Setting: Press conference with the NRA's president somewhere in Texas
NRA President: "Thank you all for coming today. I'll be open to any and all questions. Who wants to start? Okay, yes, you over there with USA Today..."
USA Today reporter: "You've gone on the record as saying that regardless of the gun laws, people are going to break them, so there's no point in having gun laws. Is that correct?"
NRA President: "Yes, that is correct. Look, we have drug laws and people are still snorting coke and crap like that, right? So what's the point in having gun laws, you know?"
USA Today reporter: "So, if one person breaks a drug or gun law, this proves the law isn't at all effective and doesn't prevent some people from committing such crimes?"
NRA President: "Uh, yeah, sure"
USA Today reporter: "So, unless 100% of drug and gun-related crimes can be prevented with law, then there's no point in having such laws?"
NRA President: "I guess. Okay, I'm done with you. Let's go over here with the Washington Times..."
Washington Times reporter: "What about robberies? Since robberies are still committed, does that mean we shouldn't have any laws to prevent such crimes? Like with guns and drugs, should robberies be legal as well?"
NRA President: "I never said drugs should be legal..."
Washington Times reporter: "You said, and I quote, 'Look, we have drug laws and people are still snorting coke and crap like that, right? So what's the point in having gun laws, you know?," insinuating that like with guns, since drug laws are broken, there's no point in having any gun laws. In other words, with this logic, drugs, like guns, should be legal, correct?"
NRA President: "Oh yeah. Yeah, that's exactly right!"
Washington Times reporter: "Okay, so what about robberies? Should they be legal as well, since robberies are still committed?"
NRA President: "Well..."
Washington Times reporter: "Well, what?"
NRA President: "I'll have to think that one over. You're asking some tough questions today. Okay, over to the New York Times..."
New York Times reporter: "Since murders are still committed, should murder still be illegal?"
NRA President: "Of course it should still be illegal! What kind of stupid question is that?"
New York Times reporter: "I'm just trying to follow your line of thinking. You said there should be no drug or gun laws, because people still break those laws. You said you weren't certain if there should be any laws on robbery, since those still occur. Now you're saying murder should still be illegal, even though it happens on a daily basis, and often times with guns as the culprit. Is that correct?"
NRA President: "Look, I don't know! I'll have to look at my notes! All I know is guns don't kill people; people kill people! Next... Yes, you over there with the Washington Post..."
Washington Post reporter: "So, can a person shoot and kill another without a gun?"
NRA President: "No! What are you getting at?"
Washington Post reporter: "So, if that's the case, wouldn't the gun be at least partially responsible for such murders?"
NRA President: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"
Washington Post reporter: "Yes, I heard you the first time. But in such murders, you also said that a person couldn't shoot and kill another without a gun. Correct?"
NRA President: "Yeah! So?!?"
Washington Post reporter: "So, you in essence just admitted that, in a way, guns do kill people. Correct?"
NRA President: "Never! You liberals need to cut it out with your gotcha questions! Alright, I'll take one more question! You, in front, with Yahoo..."
Yahoo reporter: "So, since you basically admitted that guns do, in a way, kill people, and said that murder should still be illegal, do you still not believe in gun laws?"
NRA President: "Look, I never said guns kill people! I just admitted that in order for a person to shoot and kill another, a gun has to be used. But, you see, the gun doesn't go off by itself. A person has to pull the trigger. Even though he wouldn't be able to kill a person in that same manner with any other weapon, doesn't mean that guns kill! Okay, you got that?"
Yahoo reporter: "So, what you're saying is that guns aren't the problem, people are?"
NRA President: "That's exactly what I'm saying! Someone finally gets it! Thank you!"
Yahoo reporter: "Okay, so does that mean you'd be in favor of laws preventing certain people from purchasing guns, or at least making it more difficult for them to purchase guns? Wouldn't these laws revolve more around people than guns? Wouldn't expanding background checks pertain to the potential buyer - the person - and not the gun he would be buying?"
NRA President: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"
Yahoo reporter: "That's exactly what I'm saying. So, does that mean you would be in favor of some guns laws preventing dangerous individuals from obtaining firearms?"
NRA President: "I don't know! No further questions!"
Washington Times reporter: "Have you made up your mind yet on whether or not robberies should be legal?"
NRA President: "I said no further questions!"
New York Times reporter: "Are you standing by your statement that murder should be illegal, even if guns are at least partially responsible for the crime?"
NRA President: "No further questions!"
Yahoo reporter: "Are you mentally stable?"
NRA President: "For the last freaking time, no further questions!"
NRA President: "Thank you all for coming today. I'll be open to any and all questions. Who wants to start? Okay, yes, you over there with USA Today..."
USA Today reporter: "You've gone on the record as saying that regardless of the gun laws, people are going to break them, so there's no point in having gun laws. Is that correct?"
NRA President: "Yes, that is correct. Look, we have drug laws and people are still snorting coke and crap like that, right? So what's the point in having gun laws, you know?"
USA Today reporter: "So, if one person breaks a drug or gun law, this proves the law isn't at all effective and doesn't prevent some people from committing such crimes?"
NRA President: "Uh, yeah, sure"
USA Today reporter: "So, unless 100% of drug and gun-related crimes can be prevented with law, then there's no point in having such laws?"
NRA President: "I guess. Okay, I'm done with you. Let's go over here with the Washington Times..."
Washington Times reporter: "What about robberies? Since robberies are still committed, does that mean we shouldn't have any laws to prevent such crimes? Like with guns and drugs, should robberies be legal as well?"
NRA President: "I never said drugs should be legal..."
Washington Times reporter: "You said, and I quote, 'Look, we have drug laws and people are still snorting coke and crap like that, right? So what's the point in having gun laws, you know?," insinuating that like with guns, since drug laws are broken, there's no point in having any gun laws. In other words, with this logic, drugs, like guns, should be legal, correct?"
NRA President: "Oh yeah. Yeah, that's exactly right!"
Washington Times reporter: "Okay, so what about robberies? Should they be legal as well, since robberies are still committed?"
NRA President: "Well..."
Washington Times reporter: "Well, what?"
NRA President: "I'll have to think that one over. You're asking some tough questions today. Okay, over to the New York Times..."
New York Times reporter: "Since murders are still committed, should murder still be illegal?"
NRA President: "Of course it should still be illegal! What kind of stupid question is that?"
New York Times reporter: "I'm just trying to follow your line of thinking. You said there should be no drug or gun laws, because people still break those laws. You said you weren't certain if there should be any laws on robbery, since those still occur. Now you're saying murder should still be illegal, even though it happens on a daily basis, and often times with guns as the culprit. Is that correct?"
NRA President: "Look, I don't know! I'll have to look at my notes! All I know is guns don't kill people; people kill people! Next... Yes, you over there with the Washington Post..."
Washington Post reporter: "So, can a person shoot and kill another without a gun?"
NRA President: "No! What are you getting at?"
Washington Post reporter: "So, if that's the case, wouldn't the gun be at least partially responsible for such murders?"
NRA President: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"
Washington Post reporter: "Yes, I heard you the first time. But in such murders, you also said that a person couldn't shoot and kill another without a gun. Correct?"
NRA President: "Yeah! So?!?"
Washington Post reporter: "So, you in essence just admitted that, in a way, guns do kill people. Correct?"
NRA President: "Never! You liberals need to cut it out with your gotcha questions! Alright, I'll take one more question! You, in front, with Yahoo..."
Yahoo reporter: "So, since you basically admitted that guns do, in a way, kill people, and said that murder should still be illegal, do you still not believe in gun laws?"
NRA President: "Look, I never said guns kill people! I just admitted that in order for a person to shoot and kill another, a gun has to be used. But, you see, the gun doesn't go off by itself. A person has to pull the trigger. Even though he wouldn't be able to kill a person in that same manner with any other weapon, doesn't mean that guns kill! Okay, you got that?"
Yahoo reporter: "So, what you're saying is that guns aren't the problem, people are?"
NRA President: "That's exactly what I'm saying! Someone finally gets it! Thank you!"
Yahoo reporter: "Okay, so does that mean you'd be in favor of laws preventing certain people from purchasing guns, or at least making it more difficult for them to purchase guns? Wouldn't these laws revolve more around people than guns? Wouldn't expanding background checks pertain to the potential buyer - the person - and not the gun he would be buying?"
NRA President: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"
Yahoo reporter: "That's exactly what I'm saying. So, does that mean you would be in favor of some guns laws preventing dangerous individuals from obtaining firearms?"
NRA President: "I don't know! No further questions!"
Washington Times reporter: "Have you made up your mind yet on whether or not robberies should be legal?"
NRA President: "I said no further questions!"
New York Times reporter: "Are you standing by your statement that murder should be illegal, even if guns are at least partially responsible for the crime?"
NRA President: "No further questions!"
Yahoo reporter: "Are you mentally stable?"
NRA President: "For the last freaking time, no further questions!"
Comments
Post a Comment