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. 57strat

    The NRA advocates personal responsibility for the personal defence of the individual, how about responsibility for the security of such weapons that end up used in incidents such as Newtown. Place the true cost of gun ownership on the gun owners. It could take the form of a tax, or registration. Registration would be handy since the individual would be responsible not to allow the gun to be passed to anyone else who may not be eligible to possess or own such a weapon. Yes I support personal responsibility and that includes being responsible for the cost of regulation, training and enforcement and liability for how your weapons are used and the damage they inflict.

    January 15, 2013 10:39 pm at 10:39 pm |
  2. Country Concerned

    Simple solution. National referendum with registered voters and identified. Take away all the guns or stop attempting to take the guns. Should the do gooders win and the crime rate goes up all those that voted to take away the guns would automatically judged to be accessory to murder and executed in states with the death penalty and those with no death penalty would have to serve at hard labor with no possibility of parole. Benefit; massive population reduction, plenty of food, water, and jobs.

    January 15, 2013 10:40 pm at 10:40 pm |
  3. nc_mike

    I've been an NRA member since age when I first earned my sharpshooter first class as a boy scout. I am renouncing any association with the NRA and any organization that is associated with it. It has become nothing more than a lobby run by the big money of gun makers; it hasn't been an association for individuals for a very long time. This is big money versus we the people. Sensible regulations such as universal background checks, waiting periods, and semi-automatic weapon band would not even remotely impede second amendment rights and I want nothing to do with the paranoia they are spreading among the extreme minority fringe that give lawful, responsible gun owners a bad name. The NRA is nothing more than a tool of sick narcissists.

    January 15, 2013 10:40 pm at 10:40 pm |
  4. Damien

    I'd take gun free zones for my kids ! Any day, every day.

    January 15, 2013 10:40 pm at 10:40 pm |
  5. Chris Swigert

    I am so tired of the right wing and their attempts to use labels to divide us. What is elitist about wanting to protect our nation's elementary schools and our theaters and other public places from the entire place getting shot up. I really think the NRA is a lonely corner now and with the spotlight on them, America will really get a chance to see how wacked out and narcisstic they are.

    January 15, 2013 10:41 pm at 10:41 pm |
  6. James

    Obama could care less about what the NRA thinks. He will sign executive orders and dare them to do....what? Impeach him? Don't have the votes, or the support either. The American people WANT this. Deal with it. You lost, and you will get four years of "I won, you lost, here is what I'm doing". And, Obama IS RIGHT!

    January 15, 2013 10:42 pm at 10:42 pm |
  7. marty

    At first I thought that NRA members who think and act like the Andrew Arulanandams of the world were silly and ridiculous, now I think that they are unstable, mentally challenged, anti-american and extremely dangerous. The fact that the NRA would resort to the lowest of lows with their recent TV ad is quite telling.

    January 15, 2013 10:42 pm at 10:42 pm |
  8. Surthurfurd

    Why do Right Wingers always call others names accusing the others of the very shames that the Right Wingers pride in themselves?

    January 15, 2013 10:43 pm at 10:43 pm |
  9. Craig R B

    The arrogance of the NRA totally qualifies them as "elitist"....they really are unscrupulous instilling fear & hatred in people just to increase gun sales. You know, these distortionist tactics helped Obama win the last election and they're going to get sweeping gun legislation passed ie: New York.

    January 15, 2013 10:44 pm at 10:44 pm |
  10. Sir Cecil

    No-one is stopping NRA members hiring trained, expert security guards. Of course, NRA members are too cheap. Buying a gun at Walmart is cheaper.

    January 15, 2013 10:44 pm at 10:44 pm |
  11. horf

    Can we please have a discussion about gun rights without all the extremist rhetoric? The scare tactics of the extreme right (the government will take all your guns) and the extreme left (no one should have guns) do not help us figure this out. Where are the moderate voices on this issue?

    January 15, 2013 10:45 pm at 10:45 pm |
  12. SpudsMackenzie

    Well, his kids are certainly in more danger than mine. I don't find this hypocritical at all, just the NRA being....well, the NRA.

    January 15, 2013 10:47 pm at 10:47 pm |
  13. Steve

    Wow. A new low. If the NRA is too stupid to understand the difference between a sitting president's family and non-POTUS kids, then they do not possess the intelligence to own firearms.

    January 15, 2013 10:48 pm at 10:48 pm |
  14. CAWinMD

    The hypocrisy lies with the NRA. They're all about enforcing the existing laws, as if that will prevent the kind of gun violence that we have seen. But let Obama propose universal enforcement of background checks, you know, the current law, then the NRA starts calling the President names and brings his kids into the conversation, which is way beyond the pale.

    The NRA just can't handle the fact that a majority of Americans want the kind of solutions the President is going to announce. So they resort to name-calling. That's the best that the leading gun advocacy group can bring to the discussion. Just pathetic.

    January 15, 2013 10:48 pm at 10:48 pm |
  15. Gerry Daley

    These people who, after blaming video games for gun violence, just released a video game featuring...yup...gun violence. They are shameless nutcases. Full stop.

    January 15, 2013 10:48 pm at 10:48 pm |
  16. John

    Truth hurts doesn't it.

    January 15, 2013 10:48 pm at 10:48 pm |
  17. steve

    The NRA and the manufacturers they represent unfortunately are on the wrong side of this issue. They are proposing big government, police state policies and pumping their marketing campaign to keep closed minds closed. Keep in mind Columbine...two armed guards and friendly fire and an assault rifle riddled assault weapons ban in place. Not a success story. The NRA's hands off approach re guns and background checks is absurd. The machine gun ban of 1932 has had an amazing track record. The only place you'll find machine guns are with specially licensed people, the military and perhaps the black market. (a market built around money) Put in a solid assault weapons ban, no mega clips, 100% background checks, incorporate mental health qualifications (or dequalifiers), put smart ID's on certain classes of weapons, and tighten the rating of computer war games (without trampling the 1st Amendment). All this can be done without infringing on the 2nd Amendment. This amendment was NOT put in place to guarantee citizens access to the latest technology in weapons systems. We have the right to bare arms...not machine guns and hopefully not any other weapons allowing one individual the ability to become a one man militia. As a gun owner I own several guns and know how to shoot them. This isn't about taking guns, but controlling access to guns that have a proven track record of mass carnage on a moments notice. If people want the assault rifles, they should have to go through the same obstacles they do to get a machine gun. I've never heard anyone complain about not being able to readily buy a machine gun. The NRA can do better in representing it's small vocal factions that actually believe the NRA represents them. Follow the money and the NRA's true colors will appear. In the meantime, common sense will eventually prevail over money and politics.

    January 15, 2013 10:49 pm at 10:49 pm |
  18. FreeFromTheism

    Well, it would seem that the NRA fails at logic once more...
    Why does the President have bodyguards and why shouldn't you, are you less important? There we go; now we have a perfectly good case for getting every American a bodyguard paid for by the government. Of course, each bodyguard would need a bodyguard too =)
    What a load of nonsense...

    January 15, 2013 10:49 pm at 10:49 pm |
  19. David A. Craft

    NRA, you are wrong for messing with the President's children! I don't care if you don't like the President or the party he is associated with-children are off limit, even in your ads.

    January 15, 2013 10:50 pm at 10:50 pm |
  20. RockinRol

    Further arming our communities and public spaces will never reduce violence or the threat of violence. A new arms race on our shores will only sow more seeds of paranoia and raise the spectre of gun carnage and senseless killing. The USA must come not escalate the gun madness.

    January 15, 2013 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm |
  21. ST

    This is an ill thinking and ridiculous of NRA. Is every kid's father a president? If so, we must have millions of presidents in the country at the same time.

    January 15, 2013 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm |
  22. Bob

    How any thoughtful human being can listen to those running the National (Assault) Rifle Association and still claim to be a member of the association is beyond my understanding. To Christians I ask, " WWJD?"

    January 15, 2013 10:52 pm at 10:52 pm |
  23. MikeyNYC

    If school security guards were as well-trained as Secret Service agents, I'd wager there would be far less of a problem with the idea of armed security guards in schools. The NRA has resorted to name-calling it seems and even worse, it hasn't addressed the recent shootings that took the lives of so many. Its obvious that the NRA really doesn't care about solving problems, just making problems and as long as the money rolls in to its coffers, the NRA isn't going to produce any reasonable solution.

    January 15, 2013 10:53 pm at 10:53 pm |
  24. DWileyOne

    The NRA's advertising is disingenuous and typical of an organization that spews misleading rhetoric. Can anyone say, "red herring"? President Obama's children have Secret Service protection for one reason only: they are the children of the president of the United States. So, instead of doing a smoke and mirrors act, why don't you all agree that there is a problem with the way guns are handled and figure out some common ground where everyone compromises a little to the greater good ... OUR CHILDREN.

    January 15, 2013 10:53 pm at 10:53 pm |
  25. bronxite10

    Stand and Fight sums up most Americans feel about how to deal with the NRA. We have had it with you people. We do not want to sacrifice more innocents on the alter of your lunacy. We do not want to condemn more parents to a lifetime of grieving so that you can cradle an assault weapon in your arms. You do nothing, absolutely nothing, to defend us from criminals and crazies. Instead, you make it easier for those criminals crazies to get guns. You are not the answer to the bad guys with the guns. You ARE the bad guys with the guns.

    January 15, 2013 10:53 pm at 10:53 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