Fast Eddie on Face the Nation Debate

[Defender]

Fast Eddie is supposed to be on Face the Nation today debating Wayne Lapierre. Should be interesting. Go Wayne!!!

[Huntingdonhavoc]

Good find!!

[Huntingdonhavoc]

They're going on CBS

[stephpd]

Gee, Ed just can't get it in his head that EBR's aren't 'assault rifles'. This inability to be able to distinguish between the two should be an instant disqualifier in discussing the issue.

At least he admitted that they need to enforce the laws already on the books.

[markheck1]

C'mon, I missed it, I need more info, LOL

[stephpd]

Web filter blocks me from going to CBS news so I'll give a quick run down.
Wayne Lapierre is in Washington with Bob Schieffer. Ed Rendell is via sattelite.

Ed wants to ban 'assault weapons' and says they have no hunting purpose. No reason for citizens to have them.
Lapierre says they are functionally the same as every other rifle. Not full auto and they aren't more powerful then any other gun.
Ed repeats himself numerous times that they are high powered, of no use, rapid fire, blah, blah blah.
Lapierre says Ed's not telling the truth about these guns
Bob Schieffer seems lost and has no control.
Moves on to straw purchases and Ed lies about that too saying most guns used by felons are from straw purchase.
Lapierre doesn't correct him on this and agrees that more needs to be done to stop this. Mentions that existing laws need to be enforced.
Ed agrees. Says something about more arrests and convictions in PA.
Bob Schieffer still lost.
Goes back to EBR's and Ed refusing to admit they are different from true assault weapons.
Ends with them agreeing that laws need to be enforced. Ed wants more laws.

[ABuck]

Thanks for this, good find. Just turned it on as they went to them. Of course Rendel was just using the same BS and outright lies as usual. And wanting even more laws.

When asked "What blessed use is there, for one of these assault weapons, what American needs an assault weapon to protect themselves, or to shoot targets?" I thought Mr. Lapierre could have replied that the 2nd A is not about hunting weapons. That the SCOTUS has affirmed that the police have no duty to protect, and also that the 2A has been affirmed by SCOTUS as applying to individuals. There are times hi capacity mags and fast rate of fire may be needed, sometimes even simply as a visible deterrent. Such as the grocery owners during the LA riots.

They say they are not against the 2A, but what Mr. Rendell (and anyone else wanting an AWB) is calling for, is basically that the 2A be divided, with LEO (government) being able to posses the weapons most useful in these times, yet taking that right away from citizens.

His comments, and lack of admitting to the facts about these so called assault weapons, and laws already on the books, show that he is obviously ignorant, stupid or lying about this issue. In other words, typical political posturing, smoke and mirrors, get tough on crime, BS.

He was also going off about one handgun a month. Ed R. "Who in their God's name needs more than 12 handguns a year?" I guess nobody ever inherits or buys a collection?

[markheck1]

or a matched pair......like the NRA ruger Vaquero's they are auctioning off at Friends of the NRA dinners,

[Steelblitz]

When asked "What blessed use is there, for one of these assault weapons, what American needs an assault weapon to protect themselves, or to shoot targets?" I thought Mr. Lapierre could have replied that the 2nd A is not about hunting weapons. That the SCOTUS has affirmed that the police have no duty to protect, and also that the 2A has been affirmed by SCOTUS as applying to individuals. There are times hi capacity mags and fast rate of fire may be needed, sometimes even simply as a visible deterrent. Such as the grocery owners during the LA riots.

That right there is what I don't understand about Lapierre. He never goes the full distance in his rhetoric. It's like he's afraid to be labled a nut for stating that the 2nd amendment isnt about hunting in these debates, or maybe he's trying too hard to appease the Fudds.

What Lapierre/NRA fails to realize is why is there an entire segment of firearm owner that they are not conencting to. We see it here on this site or any firearm site. The wife and I are NRA members, but there is a desperate need for the NRA to have a different branch or spokesperson to reach out to the millions of firearm owners they have yet to connect with. Maybe start up a 'patriot' type branch of the NRA. One that is grounded is the basic understanding of why there is the need to have an armed population. GOA tries to do this, but I would like to see the NRA with their money and political clout undertake this.

[ABuck]

Yes, I thought he had the upper hand by hammering a bit on Philly actually being soft on true gun using criminals, and the ignorance about the term "assault weapon", but then he seemed to back off a bit.

As a long time NRA Life member, I think there is a lot more they could be doing. And using our money a lot wiser than all these damn mailings.

On a side note, I wonder if Ed had just come from church, since he made statements such as "What blessed use is there" and "Who in their God's name?" Maybe he is trying to get a real heavy hitter on his side? LOL

Now to head to that southern neighbor of ours to do some lawful carrying of a weapon. (Turkey hunting in MD for a few days in Green Ridge SF)