Quote:
|
How was LaPierre's response disasterous? What disaster ensued?
|
He never should have made a statement at all. The NRA wasn't responsible in even the most tangential way.
You have to look at it from two points of view: the anti-gunner and the uncommitted person.
To the uncommitted, the act of giving a speech and proposing policy solutions seemed to imply some sort of guilt. Furthermore, the idea of flooding our schools with armed security came off as opportunistic and tone-deaf.
To the antis, it was a goldmine. They twisted the "good guy with a gun" phrase and used the speech as proof the NRA was somehow trying to take advantage of the situation.
Let's remember that Timothy McVeigh had an NRA membership. So what, right? That's what
we think.
At the time, the antis pounced on that. He also had some remote involvement with the KKK, and the media had a field day. They stressed his memberships in both organizations as a way of "proving" some connection between the NRA and KKK.
Public relations were terrible for the gun culture at that point, and what did LaPierre do? He referred to law enforcement as "jack booted thugs." Thanks, Wayne. The backlash was epic.
If there was to be any statement following Newtown, it should have been a noncommittal "our hearts go out to the families, but this has nothing to do with us" sort of thing, preferably delivered by someone without such a poisoned public-relations history.
LaPierre really needs to be replaced with someone with a better sense of public opinion.