Customer Reviews

Shooting Straight: Telling the Truth About Guns in America

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Does a pretty good job of explaining why most if not all gun control concepts and demands will not work and in some cases may not even be meant to. Each chapter is extensively footnoted (I'd like more detail in them)and features numerous quotes from various figures throughout history on what the Country's founders really meant and why they meant what they said. In many cases examples are given of the various control proposals that have been made, followed by just how they've failed. I appreciate the care given to the reporting of what many have privately, if not always publicly, said about what they really want for guns in America.
This book won't convince those that refuse to be convinced but should be read by anyone who has an honest interest in the facts about gun control.

I'm not a member of the NRA or even a gunowner, but I have to praise this book highly. LaPierre and Baker do an outstanding job of defending the rights of gunowners in Shooting Straight. The authors address and rebut most of the common gun-control arguments. Their defense of the 2nd Amendment as being a personal right rather than a collective right was particularly convincing. Any fair-minded reader will be forced to concede that LaPierre and Baker have demolished a number of the myths of the gun control crowd. Even if you're a gun control proponent, I urge to read this book with an open mind. The NRA has been treated unfairly by the established media; I'm glad they decided to take their case to the public.

However, I do have one strong disagreement with the authors. On page 52, they urge "the enforcement of the 20,000 gun control laws on the books." Wait a minute. The authors devoted the rest of the book to showing us gun control laws don't reduce crime. So why do we need to enforce thousands of laws that are ineffective as well as probably being unconstitutional? The authors don't explain this inconsistency. In my judgement, this weakness keeps the book from meriting a 5 star rating. Nevertheless, it is still an excellent book that I can proudly recommend.

Mr. Arthur Hayhoe comments below contradict his own opening paragraph.

To all readers please read the United States Supreme Court (USSC) Decision in Perpich v. DOD (1990 Justice Kennedy wrote the decision) and the Lopez v. U.S. (1994 Justice Scilia wrote the decision). You will find the individual right to a gun very well established. If you doubt that then read the papers of the Continental Congress during the formation of our country. But that is about 3000 pages of reading.

Best wishes Steve Grigsby

Shooting Straight is a fantastic book about guns in America. It corrects all of the intentional errors put forth by the liberal media in this country and gives you the facts, both statistically and from a historical perspective. Wayne LaPierre is currently the head of the NRA, yet you don't get a feel for biased perspectives or crazy rants, distorted facts that are common in other left-wing media based text. The author simply states facts, both statistical and hisorical concerning gun ownership, right to carry laws and the second amendment. This book correctly summarizes what the founding fathers intended through the second amendment and he proves this by citing indisputable examples of their quotations and writings through the federalist papers.

There is NO denying the fact that our founding fathers were concerned about any governmental intrusion on the individual right to bear arms for both self protection and government tyranny. The Bill of Rights, including the second amendment are critical for America's survival today (in the light of an increased awareness of fanatical terrorism) and for future generations of Americans.

Not only should everyone read this book, but its contents should be priority teaching in all public and private schools today.

It is unfortunate how many people think they know something about guns, however, they have absolutely no idea (never owned one,never viewed children in the field with their parents enjoying the outdoors, etc...). The media tries so hard to brain wash the ignorant and weak to believe guns are bad. Guns have been a positive part of our heritage from the beginning (parents and children, friends, individuals and their dogs, etc...) and this book shows the TRUE story from people who know something about guns and not those misinformed people who get their information strictly from the media.

There is absolutely NOTHING WRONG with owning firearms.

Whether out of stupidity, ignorance, or naivety, most leftists really do believe that firearms ownership is a "left versus right" issue. It is NOT.

Every person has THE RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE.
Every person has THE RIGHT TO DEFEND OTHERS.
Possessing the contemporary arms to do so, IS PART OF THAT RIGHT.

A historical case in point:

Alan Berg, a leftist radio talk-show host from Colorado, recieved a number of death-threats from neo-nazis. Berg was brash, abbrasive, and controversial, which is what you have to be to succeed in particular talk-show venues. I myself would probably greatly disagree with Berg's political views, but in America, we all have a RIGHT to express ourselves, whether anyone agrees or not. NO ONE CAN STOP YOU FROM SPEAKING YOUR MIND.
Due to the death-threats, Berg applied to the police for a permit to carry a pistol. THEY SAID NO. Guess what? The Aryan Nation KILLED Berg.

Now, even if he had been armed, they still may have been able to murder him, ...or maybe he may have been successful in defending himself. Being armed, he at least had a chance.

This example demonstates, in part, what our Second Amendment was meant for.

There is an agenda behind every proposal to disarm private citizens. There is NO VALIDITY to any of the usual leftist propaganda cited arguing in favor of the disarmament of law-abiding citizens. All such leftist propaganda is logically de-bunked in Mr. Lapierre's recent book.

Unfortunately, the anti-gun rabble WILL NOT listen. They very desparately WANT to believe the propaganda from their commisars, as all good communists do.

Consider these FACTS:

-Some people think "gun-control" is needed for "public safety":

99% of all firearms in America are owned by responsible, private citizens who abide the law and are NO THREAT to anyone. The fact is, the anti-gun politicians are AFRAID that the specific demographic groups who possess guns won't comply with their prospective "politics". Hitler and Stalin had the same problem when they came to power.

-Some people really want to believe that banning firearms will result in "less crime":

In fact, in every country in the world, ...the vast majority of which DO NOT recognize a citizen's right to self-defense, and DO NOT ALLOW their citizens to keep any kind of weapon ...THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT IS ARMED TO THE TEETH! This is true even in nations under totalitarian rule. Revelation: criminals DON'T OBEY LAWS!
The TRUTH, is that gun-banning is all about CONTROL of the LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN.

-Some people, LEFTISTS IN PARTICULAR, think that "only the police and military should have guns":

I have never known liberals to be supporters of the police or military. According to them: "the cops are racist" and the "military is a fascist organization". Why then, would they endorse a policy in which ONLY the police and military may keep arms?

In fact, in many nations, the police and military are a tool of the state, whose major task is to suppress the citizenry, not necessarily law-enforcement or national-defense. In fact, a number of emminent statesmen such as Stalin, Lenin, Mao Tze Tung, Pol Pot, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Idi Amin (just to name a few) were quite aware of the advantages of just such an arrangement. Its rather easy to enforce your "policies" when the populace has no means to resist.

Mao Tze Tung, said: "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun".


-Some people think that you should depend on the police to protect you:

In a city of a million people, do you really think a few hundred police-officers can magically appear to save you, PRECISELY at the time of an assault? Has this EVER happened? What if the police are already overwhelmed with previous calls, which is all too often in many urban areas? Often, even if the victim DID have time to call for help, the police arrive long after the crime was commited. Sometimes, only the corroner and forensic team can do anything at that point.

ONLY YOU can be resonsible for your own safety. If you can't comprehend this, you are living in a fantastic delusion.

THE TRUTH: Those politicians and activists who are so determined to disarm the law-abiding populace, have an agenda. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao did. They too, were very strong advocates of "gun-control". They too, stated it was for "public safety".

This book is fantastic and you cannot argue with facts, unless of course your name is Arthur Hayhoe. This is a gentleman who carries and conceals his own weapon, be aware of that when listening to his anti-second amendment rhetoric. He is deceitful and elitist.

I wasn't even going to look at Mr. LaPierre's book until I saw the simplistic and grammatically challenged "review" posted by one "Arthur Hayhoe." If the only "review" this guy can dish up is comprised almost exclusively of his own warmed-over leftist ideology and revisionist history, then LaPierre must be on to something.

In "Shooting Straight" Wayne LaPierre analyzes the "buzz words" used by the gun control lobby.
The most telling abuse of these words is "Assault Weapons".
Mr. LaPierre quotes Josh Sugarman of the Violence Policy Center to reveal how the gun control lobby really works.
"Assault weapons are a new topic. The weapon's menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine-guns versus semi-automtic assault weapons. Anything that looks like a machine-gun can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." - page 44.
Deception and confusion are standard operating procedure.

The author cites numerous statistics proving that crime rates increase with a disarmed population. That contrasts with lower crime rates in conceal-and-carry states. Crimonologists Gary Kleck and John R. Lott,jr are sources for that data.
"The point is clear, crime is irrelevant to the gun control lobby, control is the issue." The author quoted on page 66.

The media bias in reporting on the conclusion of the shooting at Appalachian School of Law in 2002 is addressed. What the media widely ignored or censored was the fact that two armed students disarmed the shooter.

John McCain's Campaign Finance Reform bill is analyzed as well as McCains' relationship with Americans for Gun Safety(AGS). AGS has no relationship to gun safety, it's a stealth approach at gun control.

The myth that the government or police force must protect you is shattered by a D.C. Court of Appeals ruling in 1981 which reads in part, "a government and it's agents are under no general duty to provide public services such as police protection, to any particular citizen".

As Mr. LaPierre accurately points out, the problem is not with laws. The problem lies in woefully inadequate enforcement and prosecution of federal laws! The common sense solution is enforcement of current laws and responsible gun ownership!


One point of contention I have is one that was brought up by an earlier reviewer, that is the seemingly high number quoted for existing laws by the author.

"Shooting Straight-Telling the Truth About Guns in America" is just what the title implies, a straight forward book about the inalienable right of self-protection, responsible gun ownership, and the tactics used by the gun control lobby.

"It's just plain common sense that there be a waiting period to allow local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on those who wish to buy a handgun."

- Ronald Reagan *endorsing* the Brady handgun control bill, at a March 1991 event commemorating 10th anniversary of the assassination attempt.