Thin blue line (courtesy ammoland.com)

FAIRFAX, Va. [ via Ammoland.com] The following statement was issued this morning by Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President and CEO of the National Rifle Association of America:

“On behalf of the more than five million members of the National Rifle Association, and especially on behalf of our members from the law enforcement community, I want to express the deep anguish all of us feel for the heroic Dallas law enforcement officers who were killed and wounded, as well as to those who so bravely ran toward danger to defend the city and the people of Dallas.

With heavy hearts, NRA members honor their heroism and offer our deepest condolences to all of their families.”

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

39 COMMENTS

  1. “Why did it take so long for the NRA to release an official statement? They must hate (circle at least one: cops, black people, Hispanic people, bottle nose dolphins, puppies, Ford trucks, other)!”

    ~ Dumbshit news propagandist

    • Unlike the democrats the NRA has some respect and does not jump to politicize every crisis. MANY things I don’t agree with them on , but they do this right.

    • Because the parties present at the Dallas crime incident were the shooter(s), the police and the protesters. The NRA did not want to insert itself into the media’s discussion about the parties present at the crime. The NRA is unrelated to the crime discussion and is merely expressing its condolences within a meaningful time after the crime took place, which is a smart approach.

    • A day and a half is not too long to release a statement.

      It’s not their fault the progs were calling for ‘WHY IS THE NRA SILENT???!!’ before the bodies were even picked up off the street.

    • And if the NRA had an immediate response, the public would have attacked them for trying to capitalize on the tragedy. The NRA can’t win in such a climate. At least, when they responded they didn’t do what Obama, Clinton, and others did and go straight to the gun control issue in their initial response. Even Texans didn’t do that. They were more concerned about the community, cops, and citizens.

  2. 1 thing we know for certain. When the bullets started flying the cops went towards the source. How many of us would have done the same?

    • “How many of us would have done the same?”

      This is the great fear of people who have never faced risk of their very lives. Until you are in it, you don’t know what you’ll actually do. You might find out something about yourself you don’t much like.

      It’s worse than that. If you don’t do the noble thing, you wonder if you are a coward or worse. If you do, you wonder if you’re a schmuck.(*)

      This, in the end, is perhaps the greatest deep impulse behind the anti- gun people. Guns are indeed a symbol, a symbol that we make choices of life and death every day. Get rid of the symbol, and it is that much easier to float in denial. That much easier to deny the choices you have made, and what that says about you. The last thing these people want to do is make a choice and live with it.

      (*) Not to imply that I’ve ever run toward the sound of gunfire. Nearly died with time to think about it, a couple times. That’s in the same neighborhood, but not the same. You learn some things. I curse the lesson, and bless the knowledge.

      I hope I have the character to move toward the gunfire, if that’s what’s needful. I also hope I never find that out, one way or the other.

    • I would have found cover first, assessed what the hell just happened second, then take appropriate action third. I do not see the point of going head long into flying anything without a plan.

      In the case of Dallas specifically, as a CCW holder you may have just as been targeted by the police at that moment of panic and little information.

      That is not to dismiss any courage under fire, but if you are asking personally as a non-LEO, being a hero is not first thought.

    • “When the bullets started flying the cops went towards the source. How many of us would have done the same?”

      I hope that none of us would. Because unless we were wearing blue, we would have been the first ones that the police shot.

      Resist the impulse to run into “friendly fire.”

      • Very good point. The cops are going to shoot anyone having a gun without a uniform. Even their own.

      • Well, I’d definitely go in if I’m on duty. Off duty I’d GTFO if I was with my family. If I was solo I’d probably wind up going in. I couldn’t live with myself being armed and doing nothing. Maybe that’s not TTAG savvy, but it is what it is. Not every fight can be avoided.

    • I wouldn’t have. I’m not a hero. I only carry in the event that the there’s only one way out and the shooter is between me and the exit.

    • Why?? Seriously? A citizen. With a pistol. Towards the shooter? In downtown Dallas? At night? In the middle of a BLM demonstration. With dozens of officers. Are you fucking nuts? Yes, you are.

  5. The way I like to drop logic bombs on all the blacklivesmatter supporters that can’t be bothered to think about the ramifications of recent events on future gatherings and protests, is I just straight up ask them a few questions:

    1) Are you or BLM advocating for the murder of police officers that commit crimes?

    2) Are you or BLM advocating for the murder of police officers not committing crimes?

    3) Are you or BLM advocating for the prosecution of police officers that commit crimes with verdicts that allow for the same sentencing, if found guilty, that the average citizen would receive?

    And then I remind them that as of this weekend, terrorist activities are now forever associated with the BlackLivesMatter movement, whether it was intentional or not.

    The BLM leaders have two choices:
    Disassociate themselves from the violence against the police and then recognize their subject matter invites extremist behavior and violence and rethinking how they get their message out in the interest of public safety.

    or

    Admit the violence was a part of their agenda and then they own whatever appropriate police and public response they get.

    • BLM, as an organization, ended in Dallas. Do you think the highly militarized police will tolerate another potentially violent protest by that “organization”?

      • How exactly did it “end” in Dallas? BLM, the ideology (it’s real purpose is conveniently vague) is still all over the social media.

        I just went to their site. No comment on the Dallas shootings. For a movement that is: “a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes.” per their site, there is NO caution or condemnation of violence as a form of protest. Not a peep regarding their stance on the gunman’s actions and if it’s part of their message. Their facebook page seems to be the only place where the Dallas public is demanding to know their stance on the weekend events.

        • THIS is a shot in the arm(pun intended) to Black Lives Splatter…they’ve already disavowed Dallas.

      • “BLM, as an organization, ended in Dallas.”

        As long as #BLM has so many cheerleaders and enablers in Washington, it won’t end. #BLM is societal herpes.

        • I saw a car in DC with the BLM logo emblazoned on the side. They are deeply entrenched in DC and like moveon.org will be around long after we forgot how they started. They are the ultimate in selective rights advocacy and will soon be advocating for a lot more than a pass from law enforcement.

  7. At the least the NRA waits till some facts are known. Maybe not all but enough to make a real announcement of its thoughts.
    Unlike Dims who rush in headlong mouth first. Brains and thoughtfulness a distant second.

  9. I’m shocked! I figured the NRA would be making a statement that they will be working to compromise on passing an Assault Weapons Ban bill.

  10. We need balance from both sides but we will never see it from the left. We of the pro gun community must have balance. The NRA statement about the police officers in Dallas is needed, but where is the outrage over the shooting of a man in Minnesota who was killed reaching for his wallet ? A man who happened to be legally carrying. If I am legally carrying do I have to fear for my life if I give a police officer a bad vibe ? It is hard to see the NRA for anything but another corrupt political organization that looks out for its donors first if they are not outraged by that shooting as well.

    • “where is the outrage over the shooting of a man in Minnesota who was killed reaching for his wallet”

      The cop says he was reaching for his gun, not his wallet. But you know better because you were there. Right?

    • It actually seems likely that the guy in Minnesota did NOT have a license to carry. Was likely stopped as a person of interest in an armed robbery 4 days prior and a few blocks away. Had a firearm on his thigh when the officer approached and was not in a holster. Also, more likely than not (by his FaceBook page) that he was a member of or affiliated in some way with the Crips street gang.

      We can never EVER EVER trust what we hear in the first 24-48 hours and only after that when we have done our own research using various sources.

  12. The entire ‘ Hands Up ‘ Fergideshu construct was …… False ! – Now the facts are coming out about this event , the Lying media is exposed , naked . pushing a collectivist agenda …… because that what the OWNERS want.

  13. Curious as to why the NRA has to have dick-all to say about every single use of a firearm. They’re not the president of everyone who ever fired a gun. They’re a safety/training/lobbying group, not the official spokesperson of all shooters. To think they owe anyone any statement about anything just because the situation involved a gun is like saying that Jesse Jackson is the king of all black people and should have something to say every time some dark skin does anything at all.

Comments are closed.