 5%. Maybe if they’d stop paying their NRA dues and contacted their elected representatives and advocated for meaningful gun control reform, things would change? But hey, it’s only 5%.
I don't know where this 5% number comes from. True to its sinister ways, the NRA refuses to reveal how many members it has, but even 5 years ago it claimed to have 5 million members. Now that might have been true, and it might not have been true, but I think it's easy to assume that their membership has only increased since 2013. I also think it's just as likely that they gave a low number as it is that they gave a high number (and maybe they gave a real number). Now, why does the NRA keep how many members it has secret? And how is it even legal for them to do so? Wouldn't their tax records reveal their income from membership dues??
I didn’t know they were secret about it. I’ve seen the 5 million reported a few times, never had a reason to doubt it was accurate. Maybe it is. My point still was the NRA and their unwillingness for change doesn’t represent the majority of gun owners, whether it’s 5, 10 or 15%.
Since the majority of gun owners are silent and don't push for any kind of gun reform then the NRA sure as shit represents the majority of gun owners. They just sit back and let the NRA do all the dirty work.
Absolutely. And let's remember ALL gun owners actually support the NRA one way or another, whether they go out of their way to do it or not, and whether they want to or not. Really, every gun sale in America and every comment against more gun regulation is another point for the NRA. Just because our actions aren't direct ones, it doesn't mean they don't have in impact elsewhere.
I think that's too broad of a brush. I am a gun owner but completely despise the NRA and any absolutist on the issue.
Yes, but unfortunately, despite how you feel about the NRA, simply buying guns in America bolsters the NRA's position. That's what I'm saying. Hate them all you want, but all gun owners further the NRA's cause one way or another, even if the idea makes you sick to your stomach. It's kinda like if I were a peace-loving person who is against organized crime/drug gangs, but picked up a gram of coke at a bar just because I like to party. It doesn't mean I like the criminals any more than I did, but I still just contributed to what they do by buying my party powder. Hey, same goes for buying bootlegged vinyl a lot of the time. Plenty of that comes out of larger organized crime rings. Yet plenty of people don't blink when they spend their money on something attached to them.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I was okay with gun ownership a couple years ago. I never would want to own one myself but understood the reasons people would want to own one.
But listening to you gun nuts not want to give a damn inch has made me 100% change my opinion and I say take all the guns. If you can't compromise just a little bit to try to save some kids' lives than I'm sorry, you blew it. Let's get some legislation to take all of your guns you self-absorbed, uncaring, and scared scared scared scared scared scared scared scared people.
I can think maybe 1 person who doesn’t want more gun restrictions here. Every source I’ve ever seen puts it at 85-90% of gun owners want change. so where are you getting this idea from? Are you basing this statement from one poster on a single forum and applying it to all gun owners? And I’ve also seen said many times “no one wants to take your guns”. But your about the 4th or 5th person this week to say so.
If so many gun owners want more restrictions then why aren't there more restrictions?
Yes, if this 85% - 90% estimation is accurate, then you'd think that the NRA would have lost 85% - 90% of its millions of members. Instead, gun sales and NRA membership purchases increase after every mass shooting, and NRA members are not dropping out. There was 10% increase in NRA memberships after Newtown alone. And I figure that those members who refuse to acknowledge how complicit the NRA is when it comes to this crisis in America, then they are also complicit. Anyone who claims to support increasing gun restrictions and continues to be an NRA member actually doesn't support increasing gun restrictions at all.
Very few gun owners are NRA members, something around 5% I believe. So if every single NRA member was against more regulations, that does very little compared to the majority who do.
Approximately 2.3 million based on your belief of 5%. Maybe if they’d stop paying their NRA dues and contacted their elected representatives and advocated for meaningful gun control reform, things would change? But hey, it’s only 5%.
I don't know where this 5% number comes from. True to its sinister ways, the NRA refuses to reveal how many members it has, but even 5 years ago it claimed to have 5 million members. Now that might have been true, and it might not have been true, but I think it's easy to assume that their membership has only increased since 2013. I also think it's just as likely that they gave a low number as it is that they gave a high number (and maybe they gave a real number). Now, why does the NRA keep how many members it has secret? And how is it even legal for them to do so? Wouldn't their tax records reveal their income from membership dues??
I didn’t know they were secret about it. I’ve seen the 5 million reported a few times, never had a reason to doubt it was accurate. Maybe it is. My point still was the NRA and their unwillingness for change doesn’t represent the majority of gun owners, whether it’s 5, 10 or 15%.
Since the majority of gun owners are silent and don't push for any kind of gun reform then the NRA sure as shit represents the majority of gun owners. They just sit back and let the NRA do all the dirty work.
Absolutely. And let's remember ALL gun owners actually support the NRA one way or another, whether they go out of their way to do it or not, and whether they want to or not. Really, every gun sale in America and every comment against more gun regulation is another point for the NRA. Just because our actions aren't direct ones, it doesn't mean they don't have in impact elsewhere.
I think that's too broad of a brush. I am a gun owner but completely despise the NRA and any absolutist on the issue.
Yes, but unfortunately, despite how you feel about the NRA, simply buying guns in America bolsters the NRA's position. That's what I'm saying. Hate them all you want, but all gun owners further the NRA's cause one way or another, even if the idea makes you sick to your stomach. It's kinda like if I were a peace-loving person who is against organized crime/drug gangs, but picked up a gram of coke at a bar just because I like to party. It doesn't mean I like the criminals any more than I did, but I still just contributed to what they do by buying my party powder. Hey, same goes for buying bootlegged vinyl a lot of the time. Plenty of that comes out of larger organized crime rings. Yet plenty of people don't blink when they spend their money on something attached to them.
I understand the analogy, and it's interesting but I don't agree. The act of purchasing a weapon yet voting in the opposite direction (along with advocating) doesn't further the NRA's agenda directly. Perhaps it add $3 to Colt's bottom line, of which a nickel goes to lobbying.
But that's the same argument as saying that if I'm on a statin, made by Merck, and they lobby against opioid controls in this country, that I'm supporting the addiction epidemic by taking my statin every night. I think that's a little too far.
I was okay with gun ownership a couple years ago. I never would want to own one myself but understood the reasons people would want to own one.
But listening to you gun nuts not want to give a damn inch has made me 100% change my opinion and I say take all the guns. If you can't compromise just a little bit to try to save some kids' lives than I'm sorry, you blew it. Let's get some legislation to take all of your guns you self-absorbed, uncaring, and scared scared scared scared scared scared scared scared people.
I can think maybe 1 person who doesn’t want more gun restrictions here. Every source I’ve ever seen puts it at 85-90% of gun owners want change. so where are you getting this idea from? Are you basing this statement from one poster on a single forum and applying it to all gun owners? And I’ve also seen said many times “no one wants to take your guns”. But your about the 4th or 5th person this week to say so.
If so many gun owners want more restrictions then why aren't there more restrictions?
Yes, if this 85% - 90% estimation is accurate, then you'd think that the NRA would have lost 85% - 90% of its millions of members. Instead, gun sales and NRA membership purchases increase after every mass shooting, and NRA members are not dropping out. There was 10% increase in NRA memberships after Newtown alone. And I figure that those members who refuse to acknowledge how complicit the NRA is when it comes to this crisis in America, then they are also complicit. Anyone who claims to support increasing gun restrictions and continues to be an NRA member actually doesn't support increasing gun restrictions at all.
Very few gun owners are NRA members, something around 5% I believe. So if every single NRA member was against more regulations, that does very little compared to the majority who do.
Approximately 2.3 million based on your belief of 5%. Maybe if they’d stop paying their NRA dues and contacted their elected representatives and advocated for meaningful gun control reform, things would change? But hey, it’s only 5%.
I don't know where this 5% number comes from. True to its sinister ways, the NRA refuses to reveal how many members it has, but even 5 years ago it claimed to have 5 million members. Now that might have been true, and it might not have been true, but I think it's easy to assume that their membership has only increased since 2013. I also think it's just as likely that they gave a low number as it is that they gave a high number (and maybe they gave a real number). Now, why does the NRA keep how many members it has secret? And how is it even legal for them to do so? Wouldn't their tax records reveal their income from membership dues??
I didn’t know they were secret about it. I’ve seen the 5 million reported a few times, never had a reason to doubt it was accurate. Maybe it is. My point still was the NRA and their unwillingness for change doesn’t represent the majority of gun owners, whether it’s 5, 10 or 15%.
Since the majority of gun owners are silent and don't push for any kind of gun reform then the NRA sure as shit represents the majority of gun owners. They just sit back and let the NRA do all the dirty work.
Absolutely. And let's remember ALL gun owners actually support the NRA one way or another, whether they go out of their way to do it or not, and whether they want to or not. Really, every gun sale in America and every comment against more gun regulation is another point for the NRA. Just because our actions aren't direct ones, it doesn't mean they don't have in impact elsewhere.
I think that's too broad of a brush. I am a gun owner but completely despise the NRA and any absolutist on the issue.
Yes, but unfortunately, despite how you feel about the NRA, simply buying guns in America bolsters the NRA's position. That's what I'm saying. Hate them all you want, but all gun owners further the NRA's cause one way or another, even if the idea makes you sick to your stomach. It's kinda like if I were a peace-loving person who is against organized crime/drug gangs, but picked up a gram of coke at a bar just because I like to party. It doesn't mean I like the criminals any more than I did, but I still just contributed to what they do by buying my party powder. Hey, same goes for buying bootlegged vinyl a lot of the time. Plenty of that comes out of larger organized crime rings. Yet plenty of people don't blink when they spend their money on something attached to them.
I understand the analogy, and it's interesting but I don't agree. The act of purchasing a weapon yet voting in the opposite direction (along with advocating) doesn't further the NRA's agenda directly. Perhaps it add $3 to Colt's bottom line, of which a nickel goes to lobbying.
But that's the same argument as saying that if I'm on a statin, made by Merck, and they lobby against opioid controls in this country, that I'm supporting the addiction epidemic by taking my statin every night. I think that's a little too far.
Well, that is a bad example because the statin is something you need to maintain your health and possibly your life, therefore removing a lot of the power of choice. That power of choice is at 100% when it comes to buying drugs and guns though. And I think simply buying a gun and adding to the statistic of guns purchased and owned furthers the NRA's agenda... and yes, as you mention, the financial contribution that ends up as lobbying loot too, not to mention whatever comes from the distributor and the seller, when applicable. And don't forget about the ammo, which I gather rakes in way more than gun sales do. I don't think it being a small amount is really relevant. I mean, an actual NRA membership only costs $40/year.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
I never rarely shoot any weapons. I hate cleaning them after. And to be completely fair, I've never purchased one. All of mine were inherited from my father at his death. So I'm a gun owner, but not technically a purchaser. But you did bucket me with the rest of them.
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
But that is the case.... Yes, every single purchase you make supports the agenda of those you're purchasing from. And where you're purchasing it from, too. That is 100% true. That doesn't mean you support the agenda intellectually, but you're supporting it financially. There's no way around that fact. That's also what boycotts are all about. And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
But that is the case.... Yes, every single purchase you make supports the agenda of those you're purchasing from. And where you're purchasing it from, too. That is 100% true. That doesn't mean you support the agenda intellectually, but you're supporting it financially. There's no way around that fact. That's also what boycotts are all about. And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
well supporting it financially is a little different than how you were presenting it earlier. I think it's important to make that distinction. But also, they aren't buying from the NRA.
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
But that is the case.... Yes, every single purchase you make supports the agenda of those you're purchasing from. And where you're purchasing it from, too. That is 100% true. That doesn't mean you support the agenda intellectually, but you're supporting it financially. There's no way around that fact. That's also what boycotts are all about. And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
well supporting it financially is a little different than how you were presenting it earlier. I think it's important to make that distinction. But also, they aren't buying from the NRA.
I think I've been pretty clear... no? It supports the NRA both financially and in terms of statistics that they use to bolster their position. And no, I've been clear about how the purchase leads to supporting the NRA even though the NRA isn't the retailer or producer of the product. Obviously the scenario with the NRA doesn't fit exactly with the purchase of any good. Guns are in a league of their own. I'm making philosophical comparisons, not exact literal ones.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
But that is the case.... Yes, every single purchase you make supports the agenda of those you're purchasing from. And where you're purchasing it from, too. That is 100% true. That doesn't mean you support the agenda intellectually, but you're supporting it financially. There's no way around that fact. That's also what boycotts are all about. And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
well supporting it financially is a little different than how you were presenting it earlier. I think it's important to make that distinction. But also, they aren't buying from the NRA.
I think I've been pretty clear... no? It supports the NRA both financially and in terms of statistics that they use to bolster their position. And no, I've been clear about how the purchase leads to supporting the NRA even though the NRA isn't the retailer or producer of the product. Obviously the scenario with the NRA doesn't fit exactly with the purchase of any good. Guns are in a league of their own. I'm making philosophical comparisons, not exact literal ones.
to my knowledge, you only said "supporter" without specifying. either way, I find this kind of a pointless exercise anyway, because honestly, that means since I pay to watch UFC, and Dana White is/was part owner and is a Trump supporter, and if he has made campaign contributions, that makes me a de facto Trump supporter.
I never rarely shoot any weapons. I hate cleaning them after. And to be completely fair, I've never purchased one. All of mine were inherited from my father at his death. So I'm a gun owner, but not technically a purchaser. But you did bucket me with the rest of them.
That makes you a "responsible" gun owner until you're not.
Welcome to the criminals in waiting club.
Gotta love AMT.
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
I never rarely shoot any weapons. I hate cleaning them after. And to be completely fair, I've never purchased one. All of mine were inherited from my father at his death. So I'm a gun owner, but not technically a purchaser. But you did bucket me with the rest of them.
That makes you a "responsible" gun owner until you're not.
Welcome to the criminals in waiting club.
Gotta love AMT.
You don't have to wait long, its in todays headlines. But you know, don't let facts sway you.
On average, there are 276 gun homicides a week in America. There are 439 gun suicides. All told, there are, on average, nearly 1,200 incidents involving gun violence, every week, in America.
This landscape of gun violence — suicides, homicides, mass shootings, accidents — is not evenly distributed. Instead, it plays out over geographic and political dividing lines — and these may help explain why individual Americans see the issue so differently.
To better understand how the geography of gun violence may affect how Americans think about the issue, The Washington Post analyzed data on gun deaths from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for every county from 2007 and 2016 and the nonpartisan Gun Violence Archive from 2016 to present. (Our full methodology is explained at the bottom of this post.)
A distinct pattern emerged: In Democratic regions of the country, which tend to be cities, people are more likely to be murdered with a gun than they are to shoot themselves to death. In regions of the country won by Republican, which tend to be rural areas and small towns, the opposite is true — people are more likely to shoot themselves to death than they are to be murdered with a gun.
I think that's taking it too far. by that end, every single purchase I make supports the agenda of those I'm purchasing from, which simply is not the case. I'm supporting their ability to make their own choices about which agenda(s) they support, not WHICH choice.
But that is the case.... Yes, every single purchase you make supports the agenda of those you're purchasing from. And where you're purchasing it from, too. That is 100% true. That doesn't mean you support the agenda intellectually, but you're supporting it financially. There's no way around that fact. That's also what boycotts are all about. And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
well supporting it financially is a little different than how you were presenting it earlier. I think it's important to make that distinction. But also, they aren't buying from the NRA.
I think I've been pretty clear... no? It supports the NRA both financially and in terms of statistics that they use to bolster their position. And no, I've been clear about how the purchase leads to supporting the NRA even though the NRA isn't the retailer or producer of the product. Obviously the scenario with the NRA doesn't fit exactly with the purchase of any good. Guns are in a league of their own. I'm making philosophical comparisons, not exact literal ones.
to my knowledge, you only said "supporter" without specifying. either way, I find this kind of a pointless exercise anyway, because honestly, that means since I pay to watch UFC, and Dana White is/was part owner and is a Trump supporter, and if he has made campaign contributions, that makes me a de facto Trump supporter.
that is a stretch at best.
Well, it makes you a supporter of a Trump supporters, so if you take the long view, yes, you're also supporting Trump (but no, you're not a Trump supporter - this happens even if you despise Trump obviously) ... We're all culpable in these ways. I know we all don't want to be... but at the end of the day we are. And unless someone's gone off the grid, nobody is innocent - we're all a part of the shitty system one way or another... that is pretty much the entire reason it is next to impossible to change things for the better. Me for example... I shop at Walmart for some stuff, even though I despise Walmart for several reasons - I feel like I'm contributing to their hard line against unions, while I'm a big supporter of unions. Yes, I feel like an asshole when I spend my money there, yet my excuse is that I simply can't afford NOT to shop there for certain products. And that is true. I don't consider my being poor a good excuse though. I'm still guilty of supporting something I'm against. I'm a part of the problem. Anyone who claims not to be a part of "the problem" (any and all) is in denial IMO. But at least people can be more than that. We can be a part of the problem, and be solving problems at the same time. That's something I guess.
But anyway, I guess what I'm still saying is, essentially, that all gun owners are a part of the gun problem one way or the other. And if you didn't buy the gun, then you're still a part of the gun problem by contributing America's gun culture. Sorry, I don't mean it to shit on anyone... I'm just saying that's how it is.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I never rarely shoot any weapons. I hate cleaning them after. And to be completely fair, I've never purchased one. All of mine were inherited from my father at his death. So I'm a gun owner, but not technically a purchaser. But you did bucket me with the rest of them.
That makes you a "responsible" gun owner until you're not.
Welcome to the criminals in waiting club.
Gotta love AMT.
Meh. That doesn't bother me as a statement. I would happily turn them in if it helped with this issue. Mine are locked tight in a cabinet and only I know where the key is. It's stashed next to my weed. My 16 year old son will NEVER find that!
The Texas governor is making some proposals and allocating funds in response to school shootings to increase safety for students. He also recognizes that this is "not an ending place". A lot of the things he mentioned seemed like an obvious step and I was surprised to see they weren't already doing it. The problem with some of these is that they simply state "encourage" instead of require so that doesn't necessarily mean they will happen unfortunately.
Highlights:
Increasing Law Enforcement Presence in Schools
A core tenet of the proposal is the need to add more police officers and marshals to school campuses in the state.
“When an active shooter situation arises, the difference between life and death can be a matter of seconds,” Abbott said. “Trained security personnel can make all the difference.”
Current state law allows specially trained school staff members, deemed marshals, to bring guns onto campus if they are stored and locked away.
The governor recommended many changes relating to officers in schools.
1. School should collaborate with local law enforcement to heighten police presence on school campuses. This could be done by adding campuses to officers’ regular patrol routes and allowing officers to go on break or file reports on campuses. The plan calls for the state to consider offering $10,000 grants to schools that draw down federal funds to make accommodations for law enforcement officers.
2. Prioritize hiring retired peace officers and military veterans for school security. In addition, the state should create a modified school marshal training program for veterans.
3. Increase the number of school marshals by funding training this summer. Funds from the Governor’s Criminal Justice Division will pay for all training costs from June to August of this year.
4. Increase the number of school marshals that can be appointed per school. Change the law to allow one marshal for every 100 students. The current law allows only one marshal for every 200 students. The plan estimates this translates to about one marshal for every four to five classrooms.
5. Remove firearm storage requirements for school marshals who are in direct contact with students. School marshals are currently required to store their firearms in a safe while on campus, but the plan recommends repealing that requirement to make guns easier to access in the event of a crisis.
6. Revamp marshal training to focus more on firearms training. The current marshal training course includes 80 hours of course training that volunteers must complete during their vacation time, which has limited use of the program. The governor argues the training course “should be streamlined to focus primarily on material that will improve the individuals the ability to respond to an active shooter scenario.”
7. Require annual refresher courses to maintain school marshal skills.
School Safety and Security Measures
The governor had discussions with architects, law enforcement superintendents, teachers and students in the lead up to his plan and says he learned that no one-size-fits-all program exists for school security.
School hardening can take several different forms, none of which are mutually exclusive. Typical infrastructure hardening is one option.
Structural improvements could include:
Building front offices closer to entrances and creating vestibules where doors must be remotely unlocked before visitors can enter the school
Erecting barriers around campuses and stadiums that prevent vehicles from being driven into crowds or students
Installing metal detectors at school entrances
Installing security systems that monitor and record entrances, exits and hallways
Providing telephones or radios in every classroom so that teachers can quickly report threats
Installing active shooter alarm systems
Controlling access to campus facilities
The plan also features several school security policy recommendations for lawmakers to consider.
1. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) should review school districts’ and charter schools’ safety and security audits. TEA should create a formal review process to review districts’ school safety audits with input from the Texas School Safety Center (TSSC). This review should be done once every three years for a school district.
2. Specifically require certain community members to serve on an ISD or charter school’s safety and security committee. The individual members of a committee should include:
One or more representatives from the county or city emergency management coordinator’s office
One or more representatives from the local police department or sheriff’s department
One or more representatives from the school district’s police department, where applicable
One or more representatives from the municipality with territory included within the boundaries of the district
The president of the school district or charter school’s board of trustees, board of managers, or board of directors
A member of the school district or charter school’s board of trustees, board of managers, or board of directors other than the president
If a school district partners with a charter school to provide instruction to students, a member of the charter school’s board of directors or her designee
Two parents or guardians of students in the school district
The district’s superintendent
One or more designees of the district’s superintendent, one of whom must be a classroom teacher in the school district or charter school
3. The School Safety and Security Committee should be required to discuss with law enforcement the expansion of patrol zones to include the school district. By including school campuses in patrol zones the governor believes response times will decrease significantly.
4. The School Safety and Security Committees should periodically provide updates to the school board, including emergency plan updates twice a year.
5. Schools should be required to notify parents if a significant threat to students’ safety occurs.
The governor’s plan also includes recommendations to improve mental health support structures.
1. Expand access to Texas Tech Health Sciences Center’s Telemedicine Wellness Intervention Triage and Referral (TWITR) Project. The TWITR project created a model for identifying junior high through high school students at risk for committing school violence and intervening with those students before incidents occur. Students are identified by trained school staff and screened for risk-based behaviors by Licensed Professional Counselors in schools then provided psychiatric services by Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (TTUHSC) over a telemedicine link. Two telemedicine psychiatry sessions are provided through the project.
2. Increase Mental Health First Aid training during the summer of 2018. Mental Health First Aid is an eight-hour, evidence-based program designed to develop the skills to identify, understand, and respond to signs of mental illness.
3. Prioritize the importance of the mental and behavioral health needs of students by freeing up counselors to focus on those needs, encourage school districts to add more counselors at the camp level and appropriate funds to fill gaps.
4. To better respond to the needs of students and school faculty following a crisis, expand the Texas Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) Network to improve outcomes. The CISM Network assists emergency service providers and first responders who have experienced a “critical incident” in the line of duty.
5. The Texas School Safety Center will partner with SIGMA Threat Management to deliver training on Behavioral Threat Assessment to school personnel.
1. Increase the use and awareness of the DPS “iWatch Texas” reporting system to encourage parents, students and teachers to easily report potential harm or criminal activity directed at schools, students and staff members. Texas DPS’ “iWatch Texas” app will launch on June 7 to make tip reporting easier and anonymous.
2. Increase the number of fusion centers in Texas to improve law enforcement’s ability to identify, process and resolve potential threats that appear on social media.
Improving Gun Safety
One of the more anticipated and controversial aspects of the plan (particularly for Governor Abbott, who is in an election year) was the gun safety measures. The plan discussed gun safety measures extensively, including giving the following recommendations:
1. Create a statewide case management system to give magistrates immediate access to critical information and to speed the timely reporting of court records for federal background checks.
2. Encourage Texas lawmakers to issue an interim charge to consider the merits of adopting a red flag law allowing law enforcement, a family member, school employee or a district attorney to file a petition seeking the removal of firearms from a potentially dangerous person only after legal due process is provided.
3. Adjudications affecting the right to legally purchase and possess firearms should be reported within 48 hours. This 48-hour requirement should also extend to protective orders and family violence convictions. Courts should ensure that all disqualifying felony convictions are entered as soon as possible.
4. Firearm storage laws should be changed so that parents of children up to 17 are obligated to securely store their firearms.
5. Change the threshold for prosecution of people inadequately storing their guns so that they are criminally liable whether the weapons are loaded or not.
6. When a child’s access to inadequately stored guns results in death or bodily injury, increase the penalty for the gun owner to a third-degree felony.
7. Promote voluntary use of gun locks
8. Require gun owners to report when their firearms are lost or stolen to law enforcement within ten days.
Providing Emergency and Active Shooter Training
1. Better prepare campus security to respond to active shooters. All school security officers in the state should receive active shooter response training. Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training (ALERRT) was mentioned specifically as a high quality option.
2. The Texas School Safety Center will deliver a workshop-based course that allows for hands-on application of high quality planning practices. First responders must collaborate when school officials are developing emergency operations plans. This course will be provided free of charge.
3. The Texas School Safety Center will partner with the I Love U Guys Foundation to provide training in the Standard Response Protocol and the Standard Reunification Method for school personnel. These trainings will be delivered using a train-the-trainer model, which acts as a force multiplier in that trainers are able to offer this material in their regional areas. These will be delivered in partnership with the I Love U Guys Foundation at no cost to schools.
So on the level of being training to be responsible gun owners where would an FBI agent fall v those armed teachers some people want to see In schools?
So on the level of being training to be responsible gun owners where would an FBI agent fall v those armed teachers some people want to see In schools?
WASHINGTON — As they inspect the nation’s gun stores, federal investigators regularly find violations of the law, ranging from minor record-keeping errors to illegal sales of firearms. In the most serious cases, like a sale of a gun to a prohibited buyer, inspectors often recommend that gun dealers lose their licenses.
But that rarely happens. Senior officials at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regularly overrule their own inspectors, allowing gun dealers who fail inspections to keep their licenses even after they were previously warned to follow the rules, according to interviews with more than half a dozen current and former law enforcement officials and a review of more than 100 inspection reports.
One store was cited for failing to conduct background checks before selling a gun. Another store owner told investigators he actively tried to circumvent gun laws. One threatened an A.T.F. officer, and another sold a gun to a customer who identified as a felon. All were previously cited by the A.T.F. In each instance, supervisors downgraded recommendations that the stores’ licenses be revoked and instead let them stay open. Image
Of about 11,000 inspections of licensed firearm dealers in the year starting in October 2016, more than half were cited for violations. Less than 1 percent of all inspections resulted in the loss of a license.
The episodes shed light on the A.T.F.’s delicate role in policing the gun industry, which has historically resisted regulation and holds powerful political sway over the A.T.F.’s appropriators in Congress. Lawmakers set a stringent requirement decades ago for gun inspectors: They must prove that store owners not only violated the law but intended to do so. The bureau has sidestepped the potential legal appeals and political fallout of revoking licenses by trying to work with gun dealers rather than close their stores.
The approach is widely seen by the A.T.F. as the best option to regulate the gun industry without fostering an adversarial relationship, but some in the bureau consider it a compromise that is at best nuanced and at worst unsafe.
“We’re not selling ice cream here,” said Howard Wolfe, who retired from the A.T.F. in 2006 after 36 years on its industry operations side, including as an inspector and supervisor. “You’re selling something here that if you screw up, somebody can be killed.”
The A.T.F. declined repeated requests for comment.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The National Rifle Association (NRA) and its wide-ranging influence is back in the spotlight after the massacre in Las Vegas, with Democrats renewing their push for gun control measures that the gun rights group has long opposed.
The group is among the most powerful lobbying forces in Washington, with clout that extends far beyond campaign contributions.
Here are some key figures to keep in mind.
$336.7 million
The amount of revenue that the NRA took in during 2015, the most recent year for which tax forms are available. Of that total, $165.7 million came from membership dues.
A one-year membership to the NRA costs $40. A lifetime membership costs $1,500.
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/business-a-lobbying/354317-the-nras-power-by-the-numbers
5 million
The number of members the NRA has, according to the group. A Pew Research Center report in June pinned the number far higher, at 14 million, but the NRA said it’s typical for nonmembers to express support in polling.
“We have millions more Americans who support us and will tell pollsters they are members, even when they are not,” the NRA Institute for Legislative Action said in a blog post after the numbers dropped earlier this summer.
“For some, it could be that their membership has lapsed and for others, they might consider a family member’s membership part of their own,” the group said. “Even more to the point, the simple fact is that our support runs much deeper than among our members alone. Gun control advocates know this to be true, and that’s why the NRA remains the most powerful political force in America.”
More than $54 million
The amount the NRA and its affiliates spent on independent expenditures (IEs) in the 2016 election cycle, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records.
Independent expenditures go toward supporting and opposing candidates and causes, with the money spent on political television and digital ads, yard signs, NRA booths and mailers, among other things.
The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action helped primarily Republican candidates by spending $33 million on IEs, while its traditional PAC spent an additional $19.2 million on IEs, according to FEC records.
The PAC also gave $1 million to federal candidates and party committees in the 2016 election cycle. Its members contributed an additional $67,700, including $10,550 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). (The group itself donates almost exclusively to Republicans.)
$31.194 million
The amount the NRA’s outside groups spent helping to elect President Trump in 2016.
Trump was the biggest beneficiary of NRA cash in the 2016 election. Here’s the top 10:
Donald Trump — $31,194,646
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) — $6,297,551
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — $3,298,405
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) — $3,105,294
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) — $2,888,132
Former Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.) — $2,529,305
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)— $2,319,755
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)—$650,745
Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.)—$215,786
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)—$167,411
These numbers, compiled by CRP and calculated by The Hill, include only the NRA’s outside spending. It encompasses the money spent to help get the candidates elected and defeat their opponents. For example, included in Trump’s total is the $19.8 million the NRA used on ads and other IEs to oppose Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton.
More than $66 million
The amount the NRA spent electing 249 members of Congress and 54 senators as well as defeating their opponents, according to a spreadsheet compiled by CRP.
The totals represent the amount spent over the lawmakers’ career, with the data going as far back as 1989. The total includes donations and IEs from the NRA’s PAC, its super PAC, and directly from NRA members.
Tax forms show that the group also gives to state-level causes, including $192,650 to the Republican Governors Association in 2015, the most recent data available publicly. The NRA also contributed $145,000 to the Republican State Leadership Committee and $103,860 to the Republican Attorneys General Association.
$3 million
The amount the NRA has spent, roughly, on lobbying each year since 2011.
But the NRA will vastly exceed that amount in 2017. During the first half of 2017, it spent $3.2 million.
It successfully lobbied for a resolution overturning an Obama-era Interior Department rule restricting sport hunting on national wildlife refuges in Alaska, including banning hunting from planes and killing predators like bears and wolves while near their dens or their cubs. President Trump approved it in April.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But that's the same argument as saying that if I'm on a statin, made by Merck, and they lobby against opioid controls in this country, that I'm supporting the addiction epidemic by taking my statin every night. I think that's a little too far.
And I think simply buying a gun and adding to the statistic of guns purchased and owned furthers the NRA's agenda... and yes, as you mention, the financial contribution that ends up as lobbying loot too, not to mention whatever comes from the distributor and the seller, when applicable. And don't forget about the ammo, which I gather rakes in way more than gun sales do. I don't think it being a small amount is really relevant. I mean, an actual NRA membership only costs $40/year.
www.headstonesband.com
And as far as it goes for gun purchases and the NRA, well, there is only one choice being made by the NRA, isn't there, so that takes away any mystery in that particular case.
www.headstonesband.com
Obviously the scenario with the NRA doesn't fit exactly with the purchase of any good. Guns are in a league of their own. I'm making philosophical comparisons, not exact literal ones.
that is a stretch at best.
www.headstonesband.com
Welcome to the criminals in waiting club.
Gotta love AMT.
On average, there are 276 gun homicides a week in America. There are 439 gun suicides. All told, there are, on average, nearly 1,200 incidents involving gun violence, every week, in America.
This landscape of gun violence — suicides, homicides, mass shootings, accidents — is not evenly distributed. Instead, it plays out over geographic and political dividing lines — and these may help explain why individual Americans see the issue so differently.
To better understand how the geography of gun violence may affect how Americans think about the issue, The Washington Post analyzed data on gun deaths from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for every county from 2007 and 2016 and the nonpartisan Gun Violence Archive from 2016 to present. (Our full methodology is explained at the bottom of this post.)
A distinct pattern emerged: In Democratic regions of the country, which tend to be cities, people are more likely to be murdered with a gun than they are to shoot themselves to death. In regions of the country won by Republican, which tend to be rural areas and small towns, the opposite is true — people are more likely to shoot themselves to death than they are to be murdered with a gun.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/31/the-surprising-way-gun-violence-is-dividing-america/?utm_term=.dd04912bc19b
Nah, guns aint the problem.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But anyway, I guess what I'm still saying is, essentially, that all gun owners are a part of the gun problem one way or the other. And if you didn't buy the gun, then you're still a part of the gun problem by contributing America's gun culture. Sorry, I don't mean it to shit on anyone... I'm just saying that's how it is.
Highlights:
Increasing Law Enforcement Presence in Schools
A core tenet of the proposal is the need to add more police officers and marshals to school campuses in the state.
“When an active shooter situation arises, the difference between life and death can be a matter of seconds,” Abbott said. “Trained security personnel can make all the difference.”
Current state law allows specially trained school staff members, deemed marshals, to bring guns onto campus if they are stored and locked away.
The governor recommended many changes relating to officers in schools.
1. School should collaborate with local law enforcement to heighten police presence on school campuses. This could be done by adding campuses to officers’ regular patrol routes and allowing officers to go on break or file reports on campuses. The plan calls for the state to consider offering $10,000 grants to schools that draw down federal funds to make accommodations for law enforcement officers.
2. Prioritize hiring retired peace officers and military veterans for school security. In addition, the state should create a modified school marshal training program for veterans.
3. Increase the number of school marshals by funding training this summer. Funds from the Governor’s Criminal Justice Division will pay for all training costs from June to August of this year.
4. Increase the number of school marshals that can be appointed per school. Change the law to allow one marshal for every 100 students. The current law allows only one marshal for every 200 students. The plan estimates this translates to about one marshal for every four to five classrooms.
5. Remove firearm storage requirements for school marshals who are in direct contact with students. School marshals are currently required to store their firearms in a safe while on campus, but the plan recommends repealing that requirement to make guns easier to access in the event of a crisis.
6. Revamp marshal training to focus more on firearms training. The current marshal training course includes 80 hours of course training that volunteers must complete during their vacation time, which has limited use of the program. The governor argues the training course “should be streamlined to focus primarily on material that will improve the individuals the ability to respond to an active shooter scenario.”
7. Require annual refresher courses to maintain school marshal skills.
School Safety and Security Measures
The governor had discussions with architects, law enforcement superintendents, teachers and students in the lead up to his plan and says he learned that no one-size-fits-all program exists for school security.
School hardening can take several different forms, none of which are mutually exclusive. Typical infrastructure hardening is one option.
Structural improvements could include:
The plan also features several school security policy recommendations for lawmakers to consider.
1. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) should review school districts’ and charter schools’ safety and security audits. TEA should create a formal review process to review districts’ school safety audits with input from the Texas School Safety Center (TSSC). This review should be done once every three years for a school district.
2. Specifically require certain community members to serve on an ISD or charter school’s safety and security committee. The individual members of a committee should include:
3. The School Safety and Security Committee should be required to discuss with law enforcement the expansion of patrol zones to include the school district. By including school campuses in patrol zones the governor believes response times will decrease significantly.
4. The School Safety and Security Committees should periodically provide updates to the school board, including emergency plan updates twice a year.
5. Schools should be required to notify parents if a significant threat to students’ safety occurs.
Mental Health, Behavioral Threat Assessment Initiatives
The governor’s plan also includes recommendations to improve mental health support structures.
1. Expand access to Texas Tech Health Sciences Center’s Telemedicine Wellness Intervention Triage and Referral (TWITR) Project. The TWITR project created a model for identifying junior high through high school students at risk for committing school violence and intervening with those students before incidents occur. Students are identified by trained school staff and screened for risk-based behaviors by Licensed Professional Counselors in schools then provided psychiatric services by Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (TTUHSC) over a telemedicine link. Two telemedicine psychiatry sessions are provided through the project.
2. Increase Mental Health First Aid training during the summer of 2018. Mental Health First Aid is an eight-hour, evidence-based program designed to develop the skills to identify, understand, and respond to signs of mental illness.
3. Prioritize the importance of the mental and behavioral health needs of students by freeing up counselors to focus on those needs, encourage school districts to add more counselors at the camp level and appropriate funds to fill gaps.
4. To better respond to the needs of students and school faculty following a crisis, expand the Texas Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) Network to improve outcomes. The CISM Network assists emergency service providers and first responders who have experienced a “critical incident” in the line of duty.
5. The Texas School Safety Center will partner with SIGMA Threat Management to deliver training on Behavioral Threat Assessment to school personnel.
Using Technology to Improve School Safety
1. Increase the use and awareness of the DPS “iWatch Texas” reporting system to encourage parents, students and teachers to easily report potential harm or criminal activity directed at schools, students and staff members. Texas DPS’ “iWatch Texas” app will launch on June 7 to make tip reporting easier and anonymous.
2. Increase the number of fusion centers in Texas to improve law enforcement’s ability to identify, process and resolve potential threats that appear on social media.
Improving Gun Safety
One of the more anticipated and controversial aspects of the plan (particularly for Governor Abbott, who is in an election year) was the gun safety measures. The plan discussed gun safety measures extensively, including giving the following recommendations:
1. Create a statewide case management system to give magistrates immediate access to critical information and to speed the timely reporting of court records for federal background checks.
2. Encourage Texas lawmakers to issue an interim charge to consider the merits of adopting a red flag law allowing law enforcement, a family member, school employee or a district attorney to file a petition seeking the removal of firearms from a potentially dangerous person only after legal due process is provided.
3. Adjudications affecting the right to legally purchase and possess firearms should be reported within 48 hours. This 48-hour requirement should also extend to protective orders and family violence convictions. Courts should ensure that all disqualifying felony convictions are entered as soon as possible.
4. Firearm storage laws should be changed so that parents of children up to 17 are obligated to securely store their firearms.
5. Change the threshold for prosecution of people inadequately storing their guns so that they are criminally liable whether the weapons are loaded or not.
6. When a child’s access to inadequately stored guns results in death or bodily injury, increase the penalty for the gun owner to a third-degree felony.
7. Promote voluntary use of gun locks
8. Require gun owners to report when their firearms are lost or stolen to law enforcement within ten days.
Providing Emergency and Active Shooter Training
1. Better prepare campus security to respond to active shooters. All school security officers in the state should receive active shooter response training. Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training (ALERRT) was mentioned specifically as a high quality option.
2. The Texas School Safety Center will deliver a workshop-based course that allows for hands-on application of high quality planning practices. First responders must collaborate when school officials are developing emergency operations plans. This course will be provided free of charge.
3. The Texas School Safety Center will partner with the I Love U Guys Foundation to provide training in the Standard Response Protocol and the Standard Reunification Method for school personnel. These trainings will be delivered using a train-the-trainer model, which acts as a force multiplier in that trainers are able to offer this material in their regional areas. These will be delivered in partnership with the I Love U Guys Foundation at no cost to schools.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/03/off-duty-fbi-agent-accidentally-fires-gun-while-at-denver-bar
June 3, 2018
WASHINGTON — As they inspect the nation’s gun stores, federal investigators regularly find violations of the law, ranging from minor record-keeping errors to illegal sales of firearms. In the most serious cases, like a sale of a gun to a prohibited buyer, inspectors often recommend that gun dealers lose their licenses.
But that rarely happens. Senior officials at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regularly overrule their own inspectors, allowing gun dealers who fail inspections to keep their licenses even after they were previously warned to follow the rules, according to interviews with more than half a dozen current and former law enforcement officials and a review of more than 100 inspection reports.
One store was cited for failing to conduct background checks before selling a gun. Another store owner told investigators he actively tried to circumvent gun laws. One threatened an A.T.F. officer, and another sold a gun to a customer who identified as a felon. All were previously cited by the A.T.F. In each instance, supervisors downgraded recommendations that the stores’ licenses be revoked and instead let them stay open.
Image
Of about 11,000 inspections of licensed firearm dealers in the year starting in October 2016, more than half were cited for violations. Less than 1 percent of all inspections resulted in the loss of a license.
The episodes shed light on the A.T.F.’s delicate role in policing the gun industry, which has historically resisted regulation and holds powerful political sway over the A.T.F.’s appropriators in Congress. Lawmakers set a stringent requirement decades ago for gun inspectors: They must prove that store owners not only violated the law but intended to do so. The bureau has sidestepped the potential legal appeals and political fallout of revoking licenses by trying to work with gun dealers rather than close their stores.
The approach is widely seen by the A.T.F. as the best option to regulate the gun industry without fostering an adversarial relationship, but some in the bureau consider it a compromise that is at best nuanced and at worst unsafe.
“We’re not selling ice cream here,” said Howard Wolfe, who retired from the A.T.F. in 2006 after 36 years on its industry operations side, including as an inspector and supervisor. “You’re selling something here that if you screw up, somebody can be killed.”
The A.T.F. declined repeated requests for comment.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/06/04/suspect-in-arizona-killings-fatally-shoots-himself-in-hotel-room-as-officers-close-in-police-say/
Even with great training people make mistakes...