Chris Murphy Calls NRA Statement 'Revolting'

The U.S. Senator-elect says the NRA has "made itself completely irrelevant to the national conversation about preventing gun violence."

U.S. Senator-elect Chris Murphy, a Congressman whose district includes Newtown, called today's announcement from the National Rifle Association "the most revolting, tone-deaf statement I've ever heard."

"While Newtown continues the horrifying work of burying twenty children and six adults, the NRA has the gall to say that the solution to this problem is more, not fewer guns," he said.

"The NRA has now made itself completely irrelevant to the national conversation about preventing gun violence, by saying that the answer to the tragedy in Newtown is to put more deadly semi-automatic assault weapons on the streets and into our schools."

The NRA statement today — after a weeklong silence following the horrific shooting of 26 people last week in Sandy Hook — called for an armed police presence in American schools.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre called for a new kind of American domestic security revolving around armed civilians, arguing that "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Steven DeVaux December 23, 2012 at 12:31 PM
What a shame he has NO offerings to fix the core of the problem which is cultural and societal in nature. He condems a proposed symptom without any leadership on curing the diseases that infests society like divorce, violent movies (including trailers kids see), games, music etc. Not a single constructive suggestion or offer to ban violent portrayals. He is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Leaders lead, not follow polls.
Lucia December 23, 2012 at 01:33 PM
Murphy is an incompetent fool who follows his messiah, pelosi and reid. It is mystifying to me that he was elected and I find the only thing revolting is his record.
Steven DeVaux December 23, 2012 at 02:40 PM
He certainly isn't a leader in the classical sense of the word over the centuries. His clear pathos, to lead from behind...based on polls is clear. For years now people have worried about the mythical right wing agenda. Now he fast becoming one of the spokespeople for the left wing agenda. It would be great if America can or even will, find the centrist middle of the road ever again. With the senate and the presidency now democrat, the sole voice of opposition - a tradition in democracies - are the republicans.
G2 December 23, 2012 at 06:20 PM
So Chris. What is your plan? I don't think slamming the NRA is a real solution. Maybe police in schools would be a fast, right now, effort. It is more than we have heard from you. Or do you think the police should not have guns either?
H. Ferguson December 23, 2012 at 07:11 PM
So now Chris Murphy is declaring war on the NRA. Why doesn't he offer his constituents any solutions instead? Any tactless fellow can point fingers.
Steven DeVaux December 23, 2012 at 08:36 PM
It never about what he is for, which creates a political liability for him - it's what he's against and finds wrong. You think he'd try and remove violence from games/movies/music? Think he would look to permissive parenting as a good portion of the problem? He loses constituencies as a political stooge. Instead he rails against anyone who takes a stand that isn't popular in the polls at the moment. He's a wind up doll for the left wing agenda.
Kelley Anne December 23, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Mr Murphy is completely correct, s opposed to the NRA crazies, who even the conservative press admits is completely INSANE............. The New York Post and the New York Daily News tore into the National Rifle Association on Saturday for the gun lobby's bizarre press conference held in response to the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre. On Friday, the gun lobby broke its silence to comment on the Connecticut school shooting, which took the lives of 20 first-graders and six adults. In a widely-panned public appearance, NRA leader Wayne LaPierre blamed gun violence on everything from video games to the media, and advocated placing an armed officer in every school in America. Responses ranged from disgust to disbelief. The conservative New York Post, which called LaPierre a "gun nut" and "NRA loon" on its Saturday cover, may be taking its cues from its owner, Rupert Murdoch. In the wake of the shooting, Murdoch spoke out about the need for stricter gun control. "Terrible news today," he tweeted. "When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons? As in Oz after similar tragedy." Saturday's New York Daily News cover called LaPierre the "craziest man on earth." The tabloid also published a pro-gun control cover last Tuesday.
Steven DeVaux December 23, 2012 at 10:29 PM
I rest my case.
Ken December 24, 2012 at 04:11 AM
There are already police officers, security guards, metal detectors, double door entry systems which hold a person between an entrance and an exit pending clearance, security cameras and buzz in procedures in many high schools. In many cases there are already security cameras not just to monitor the interior and perimeter of a schoolst cost or whether such systems are needed, whether they would be effective against a determined armed killer but also involve an understanding of the impact extension of such security systems to elementary schools would have on the psyche of young children. Would young students entering a school with advanced and extensive security controls feel a sense of fear or would this make them feel secure?
Lucia December 26, 2012 at 04:51 PM
If there is a gun ban as murphy and his ilk would like, would it include the Secret Service's guns who protect the president and other members of government? Bet not, hypocrisy thy name is murphy and any other who wants to take away the right to bear arms.
Bobby Caselnova December 26, 2012 at 09:41 PM
The state of CT already has an "assault weapons ban". That didn't work, did it? We need better training and education for gun buyers, and that's my determination from running a federally-licensed firearms shop with my father for many years. Education pertaining to locking up your guns, how to tell if someone you live with or your child may be homicidal or suicidal can go a long way. Just like we don't let people drive cars with no training or education to prevent injuries and deaths. No law will prevent criminals from getting arms and using them on people, the laws will only apply to those willing to respect them. People have a right to self defense, and when we have criminals running around with such deadly arms, it does become necessary to have an "assault weapon". If more guns really don't make us safer, the government should lead by example and disarm all of the police, secret service, etc. It will never happen because they know for a fact that guns keep us safe when they're in good hands, and there's absolutely no way to prevent them from getting into bad hands.
Rob Gianazza December 26, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Bobby, please explain the difference between the legal definition of an "Assault Rifle" and what a real assault rifle is. I think the public needs to be educated. Second, you made an excellent reference about driving cars. How many police stops are reported where the driver is unlicensed or driving with a suspended license? How many are driving cars that are improperly registered? We, that have proper licensing, insurance and registration aren't the ones causing the problems.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something