January 15th, 2013
09:28 PM ET
5 years ago

NRA airs new TV ad criticizing Obama on eve of White House gun announcement

Washington (CNN) - The National Rifle Association released a new television commercial Tuesday night charging President Barack Obama of hypocrisy for being "skeptical" about placing armed guards at schools, while his own two daughters are protected by the U.S. Secret Service.

"Are the president's kids more important than yours?" a narrator says in the 30 second ad. "Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school."

The commercial is running on the Sportsman Channel, a cable network focused on outdoors programming such as hunting and fishing. It is also posted on a dedicated web site "Stand and Fight."

On Wednesday, Obama is set to unveil a new set of proposals that would place very tough restrictions on the ownership and sale of firearms.

In the ad, the narrator only mentions Obama by name, but it also features images of Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and NBC anchor David Gregory. Bloomberg is an influential voice in favor of stricter gun laws and has dipped into his personal fortune to help fund a lobby campaign, and Feinstein, a California Democrat, is helping spearhead a congressional effort to enforce tougher gun laws.

Gregory questioned NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre in a December interview about the effectiveness of the organization's proposal to put armed guards in schools. After the interview, the NRA and conservative media outlets noted that Gregory's children attended the same school as Obama's daughters and the school has a security department.

"Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes," the narrator says. "But he is just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security. Protection for their kids and gun-free zones for ours."

The introduction of Obama's children into the gun debate further demonstrates the high stakes in this very complicated and emotional issue about how to weigh Second Amendment rights with the safety of citizens following several high profile killings, including the recent massacre of 20 children and six educators at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school.

As advocates for new gun restrictions pledge to pressure Congress to pass new laws, the NRA and other like-minded gun rights groups and conservative organizations have said they will fight any changes to the current gun laws.

"Stand and fight sums up what Americans need to do to preserve our Second Amendment freedom," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told CNN.

The NRA is not ruling out expanding the buy to air the commercial elsewhere.

The group, which had an existing partnership with the Sportsman Channel, has added an NRA hosted daily weekday program to the network's lineup.

Filed under: Ads • Gun rights • NRA • President Obama
soundoff (583 Responses)
  1. skinet7

    Typical NRA response. It just goes to show all the NRA cares about is equipping every American with a gun. They clearly don't care about children being killed by them. The NRA's solution to ending gun violence is to give everyone a gun. Maybe the NRA should do a better job of educating the community about gun violence. The last I heard the Secret Service doesn't go around flashing their guns and shooting people because they want to. They area a protective group for the country's leaders. Maybe the Secret Service should take the NRA's advice towards the NRA. If the NRA complains about gun control, shoot them.

    January 16, 2013 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  2. TOM

    I don't like Obama, but of course the president's kids are gonna have protection. His kids aren't more important but they are in the public eye more. They are also a bigger target for an idiot with a gun trying to make a statement. Does the NRA even realize how idiotic they sound?

    January 16, 2013 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  3. Sara

    What a ludicrous argument for the NRA to make. Secret Service protection is mandatory for a sitting president and his family, as a matter of national security. Our democracy has long recognized that a kidnapping of our president's immediate family members is more than a horrifying event, it would put our national security at risk.

    January 16, 2013 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  4. snowyowl

    It used to be that the greatest threats to a President and his family came from foreign enemies and terrorists. Now it's gun-toting, right-wing nut-jobs from the good old U.S. of A. I hope that the Secret Service tracks them down and disarms them immediately. If the goal is to keep guns out of the hands of unstable individuals, a good place to start would be the NRA leadership, and maybe a few members of Congress.

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  5. mo

    If Jesus had a gun maybe he would be alive today...

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  6. Mike

    The NRA are COWARDS who hide behind children, whether it is schoolchildren whom they expect to take the bullet for gun owners' supposed right to buy assault weapons and to permit 40% of sales to go without background checks, or behind the President's children whom they now accuse of being elitist for having so much security (what a shock).
    The NRA disgusts me, and a growing number of Americans. Their demonstrations of craziness like this will only marginalize them further, but I suspect they will become more dangerous as they become more marginalized.

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  7. Jake

    But, they aren't talking about secret service. The school the President's kids go to has armed guards, and had them before they went there.

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  8. akwildflower

    NRA is not the organization I used to belong to – obviously in need of their own 'mental health' treatment. The law REQUIRES every President to have security for every family member. NOT optional, because a kidnapping, for example, could throw America into a tailspin. So this ad could NOT be farther off base. NRA has sadly gone 'round the bend ~
    The USA already had a ban on high-capacity clips & the weapons used to fire them rapidly. This is NOT a new thing.

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  9. Some guy

    The statistics really don't support the need for further banning of guns. Massacre shootings really are not even close to being close to frequent when compared to gang shooting murders, shooting killings by police, suicide shootings, etc. and shouldn't be used as a reason for this. Whatever happened to not letting emotions get ahold of you when making decisions?

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  10. JC

    The NRA is only growing my friends. The NRA is getting larger by the day. Thanks to you smack talking tree huggers. If you push, you are going to be pushed back. The NRA represents a small number of the guns in America. Only have the unfortunate individuals in the state of NY gotten screwed by the liberal zombie bottom feeders. Those ridiculous gun laws will not fly in other states. What Obama, and the rest of you jobless wastes of space have done, is in fact nothing. Nothing that has been done will reduce gun violence that has been proposed. You look act like the bottom feeders you are, kissing the ass of anyone who will give you a handout in exchange for support. You would sacrifice your freedom for another pack of cigarettes or a couple of bucks extra on your welfare check. Maybe you are so scared of guns because you have no idea how one works? Well men and women use them to fight to protect your freedom that so many of you gun-control advocates in fact don't deserve. Unfortunately, I think you will learn your lesson the hard way when all of your "legislation" proves to be ineffective. Get a job.

    January 16, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  11. Bill in Pleasanton, CA

    It is time for Americans to realize that the NRA is a domestic terrorist organization. The policies that the NRA has been espousing since the organization took a radical turn into politics starting in 1977 have resulted in hundreds of thousands of Americans losing their lives. The approximately 3,000 Americans that lost their lives on 9/11 is trivial compared to carnage that the NRA has inflicted on our country. This latest nonsense about the President's children is despicable. The NRA is the most effective terrorist organization operating in any developed western country in the world by a wide margin when measured in citizen deaths.

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  12. partisan hack

    Want to know the difference between armed security guards at schools and the secret service you NRA hicks?
    1. YEARS of training
    2. Obama's family is a prime target whereas there is no way of determining which schools will be targeted for a shooting.

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  13. JFK

    I still don't understand why we need to have assault weapons (weapons of war) on our streets. If the NRA pansies need them for hunting, then they should take up a new hobby. Riddling children or moviegoers with bullets for sport violates all of our First Amendment rights. Enough! Virginia Tech, Aurora, Tucson, Clackamas, NewTown.....on what stage is death due to dance tomorrow? Thanks NRA for bringing these places into the lexicon of our shared national tragedy. We've spent so much money on terrorism prevention, for what, THIS? And if you think arming teachers is a good idea, just wait till everyone is outgunned at Parent-Teacher night.....I can just see the "Breaking News" alert now.

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  14. Victor

    So many ignorant comments here it is amazing.

    People: The school has armed guards without the Secret Service. Even if Obama's children had zero Secret Service protection, they would still be attending a school that has armed guards. Period. The ad is spot on.

    People talking about the Secret Service and all that missed the point entirely. There are 11 non-Secret Service armed guard personnel at the school. What about them? Exactly... Just face it, his children are more important than yours. Welcome to the new United States.

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  15. Doug

    Are you kidding me? How did this turn from keeping our children safe at all cost, to a political "free for all". This is a very different world than what it was 100 years ago and it's getting worse. Americans need to lay aside their egos and take this fight to keep our children safe very serious. Hey Mr. NRA or Mr. Politician, or Mr. Supremist, or Mr. Gun Shop Owner, or Mr. Redneck, were any of your kids in that classroom that horrific day? And if you did loose a child that day, wouldn't you go to the end of the earth to make sure another child is not harmed, at any cost? Are the profits of the gun manufactures, NRA, politicians, lobbists, and some loopholes in the constitution more important than your childs safety? Let's do what it takes to make our schools safer. It doesn't matter if the best solution comes from a Democrat, Republican, a rich man. a poor man, homelss man, white man, black man, red man, dog, cat, mouse or frog. Let's get it done now.

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  16. Dee

    How typical of the elite media .. highlight and exploit dead kids for weeks, encourage copycats with demonstrated "tipping point", "game changing", "historical" proclimations for what a monster did, making the monsters dying wish come true. Vilify good people for suggesting a real solution. and then not even comment when it is, slightly modified, one of the Presidents Emperial Orders because it is a real solution,.. and then complain about the people who proposed the solution mentioning the President's Childrenand thier armed guards, while the President parades other people's children on stage while he signs his Emperial Orders...

    Did I miss something? Oh yeah.. they only mention the short 30 second version.. not the full lenght version.

    Aren't journaists so special....

    January 16, 2013 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  17. mhub

    Wayne is grasping at straws. I DO NOT WANT ARMED GUARDS IN MY KID'S SCHOOLS!!! The idea of responding to this by putting more guns in schools is completely wrong – it will cause more accidents than it prevents and sends a bad message to kids – respond to fear with use of weapons. What we've seen recently is a lot of gun owners (I own guns) are really paranoid and unrealistic. They spend way too much time fantasizing about being cowboys ready to save the day, or fearing that the government is going to turn into a dictatorship.

    January 16, 2013 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  18. earl

    Good its about time people are standing up to our corrupt government, there time of wickedness is coming to an end, the only way they will my guns is if they pry it out of my cold dead hands. period wake up dumb people..

    January 16, 2013 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  19. Oh, you guys...

    It's funny how a lot of you are like, "Bringing Obama's kids into it? How could they?" Well, every anti-gun person has used the kids slaughtered at Sandy Hook as a reason to ban guns. To the people who think armed guards at schools would be a bad thing, what if there was an armed guard at the front of Sandy Hook Elementary?

    Anyway, I'm not saying it will happen in out lifetimes, our children's lifetimes, or ever, but the deterrent of tyranny is going away. If you really think the government couldn't and wouldn't turn on its people, you must have failed history.

    January 16, 2013 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  20. Person with Common Sense

    This is one flawed argument if I've ever seen one! Let's compare apples to rocks:

    – The Secret Service is a highly-trained agency of PROFESSIONALS, not a bunch of gun-toting teachers who took a few hours of concealed carry classes and a field trip to the firing range.

    – The President's kids are about a million times more likely to be targeted for assassination, seeing as how they are the offspring of the leader of the free world. The kids of NRA members are probably more likely to be targeted by their own inbred siblings.

    Good effort, NRA. It'll be such a shame when these brilliant individuals are deprived of their excessive firepower.

    January 16, 2013 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  21. Kirk

    The school that The president's daughters attend is guarded not only by the SS rather it has its own guards. I do think that the President and his children should be protected. With that said it is hypocritical to want protection by armed guards (with guns) and not want that right for regular citizens based on the premise that "Gun Free Zones" are safer than areas that allow Citizens or Guards to be armed just in case. If it is safer for us to have Gun free zones it should be safer for them.

    January 16, 2013 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  22. sue

    Even President Bush who was a Republician kids were protected by secret service. Look at the points and don't go all over just a blame the President. he is trying to do something good for the future generation.

    January 16, 2013 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  23. Dennis

    President children, wife and himself are at far greater risk than a member of the public. It is not that our kids are worth less than the president's.
    I think the laws just past by Obama are right and sensible.
    Unfortunately many more people have a Military style weapon now, because of the possible ban, than would have bought otherwise.
    And criminals will not be effected in the least.

    January 16, 2013 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  24. Tonya

    I do think armed guards should be at every school, mall and major sporting event. I do believe that all the President's direct family members need Secret Service Protection. We do not need assault type weapons in our society or ammo that allows for multiple rounds. We do need to allow all citizens to carry concealed weapons if they so desire in areas where it is legal. Just plain common sense...all of it! Protect our kids, protect our President and his family and protect ourselves!!!

    January 16, 2013 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  25. awram

    State budgets are tapped. If the NRA can spend millions a year in lobbying maybe they can kick in the money to put the armed guards at schools. Can't imagine how much money they spend on producing and air time for ridiculous commercials.

    January 16, 2013 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24