Sensible sportsmen should abandon the NRA

In the wake of the elementary school shootings in Connecticut on Friday, the talking heads and bloggers are again arguing gun control. And, as usual, I am sure the talk will fade before any action is taken, and it will all be put on hold again until the next shooting. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Why? Because the National Rifle Association (NRA) has somehow acquired so much power that our lawmakers are afraid to oppose them. Indeed, even Democrats are afraid to speak out for sensible gun control.

The NRA keeps talking about protection of Second Amendment rights. But what they actually call for is unfettered access to even the most powerful assault weapons - far beyond the handguns kept for self-defense and rifles used for hunting.

Then, when mass shootings occur, they drag out their tired excuse that "guns don't kill people; people kill people." They refuse to admit that you can kill more people more efficiently with guns than with most other readily available weapons.

Thanks to pressure from the NRA, it is now easier to get an automatic rifle than a driver's license. But since, as they love to point out, "people kill people," shouldn't they be eager to keep their beloved weapons out the hands of the crazies who might kill people?

Apparently not. This is despite the fact that NRA members themselves overwhelmingly support some kinds of sensible gun control.

Therefore, I call on current dues-paying NRA members to abandon the organization until it backs off from its extreme positions.

Sensible gun control will not prevent all mass shootings, but it will certainly make them more difficult. Is that not a worthwhile goal?