Posted in: News

NRA Statement Rankles Newtown Residents, Teachers Groups, Boston Police

wayne lapierre NRA statement

The NRA statement made by Wayne LaPierre on Friday afternoon, a week after a school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut claimed 27 lives, has been criticized by many for the expensive proposal made for armed guards to be placed in every school in order to protect children from gun violence.

Following the Friday NRA statement on the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre, Americans took to Twitter to react to the suggestion — which has been suggested to cost as much as $5.4 billion annually by some estimates.

In Newtown, USAToday spoke to residents who, still picking up the pieces of their lives after last week’s hellish events, reacted to the comments LaPierre made about a school shield program and the idea of introducing more guns to US schools.

The paper quotes Newtown resident David Stout, 49, who is a hunter, saying:

“Folks in Newtown are appalled by that suggestion,” said Stout, who owns several hunting rifles. “I understand we want to protect our kids, but there are other ways to do that. We don’t want to turn our schools into prisons.”

Stout, who belongs to several groups formed after the tragedy, adds:

“It’s ridiculous we can’t all come together and say, ‘Ok, what makes sense?’ … Something has to change.”

Martin Blanco of Newtown echoed the sentiment, adding that the words felt like an insult so soon after the massacre. Blanco commented:

“Just an awful slap in the face, particularly to the people in Sandy Hook … The overwhelming majority of people in this town will find it a foolish, self-serving statement that has no place in Newtown or the United States of America.”

Newtown residents weren’t the only ones to find fault with the NRA statement, and teachers’ groups were quick to assess what they say is a poor approach to the issue of school violence. According to the San Francisco Gate, two national teachers’ organizations were appalled by the proposal. The paper says:

“The American Federation of Teachers called the suggestion ‘irresponsible and dangerous,’ while the National Education Association described it as shocking and based on the ‘delusional assumption that everything other than guns contributes to these tragedies.'”

Boston Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis concurred, telling the Boston Herald that LaPierre’s suggestion “is not the vision I have for the United States.” Davis was blunt in his refutation, adding:

“This rhetoric that’s being thrown around here, these cute little phrases people keep using, misdirect us from what happened here … There were 20 young children murdered with guns. And the problem was guns.”

Twitter users seemed to be largely opposed to the NRA “School Shield” program as well, but some users expressed support for the controversial proposal:

Among the criticisms frequently re-tweeted after Wayne LaPierre delivered the NRA statement on the Sandy Hook Massacre was that an armed guard was present at Columbine but unable to intervene in the shooting and prevent any loss of life.

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

10 Responses to “NRA Statement Rankles Newtown Residents, Teachers Groups, Boston Police”

  1. Jimmy Farrell

    I don't care that the NRA rankled Newtown Residents, Teachers Groups, or the Boston Police. what I care about is that posting signs that read No Gun Zone, or Gun Free Zone is a invitation to those who would do harm to others! there is more stories of how guns saved people from a crime than there are stories about crimes commeted with guns! you are just not going to be told this because there are people who use mass shootings to forward their ideals an politics!

  2. Anonymous

    total nonsense. the only reason some of these shootings occur in gun free zones is because it is in places where people gather in large numbers, exactly the kind of place these mass shooters would go whether there is an armed guard or not. So you are suggesting that the traumatized people of Newtown are using this tragedy to advance their political agenda? isnt it infinitely more likely that they are concerned for their children. And finally the only people who have demonstrated a complete lack of care for these murdered victims are the NRA and its followers. You people are the ones advancing an agenda: the ability to keep your stupid toys at any cost. I can think of 20 ways that a shooter armed with a semi-atuomatic rifle can wipe out a whole class of first graders despite having an armed guard somewhere in the school. And do you really think a teacher with a locked and protected hand gun , as absurd as it sounds to be even saying it, has a decent chance of shooting a deranged man with a semi-automatic rifle in a surprise attack. Be honest with yourself. You know I'm right. Ask for forgiveness for you have blood in your hands if you ever made sure laws banning weapons like the AR-15 were blocked.

  3. Jimmy Farrell

    No you are wrong an i don't have blood on my hands. your whole argument is silly nonsense, the only one with blood on their hands is the killer!

    not the NRA, not the gun but the killer who went to a place that had signs posted to be a gun free zone!

    the killer didn't go to a gun range to have it out with armed men an women. he chose to go where he knew no on whould shoot back!

    you wanting to take away that right to defend one's life makes you the one with blood on your hands for leaving no choice for any adult at that school or not to defend thenselves!

    if you are afaid of guns then don't own one but just because guns make you afaid doesn't give you the right to take my constitutionally protected rights away!