Gun Free Zones & Background Checks are Failing to Keep Americans Safe ~ VIDEO

Gun Free Zones & Background Checks are Failing to Keep Americans Safe
Gun Free Zones & Background Checks are Failing to Keep Americans Safe
Gun Owners of America
Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC –-(Ammoland.com)- Gun Owners of America's (GOA) Larry Pratt debated CNN's Michael Smerconish after the tragic shooting at the Umpqua Community College in October, 2015.

Pratt argued that killers like the Umpqua shooter are targeting Gun Free Zones, where all but two public mass shootings have occurred since 1950.

And background checks are failing to stop these killers from getting firearms.

About: Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington' – Ron Paul Visit: www.gunowners.org to Join.

  • 9
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    6 Comment threads
    3 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    8 Comment authors
    Grey BeardEricjamesjamesGreg Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    james
    Guest
    james

    What was not talked about is the number of people who are legitimately declined for firearms purchase during the NICS who are NOT PROSECUTED.

    Eric
    Guest
    Eric

    Exactly and the ones that lied, and the straw purchases .

    Greg
    Guest
    Greg

    We go down this same ole crap river every month of every year. There is always a politician that has a plan to disarm the American population, except criminals of course. Answer questions below. 1. Have you seen, in any state, a concerted effort to get criminals, and their guns, off the streets? 2. Do you really feel that taking guns from all law abiding citizens will make your children safer? If you think that any new gun law will make your kids safer from criminals, you are out of your mind. The police will not be able to save… Read more »

    Greg
    Guest
    Greg

    Even a liberal gun owner does not get it. Michael Smerconish took the cowards way out when talking about students being armed in that classroom. In most cases, an armed student would have challenged the single shooter. That may not be true if there had been multiple shooters covering the room, and may only have drawn his weapon as a last resort. Why do you carry a gun if you have no intention of using it when needed? Mr. Smerconish stated that he is the owner of multiple guns and has then under lock and key at home. Does that… Read more »

    james
    Guest
    james

    Agree, even with the theater shooting when the gunman wore body armor,
    a well placed shot to the head may have been difficult or impossible given the lighting and
    the smoke bombs, a laser device on the handgun pointed to the face and eyes of the gunman
    would be enough to cause diminished vision and buy time for a close head shot or to get people to safety.

    Same for the school shootings, tactical led flashlight and tactical laser to the eyes if you can not be armed.

    Like Dr. Carson said, fight because he can’t shoot all of us.

    Moe
    Guest
    Moe

    The interviewer is, in fact, a left-wing lunatic and uses all the same worn out reasons for gun control.

    JohnC
    Guest
    JohnC

    Very interesting exchange. They both make good points. The mini debate was won on two key points by Mr. Pratt, 1. That an armed student would possibly have shortened the school killing spree. 2. That mass murders of disarmed populations are worse than an armed population. One point by the interviewer is obviously right. That incomplete applications for a firearm be approved by default when not handled in the 72 hour window leaves a gap in background check efficacy. The wait time frame should be extended.

    Grey Beard
    Guest
    Grey Beard

    If extended, NO application would be approved under this regime or under ANY democrat/liberal/progressive/communist regime. NONE! The 72 hour time limit is more than adequate for a due diligence check and keeps the bureaucrats a little more honest than they would prefer.

    TEX
    Guest
    TEX

    Pratt is right 100% !