After Newtown, NRA Ready to Make 'Meaningful Contributions'

Fairfax-headquartered group issues statement about preventing future tragedies after shooting that killed 28, including the gunman, in Connecticut.

After days of silence, the National Rifle Association, headquartered in Fairfax, has released a statement on the tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn., saying it will make "meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again."

In the release, the organization begins to explain its silence, saying: "Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting."

Critics had called out the group in the days following the shooting: As citizens and legislators began to fall on either side of a debate about what, if at all, should be done about gun laws, many wondered why the group was absent from the conversation.

Patch submitted a media request with the NRA, which also houses its National Firearms Museum in Fairfax, and has yet to receive comment. The organization released its statement Tuesday to the press

The organization announced it will hold a press conference Friday in Washington, D.C. 

More details on Friday's press conference will be released when timing is deemed "appropriate," according to the statement.

The statement comes after both President Barack Obama and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said they want to tighten gun laws in light of Friday's shootings.

"Enough is enough," said Warner, who has an "A" rating from the NRA.

“I‘ve been a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights,” the Democrat from Alexandria said Monday outside the Virginia Capitol, where he was attending an unrelated meeting, The Washington Post reported Monday.

“But the status quo isn’t acceptable," he continued, as reported by the Post. "There’s got to be a way to put reasonable restrictions, particularly as we look at assault weapons, as we look at these fast clips of ammunition.”

See also:

Speak Out: Should Teachers Be Armed?

Sen. Warner: Newtown is 'Game Changer' on Guns

What Should America (and Virginia) Do About Guns?

Gov. McDonnell Orders School Safety Review

Erica R. Hendry and Mary Ann Barton contributed reporting to this story.

melvin dill December 19, 2012 at 01:01 PM
First and foremost let us be reminded that a psychotic person knows right from wrong. He or she may be delusional and paranoid but in the mist of all the mental disorder is sanity calling out for help. The school shooting was premedated and planned. So there was some sanity in the mist of a derranged mind.
Kenneth d. hardy December 19, 2012 at 01:17 PM
Mr. Gordon I hear and understand you. Tell me what you will do to protect me or, my family while the police are busy writing traffic tickets. As a combat veteran I still have a right to protect myself and family. I do not take this privilege lightly. I will always stand up for what's right even if some disagree. With every privilege comes responsibility. I do not fly because people blew up planes so I drive. It still doesn't make it right. Conduct unbiased research and then comment. How many sex offenders live in our neighborhoods.
FenianPhantom December 19, 2012 at 04:59 PM
Fast clips of ammunition? Ah yet another informed person. First of all assault rifles feed from magazines not clips. Anyone who knows anything about guns knows that and knows that the difference is important. Second, anyone who has done their homework knows that the difference in the amount of time it takes to fire 30 rounds from 3 ten round magazines vs. firing 30 rounds from a single 30 round magazine is about 6-7 seconds depending on the method and shooter skill. Given the average police response times and the fact that they don't just arrive and engage, the impact on the number of rounds your shooter will put out is going to be almost nothing. This is simple math. The NRA being involved in the solution is actually a huge step as we are far more likely to get something functional that will actually help instead of pointless crap like the '94 AW ban which managed to have zero impact over the course of its 10 year run.
Anthony Gordon December 19, 2012 at 05:26 PM
@Kenneth, don't get me wrong. I am not against banning the guns completely. But the more guns go into circulations, the odds of someone crazy having a bigger and badder gun then you increases. Guns have assembly parts which can be replaced so their deterioration can endure longer then other products. Maybe in order to yeild a gun, you have to be a NRA member. So the NRA can invest money in their crazy law abiding citizens instead of raising money for power and lobbying. Maybe there should be different classes of gun wielder. based on mental conditions and good history and even that doesn't seem right. I dont know. but it cant remain the same. If we didnt circulating high powered weapons, maybe a pistol is all you need to protect yourself. but now days, even that might not be enough.
Chuck Stein December 19, 2012 at 05:58 PM
Germany has one of the strictest gun ownership laws in the world, yet that did not stop two school massacres, in 2002 and 2009. After the U.S. assault weapons ban lapsed in 2004, the Urban Institute conducted a study and found that the ban had zero effect -- zero -- on reducing gun violence. There are plenty of studies empirically demonstrating that the safest communities have the highest rates of gun ownership. Let's be honest -- this talk about new gun control laws might be cathartic in the wake of this atrocity, but such laws will have no impact other than limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens. I don't think it's a good idea to limit our rights for no effect.


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
See more »