I totally understand not wanting to alienate hard fought-for allies in the law enforcement community. The only ones there, these days, against us are the police chiefs. But would it have really alienated them? They brother officer is off the hook AND off the force. They protected their own and purged the weak from their ranks. They could have accepted a word about this issue now.
The NRA didn't have to say something like "hang the cop up by his thumbs!" The NRA can say they were disappointed and imply more training is needed to prevent senseless tragedies in the future and that everyone regrets the whole thing, all round. Something sensible and non committal like that.
Because the dues paying NRA members are people with CCW permits like Castile had.
What kind of statement will NRA release if an actual totally squeaky clean NRA member gets shot by a nervous cop in a mirror type situation next week? Nothing? And if that NRA member is white and they do say something, the racism charges will fly and it will certainly be bad optics at a minimum. Would the NRA have lost that many members by being somewhat sympathetic to a black dude that was shot for no good reason? A black dude pretty much an ideal ally of ours? I dunno. I don't know how they calculate stuff like this downtown.
And if the NRA is more of a GOP organization now instead of a firearm owner's right organization how does not saying anything help the GOP, too?
I think Fairfax dropped the ball on this. If Loesch had just waited til the SECOND statement of hers to push the insurance she is a spokesperson for, maybe. LaPierre would have been better.
It's not helping me sway black co-workers that were leaning toward supporting 'our' side.
I'm not pissed, I just wish things had turned out different and figure this is a lost opportunity
6 comments:
I think we can agree that we do no believe that Philando Castile deserved to be shot and killed. We see it as a tragedy. We also see he contributed to the situation (being somewhat stoned and not precisely determining the officer's instructions BEFORE moving). The jury followed the instructions and based on the evidence (perhaps not enthusiastically presented by the prosecution) at hand, made a decision. We all knew that this case stunk. We all saw confusion in the actions of Castile.
The NRA was going to be pilloried if they supported Castile vs the officer because of his drug use. They would be pilloried again for supporting the officer vs Castile because of the legal possession of the firearm and Castile's permit. This was a no win for the NRA and they hoped it would blow over. A spineless action (or lack there of) but an understandable one.
then they say something non committal and cluck their tongue and woe is everyone and everything. Last week. Almost as spineless, but quite.
I think the NRA took the right stance on Castile, that is not a hill that they want to die on. No he should not have been shot, but he did almost every thing wrong in an armed interaction with the police. I am willing to be that most of that was caused because he was driving and carrying while stoned, both against the law.
Our political opponents see only the one thing he did 'wrong' I fear.
The NRA said absolutely nothing in the aftermath. Just a "We don't have all the details, but we're concerned any time a lawful CCW is shot" would have been enough. Instead, they damned themselves with silence.
Look, I understand that NRA is beholden to law enforcement for much of its support, but they should at least pay a little bit of lip service to those of us who aren't LEOs or may not look like Andy Griffith.
I quit my membership over this.
I don't know that it rises to the level of 'quit the NRA'.
If they endorsed Hillary for preznit, that would make me quit.
Post a Comment