NPR just interviewed the Mayor of LA who reacted with "What planet are they from?" to the NRA's public recommendation in response to Newtown, CT, that all schools in the US be staffed with armed guards.
Another reaction: "Ah, now I see what planet they are from! Planet money." As any gun runner knows, the real money comes from arming both sides in a conflict.
I had been looking at the NRA as a coalition of somewhat reactionary citizens. Somehow the NRA went from the gun-safety classes for Boy Scouts to advocating for Uzzis. They brought much of their membership with them, partly by promoting an idea that the US government might, any day now, begin oppressing its citizens and will certainly prepare for this oppression by restricting guns. This fits a fairly popular perspective of keeping government in check.
Now the NRA is advocating that armed guards in schools be required by federal law. When it comes to the populace, less government control sells more guns. When it comes to the government, regulation sells more guns.
The NRA has humored its individual members and used them to push an agenda that sells guns. Now they wish to use the government for the same purpose. The NRA is a lobby less for 2nd Amendment rights than for gun manufacturers. Increased sales is the common element in their seemingly disparate policies.
Turns out my analysis was wrong, or only partially right. I heard on the radio yesterday that Smith & Wesson nearly went out of business because it was boycotted by the NRA. Apparently, the gun manufacturing industry is less concerned about gun registration than the NRA is. Someone bought S&W and stopped cooperating with the government (or whoever it was concerned about gun safety) and the NRA dropped the boycott. Business has been good since.
ReplyDelete