Saturday, December 15, 2012


Gary Wills on our tragedy.
Few crimes are more harshly forbidden in the Old Testament than sacrifice to the god Moloch (for which see Leviticus 18.21, 20.1-5). The sacrifice referred to was of living children consumed in the fires of offering to Moloch. Ever since then, worship of Moloch has been the sign of a deeply degraded culture. Ancient Romans justified the destruction of Carthage by noting that children were sacrificed to Moloch there. Milton represented Moloch as the first pagan god who joined Satan’s war on humankind:
First Moloch, horrid king, besmear’d with blood
Of human sacrifice, and parents’ tears,
Though for the noise of Drums and Timbrels loud
Their children’s cries unheard, that pass’d through fire
To his grim idol. (Paradise Lost 1.392-96)
Read again those lines, with recent images seared into our brains—“besmeared with blood” and “parents’ tears.” They give the real meaning of what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School Friday morning. That horror cannot be blamed just on one unhinged person. It was the sacrifice we as a culture made, and continually make, to our demonic god.


Steve Bloom said...

This stuff is absolutely unsurprising given that the basic experiences forming our culture were slavery and Indian genocide (incomplete for a few tribes, albeit). How we love pretending that we are a different people than history shows us to be.

Anonymous said...

obituaries to these murder victims: "Gun is a tool made for killing" , "What good a tool is if it never gets used"

Steve Bloom said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
David B. Benson said...

And then there are the reports of children droned to death...

Steve Bloom said...

Hmm, some truths are a little too rough for delicate bunny sensibilities, apparently.

Gaz said...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

OK, please someone explain this to me.

Nancy Lanza apparently had an arsenal of five weapons, including - apparently - a Sig-Sauer pistol, a Glock pistol and a Bushmaster assault rifle.

To what "well-regulated militia" did she belong?

EliRabett said...

Eli does not appreciate your version of the Westboro Baptist much Steve. Take it elsewhere.

dbostrom said...

The ancients had Moloch, we've got the NRA, aka "National Gun Marketing Protective Association." Children sacrificed at the altar of a highly profitable business. A perfect union of fear and greed.

Mal Adapted said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bryson said...

I think some share of blame for the influence of 'guns make us safer' nonsense has to be placed at the door (altar?) of the entertainment industry. Almost all the violence everyday Americans (and Canadians) ever witness is fictional violence, and the vividness (in Hume's sense) of the fantasy that, if we all had guns, we would save many lives by ensuring would be mass murderers just get shot, is grounded in the narrative conventions that shape those fictions.

Anonymous said...

Well color me stoopid, that is why they call me "Hey Stoopid".

This is not the first, nor will it be the last of the tragedies of mass killing events, given the unfortunate nickname "Going Postal"!

Sadly, in the real world, the only man who needs a gun, is the brain less brain dead mononeuron end user!

This is yet another tragic "Going Postal" event, since the first of the many reported since a crazed insane lunatic called Andrew Kehoe, deliberately bombed an occupied school, way back in 1927, killing many innocent children. His farm property was foreclosed due to his deliberate failure, from a variety of circumstances and self choice, to evade payment of his county school tax assessment.

Hmmm, way back in the wake of the Columbine High School massacre, Marilyn Manson, made a very basic statement of reality. This statement still rings true to this very day. Michael Moore's "Bowling For Columbine", released in 2002, shows why these unfortunate tragic "Going Postal" incidents will remain part of the landscape, for decades to come!

As for the insensitive clowns and the paid for comment propaganda spin doctors from all the fake patriots and charlatans of the "NRA". All of them, will roll out, in the usual circus clowns/fake experts/fake skewed debate, to defend that which is indefensible.

In, addition Connecticut will get a super saturation of "Gun Shows", many very questionable petitions and much more to create the fake illusion of so called popular support to prevent additional controls and checks on a tiny feeble mentally impaired minority, who worship the gun, as a false god.

As, for the US media and Hollywood, one can expect within the next six months mindless drivel fictional meaningless mediocre movies about this incident!

I feel for the residents of Connecticut. A new clown circus has rolled into the state. For they will face an evil saturation cynical propaganda of complete nonsense, for the next twelve to eighteen months. This is to force all the residents to vote against their own best interests. That circus will leave town, only when the next tragic ongoing "Going Postal" event occurs in another unsuspecting state.

Alas, one can only wish for those drastic Japanese style gun laws(they do save many innocent lives and reduce suicides by a very large margin). Until, such time these draconian control laws are imposed, "Going Postal", will remain a very permanent fixture and part of the way of life, living in the USA.

You pays your money and takes your choice, such is life!

John Mashey said...

The local newspaper had an advertising insert from Big 5 Sporting Goods, which included 16 guns of various types, including a Colt M4 .22LR, quite similar to the Bushmaster .223 used in CT.

See for snapshot of current 'Fishing & Hunting' section.
It is unclear what game is to be hunted with semi-automatics.

As I recall from study of military history, the weapons used in the American Revolution were muzzle-loaders, capable of 2-3 shots/minute by experienced folks, although since most were muskets, not rifles, the bayonets were likely more accurate. The Founders likely weren't thinking of machine guns of any sort.

Jim Eager said...

Although I grew up with guns and enjoyed target, skeet and trap shooting as a teenager, as an adult I have never owned or even touched one.
Here's why.

My cousin in North Carolina - shot dead.
A high school friend - shot through the hand by someone fooling around with a loaded hand gun.
My cousin in Connecticut, an avid gun collector who taught me how to shoot safely - shot and severely injured during the robbery of a gun shop he just happened to enter at the wrong time.
An adult friend who hunts - shot and severely injured during a hunting "accident," as the euphemism goes.
One of my former Scouts - shot in the back dead while celebrating end of term in a bar because one of his friends spoke to the wrong girl.
An 18 year old man run down and shot dead on side walk outside my front door.

I'm just one person with no particular tie to guns or violence tracing one path through time.
Except for the 18 year old, these were all people I know or knew.
I have no use for fucking guns and no use for the people who claim they need to own them.

John Mashey said...

See article @ HuffPost.

'Any move to clamp down on consumer sales of military-style weapons could fall heavily on Bushmaster and its corporate parent, Freedom Group, a private company owned by a New York-based hedge fund, Cerberus Capital Management. According to its 2011 annual report, Freedom Group is the nation's largest manufacturer of military-style semiautomatics, which it calls "modern sporting rifles."

Freedom Group also owns Remington and DPMS Firearms, two other leading manufacturers of military-style semiautomatics.

In its 2011 report, Freedom Group described semiautomatic rifles as among the firm's most promising areas of growth. The market for such guns grew 27 percent between 2007 and 2011, the firm said.

"The continued adoption of the modern sporting rifle has led to increased growth in the long gun market, especially with a younger demographic of users," the company said.'

Neven said...

Keep shopping, folks.

dhogaza said...

"Jim Eager said...

Although I grew up with guns and enjoyed target, skeet and trap shooting as a teenager, as an adult I have never owned or even touched one.

Here's why."

I was the best shot on the 0.22 rifle range in my troop, as a boy scout. I've not owned or used a gun as an adult, and have no desire to do so.

My "personal scorecard" is "only" three people I know having been shot.

Father-in-law when his small corner grocery store was being robbed by kids in their late teens. His 30-ish son was in the storage area behind the meat market when they came in, and had their rifle out,but couldn't get a clear shot. The pistol used by the robbers had been robbed the week before from a jeweler's shop.

12-yr-old neighbor friend, same age as me, shot through the thigh with a 12-gauge at close range when sleeping over at a friend's up the street. Boys thought they heard someone in the back yard. The widowed mom got out the 12-gauge, took off the safety, bumped something and it went off. The boy lost the leg.

The third was a freak hunting accident, a professor from OSU standing on a knoll, hit by a stray bullet from far away. He died immediately. HIs friends didn't even remember hearing the shot. I'm not anti-hunting, gun control as many of us think of it would not have stopped this (unlike the other two).

It's amazing how many people have been touched by gun violence. In my case, almost as frequently as violent auto accidents.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Lumpus Spookytooth, phd.

The problem is there are so many guns out in public at this point and we have no idea how many crazy people have them. I don't think anybody here would feel immediately safer if all guns sales were banned today or tomorrow. Many drugs are illegal, people still find plenty of ways to get them.

So in summary my point is that I am so afraid of the uncertainty of the behavioral pattern of some of these people that have guns that I feel I need one to protect myself.

Eli, I hope the whole "demonic god" thing was not a reference to catholicism and instead a reference to the almighty dollar.

cynthia said...

The problem of the school shootings goes far beyond guns. This country has an ethos of violence, and every institution, from politics to media to entertainment, is responsible. We have a president who kills children daily with his drone program, and who has given himself the right to assassinate any US citizen he simply thinks might be anti-American (no trial by jury or presumption of innocence allowed). On top of that, we have an entertainment industry that makes billions off the violence it assaults our senses with daily, a “defense” industry that is the biggest money pit in history, and politicians who stand in front of the entire world and lie just to get us into more useless and unnecessary wars. In light of the death and destruction of families, lives and property that this country has wreaked throughout the world, do we really expect to evade the consequences of our violence?

Anonymous said...

Snow Bunny says:
A high school classmate, dead in a classic hunting accident
A hunter in my grandfather's field, not thought to be an accident, although no one was ever charged. The hunter asked permission of my grandfather, no one else did.
3 colleagues, suicides (you can't stop a determined suicide, although possibly 1 was an impulse, and I've known suicides who used other methods)
my former next door neighbor, murdered by his wife
his wife, a suicide
A former neighbor's son, a young man murdered by a jealous man ditched by his girlfriend

and I met a sad 80+ man whose daughter was slaughtered in a mass murder in the Derry, NH shopping area. His wife died within the year.

Ted Kirkpatrick said...

There's a reason for the paucity of research on guns. The same tactics have been used against gun research that have been used against climate research. Salon describes how the NRA got Republican lawmakers to bar the CDC from studying gun deaths as a public health issue. Of special note to RR readers is this paragraph:

'More recently, Republicans have gone after the National Institutes for Health, which has also funded research into the public health issues of guns. “It’s almost as if someone’s been looking for a way to get this study done ever since the Centers for Disease Control was banned from doing it 10 years ago,” Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, said in 2009 of the NIH.' [emphasis added]

Always the same names, it seems. They even stopped the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms from releasing data on gun crime frequency.

Anonymous said...


22LR is nothing like the .223 round.

A revolver is a semi-automatic weapon.

The Founders weren't likely thinking of blogs when they wrote about freedom of speech and the press either.

Your ignorance of guns is astounding.

Your ignorance in general is astounding.

Anonymous said...

Cynthia, I don't think that anyone could have said it better.

I'm not sure how much Americans see of other countries' movies, but British and Australian productions are very different in the shooting theme. It's certainly very rare to have the gratuitous shooting that typifies so much of American screen and TV material.

On the various gun incident tallies that people are posting here - well, I'm staggered. I straddle two distinct Australian demongraphics: amongst my urban relatives, friends and acquaintances I doubt more than one or two out of hundreds would even know someone who themselves have suffered at the wrong end of a gun, and amongst my rural relatives, friends and acquaintances I'd say that there would be one or two who know someone killed by a gun, and a handful who are aware of someone wounded. Indeed, even amongst my rural associates only a small proportion own guns, and they are farmers who only use them to shoot pest animals and injured/sick animals.

In this matter, America is a universe away from its close Western cousins.

Bernard J.

Anonymous said...

Interesting article by Gwynne Dyer on the culture of violence in the US - - it's not just guns, but for some reason the US has a much higher incidence (than other western countries) of personal violence as a means for solving problems. All part of that "government is bad" ethos perhaps...

William T

Anonymous said...

"All part of that "government is bad" ethos perhaps..."

Or the erosion of the value of the family unit, media of all forms sensationalizing killing, and the use of guns, and our society tends to find fault with everything but the individual.

Yes all those gang related shooting deaths in Chicago, where guns are banned, are because they are running around complaining of too much government.

Eli Rabett said...

Look up Gary Wills on the net (wiki is ok). It is a good habit to get into before opining.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like Eli and Gary lack any historical context in their opinions.

Gary is out there, way out there.

cynthia said...

The main reason I oppose any form of gun prohibition is because like any other form of prohibition, it won’t work. I’m not sure why the Left can be right on drug prohibition, but not gun prohibition. Creating yet another black market doesn't sound like such a great idea.

Add to the fact that most gun crimes are committed with illegal weapons, add to the fact that you’re more likely to be hit by an asteroid then be shot at in school, add to the fact that any attempts to take away guns (which would never happen) would require a far more invasive and intrusive police state, add to the fact that Canada and Switzerland and Vermont are heavily armed yet most of the most peaceful places on the planet, add to the fact that the gun control issue has become yet another inflatable wedge issue to distract people, and you can see why stuff like this is idiotic.

Also, Third Way Poster Boy Michael Bloomberg's obsession with “gun control” for as long as he’s been mayor (now close to 12 years) should serve as a red flag for any progressives, especially those who finally defected from the Legacy Party Charade. The tragic massacre of Newtown is unfortunately proving already to be an “opportunity not to be wasted” by the likes of Obama and Bloomberg who want nothing more than Americans begging hysterically for more subjugation.

They seem to be getting their wish.

dhogaza said...

"A revolver is a semi-automatic weapon."

No, revolvers are classified as revolvers, not semi-automatic weapons. Among other things they don't eject cartridges as they're fired thus require manual unloading and reloading when all the shots are fired, as opposed to simply inserting a new magazine. Since the chamber is loaded and hammer cocked by energy from firing the round (typically by bleeding some gas to operate the mechanism) rather than the mechanical force of your finger on the trigger, typically semi-autos are capable of a much more rapid rate of fire.

You may disagree with the indutry's classification of weapons, but for simplicity's sake let's stick with it.

"Your ignorance of guns is astounding."

Well ...

You do appear to be right that a Colt M4 .22 looks a lot like, but is not actually, the military M4 and does take a different round.

Jim Eager said...

"gun crimes are committed with illegal weapons"

Every gun starts out as a legal gun. The guns used in Newtown, CT were all quite legal right up to the moment they were used to kill 26 human beings.

I've heard all the arguments. Over and over and over again. I remain unimpressed.

John Mashey said...

1) dhogaza: Against unarmed 6-year-olds, any descendant of Eugene Stoner's AR-15, whether 22LR or 223 /5.56mm or (whatever) is "similar." Against adults with body armor, it would be different. Of course, Big 5 couldn't sell Bushmasters in this state (CA).
For AR-15 history, I recommend the 1981 book "National Defense" by James Fallows, Chapter 4.

2) As in secession, TX comes up with ideas that need to be analyzed in more detail. Louis Gohmert (R-TX) says:
'Gohmert argued that the mass slaughter would have gone differently if Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung had been armed.

"Chris, I wish to God she had had an m-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out ... and takes him out and takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids," Gohmert said.'

So, let us explore this in more detail:
a) Should only the Principal be armed, or all of the staff?

b) For elementary teachers, what should be the standard weapons, ammunition, number of rounds kept on hand, training (to achieve headshots, as Gohmert argues for)? Or can teachers select their own weapons? Does the school district pay for this? Likewise, does firearms training need to be added to teaching credentials?

c) HOW ABOUT BODY ARMOR? Adam Lanza is said to have had a military vest. Has anyone seen any report saying how that got bought? Did his mother have that along with the guns?

In any case, to deal with guy(s) in body armor, it seems like an armed teacher would need equivalent firepower (i.e., like Lanza's .223 Bushmaster or the Smith&Wesson M&P15 used in the Aurora shooting.

Of course, if escalation continues, we can move up to tanks and other military vehicles - my town has a very large collection, although it's a little light on German WW II tanks, as they mostly got blown up. Jacques Littlefield was very, very lucky to finally find a PzKpfw V, (Panther) they could restore, one of 6 in working order.


While chaperoning a group of Soviet scientists viviting New England in the 1970's, I took them on a weekend outing to Bostons North Shore, where, passing through Hamilton we by sheer chance encountered a retired military man out for a Sunday drive.

The Academicians were taken aback when the Sherman tank's owner waved jauntily at them from atop it as his chauffeur turned the vehicle off the road to continue cross country to the Patton homestead.

So let us not forget: if tanks are outlawed, only criminals will have tanks, which may make a poor impression on foreign vistors.

Anonymous said...

I do not personally know of anyone injured or killed by guns. Just saying.



Anonymous said...

Brave Anonymous says to John:

"22LR is nothing like the .223 round"

Well who cares, really?

"Dylan Hockley, six, was shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Newtown, Connecticut, on Friday.

His parents Nicole and Ian said their son was "wrapped in the arms" of his teacher Anne Marie Murphy when he died."


Gaz said...

I've never known anyone who's been killed or injured by a firearm.

I did hear that someone who lived on a farm near ours who was killed accidentally when a shotgun he had propped against a fence fell down and discharged.

That was back in about 1973.

I'm so glad Australia doesn't have a Second Amendment.

One interesting observation is that criminals do seem to be able to get hold of guns, but they tend to use them on each other quite a bit.

We have a few drive-by shootings here in Sydney, but the shots almost always miss their targets. Even then, they're infrequent enough to make the headlines.

Anonymous said...

"One failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one schools shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns"

John Oliver

Martin Vermeer said...

> a) Should only the Principal be armed, or all of the staff?

Surely all of the kids too... a class typically has one teacher only. Take her out and the class is defenceless.

And you cannot start too early training those kids for the real world. Just saying

Anonymous said...

Quite frankly I don't know how anyone can look at the photos of the murdered children and not be moved to scream from the rooftops for reform. Not just of gun laws but of the fundamental flaw in the culture that enables such profound horror.

It's a perverse peculiarity that those who cling most vocifereously to their guns and to their rights to "freedom" in the "best country in the world" can't seem to see that other 'civilised' countries don't have the enormous death/gun ownership ratio that the US has, and that the citizens of these other countries are by and large more free from the fear of crime and harm that is being bred into US Americans.

It's completely bizarre that Hollywood is so inhibited that it portrays people having 'cuddles' (no sex please, we're American) with their clothes on and with sheets shrinkwrapped around them, but there's no limit to the amount of graphic weapon-related violence that can be depicted, no matter how unreal or surreal.

Somewhere the nation has taken a wrong turn, and unless there's a concerted effort now to turn to another direction the future will become more and more a caricature of the present, where no amount of harm to innocence can displace selfish fundamentalist interest.

I've wept for the kids massacred last week, and I will weep for the kids that will be massacred in the future.

Why is a country that professes to being the most advanced in the world so paralysed with ideological inertia that it cannot act to save its children, nor act to save itself and the rest of the world from climate change?

- Charlotte Bacon, 2/22/06, female
- Daniel Barden, 9/25/05, male
- Rachel Davino, 7/17/83, female.
- Olivia Engel, 7/18/06, female
- Josephine Gay, 12/11/05, female
- Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 04/04/06, female
- Dylan Hockley, 3/8/06, male
- Dawn Hochsprung, 06/28/65, female
- Madeleine F. Hsu, 7/10/06, female
- Catherine V. Hubbard, 6/08/06, female
- Chase Kowalski, 10/31/05, male
- Jesse Lewis, 6/30/06, male
- James Mattioli , 3/22/06, male
- Grace McDonnell, 12/04/05, female
- Anne Marie Murphy, 07/25/60, female
- Emilie Parker, 5/12/06, female
- Jack Pinto, 5/06/06, male
- Noah Pozner, 11/20/06, male
- Caroline Previdi, 9/07/06, female
- Jessica Rekos, 5/10/06, female
- Avielle Richman, 10/17/06, female
- Lauren Rousseau, 6/1982, female
- Mary Sherlach, 2/11/56, female
- Victoria Soto, 11/04/85, female
- Benjamin Wheeler, 9/12/06, male
- Allison N. Wyatt, 7/03/06, female

Bernard J.

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Let us give you the benefit of the doubt that you realize that school and workplace shootings pose a problem. Since you oppose increased regulation, what are your proposed solutions.

Please, let's not pretend that arming teachers and principals is a realistic solution. What say you, and if you do not have anything to suggest, then how can you defend yourself against the concrete solutions being proposed for limiting body count (e.g. limiting clip capacity + banning some weapons)?

Anonymous said...

"Youth Culture"
-- by Horatio Algeranon

Obsessed with youth
But we don't care
We sacrifice
Them everywhere

At home
In war
With drone
And gore.

We use them
For ourselves
Then put them
On the shelves.

cRR Kampen said...

So that is what is going to look like. I'd choose Uzi over M1 though.

School as a warzone. No problem in Gaza with Hamas, they have a reason. But what are the USA heading to?


Gator said...

Thanks for the Gary Wills links.

John Mashey,
Bushmaster can and does sell AR-15s in CA. There is no reason Big 5 could not sell these -- they just seem to prefer not to sell them. They stick to antique military rifles. Visit a local gun shop to see AR-15s being sold. The rifle is a popular platform because it is very customizable -- one can change the caliber, barrel size, sights etc very quickly and easily.

I've lived in Switzerland. Yes, just about every household has a military rifle in a closet somewhere. Ammunition is very strictly controlled. No one there would think of using these weapons for anything but the annual target qualification. They are not for personal or home defense. The situation is not comparable to the US. I'd say the peacefulness is much more related to a strong sense of community, including a very strong social safety net.

Disclosures: I'm at least a 4th generation gun owner. Probably much more. I support gun control. I've known at least 3 people shot (1 accidentally, 2 in violence.)

cRR Kampen said...

I'll disclose with Gator. Am Dutch, live in Holland, am sports shooter (Unique DES 69 .22 match pistol, Mosin Nagant rifle for big bang, spent bowling pins are nice targets for Partisan softnose rounds: they don't talk back to much).
Holland has of old strict gun control laws. By far most people never saw a gun offn' a copper. I approve entirely and consider our law on this to be one of the best in the world.
Isn't foolproof though. Couple of years ago we had our first mall shooting killing six plus himself. The guy had a permit, since there's discussion about how he came by it, given his psych history.

Anonymous said...

Cynthia and others,
There is no slippery slope here except for the one you and some no-gun-control advocates want to invent. Not just anyone can fly an airliner. you must be REGISTERED AND LICENCED. Is that a slippery slope?

The very limited restrictions of which we speak are not an attempt to take away your rights re the 2nd amendment. It's not a matter of rights, dear. It's a simple matter of public safety. We have a right to be safe in our homes and places of public accommodation. Speaking of rights, we are granted a RIGHT to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by that same document.
How much happiness or life are those twenty little children enjoying today?

I certainly agree that the problem is not simply guns. It's the access to them by unqualified individuals that threatens us.

We do not need assault weapons for anything. If you think you need a gun to protect yourself from a "Government out of control", you are kidding yourself and anyone else who agrees. Think about it for a minute. That government, if it chooses, will send a couple of Cobra Gunship Helicopters to the site , and you will be a laughable nuisance as they turn your neighborhood into tinder wood with their chain guns. It's not guns that will win out over that "Government out of control". It's hearts and minds, not because it sounds all touchy feely, but simply because your guns would be as useless as sticks and stones.

All we are talking about here is closing the gun show loophole and outlawing assault weapons.

We regulate food, prescription drugs, cars, aircraft, and a host of things that are DANGEROUS. Give me one good reason why guns should be excepted.

Want to protect yourself in your home? Get a gun, no problem. Want to shoot at paper? No problem. Want to hunt? No problem. Those are all legal uses of firepower, and for none of them do you need an assault rifle or an extended clip, except in your fantasies.

By the way, though I'm a dedicated and decided liberal, I own eight guns. And sweety, I ain't the only liberal/left leaning guy who does. Many more libs than you imagine have them. So don't give me any nonsense about not knowing anything about firearms or their correct use. I've been trained.

Get real.

J Bowers said...

@ Bryson 16/12/12 12:39 PM

The same entertainment industry sells its wares internationally. Strangely, those other countries don't have nearly the same amount of gun homicides, and have even seen a drop in such when they banned guns.

The problem is easy access to guns, and a presistently cynical campaign by the NRA who are lobbying for the gunmakers.

J Bowers said...

So You Think You Know the Second Amendment?

Lumpus, you have more than twice the chance of being shot if you own a gun.

Gaz said...

Changing the topic a bit - has it been revealed yet which violent video game the perpetrator spent countless hours playing?

WhiteBeard said...

Anonymous in reply to Cynthia,

I tip my hat.

Also I’d suggest training. A brief, mandatory course with a certificate card (guaranteed chit explicitly forbidden). Refresher at about 5 year intervals. NRA chapters have a rep for conducting these. Government’s role, delegated to the States, one of supervision of course providers.


Ya mean ya don’t think much of the ofttimes proposed mandatory carry. Well, I declare!

My personal story is having a 30-06 pump carbine go off unintentionally. Quite the sobering experience. And, one of my stock reminisces is the effort not to become a statistic of the utterly clueless individuals the army thought fit to have expend ~2,000 M-14 rounds during basic in mid ’66. One “event” occurred about every 10 days on average, despite the overwhelming emphasis on weapons handling safety.

jyyh said...

There might be some confusion on what these guns are good for. or maybe not.

my experience with guns is about as follows (manly from the army) the 2 seconds a sniper with an assault rifle needs to kill from 200-300m were enough for me to accept them as military only. I wasn't that good a shot, so I might only be able to defend a field of 150m against an attacking crowd of 15 people, depending on how fast the field can be crossed. The only shots I took with a semi-automatic pistol went so far off the target (shot from 25 m) I'd had killed a child walking beside the enemy... At friends bachelor party the neigbourgh (got fed up with the noise?) shotgunned (140m away) and we listened the pellets falling around the sauna porch. Never had any troubles with people with hunting rifles (if I remember correctly, they're restricted to holding 4 rounds here) that I've occasionally seen on the country side. Anyway, the finnish legislation is very much stricter in the built up areas than in the country side. Some people have trouble giving up some of their guns if they have to move to a city, and if they have no place (rent a vault or something) to keep them in the countryside (where people, mooses, bears and wolwes (in that order) are the biggest killers).

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey Toobin LMAO.

I guess he only thinks 20th century opinion on the 2nd ammendment matters and only those opinions that agree with his 100% wrong interpretation of the 2nd ammendment.

It is an individual right to keep and bear arms. That does not mean it cannot be regulated and controlled, it should.

Toobin! lol

Who are you going to reference next, Peewee Herman?

Anonymous said...

[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
---George Mason

Hmm and here we are people trying to redefine the militia as to something other than the whole people.

Hmm Toobin or Mason? Hmm who should I lean towards in trying to understand the 2nd Ammendment? Hmm...

dhogaza said...

"my experience with guns is about as follows (manly from the army) the 2 seconds a sniper with an assault rifle needs to kill from 200-300m were enough for me to accept them as military only."

But true sniper rifles, single-shot 0.50 cal long barrels, have an effective range of over a mile (2000 yards).

And you can buy them in the US ...

jyyh said...

dhogaza, "But true sniper rifles, single-shot 0.50 cal long barrels, have an effective range of over a mile (2000 yards)."

Yes, I do know that, but only the best shots were allowed on the sniper rifles in our military, so no personal experience of those. I think there's some regulation on those as well in Finland too. I think an accurate general hunting rifle with a telescopic sight is the furthest range gun (what is it, some 350-500 m?) one can pretty easily buy in the countryside here (forced membership of a hunting club (and thus proof of some vision and accuracy) though required).

David B. Benson said...

American citizens need to read

J Bowers said...

"Hmm and here we are people trying to redefine the militia as to something other than the whole people."

Hmm even Scalia drew the line at handguns.

cynthia said...

Just for all of you coincidentally minded people as I really don’t know what to make of this. Sandy Hook was targeted in Batman movie and in viral advertisement for "The Dark Knight" from last year. Oh, and there’s also a nice shot of a huge skyscraper with the word “Aurora” emblazoned on it in the same movie.

Anonymous said...

"Hmm even Scalia drew the line at handguns"

The core holding in D.C. v. Heller is that the Second Amendment is an individual right intimately tied to the natural right of self-defense.

The Scalia majority invokes much historical material to support its finding that the right to keep and bear arms belongs to individuals; more precisely, Scalia asserts in the Court's opinion that the "people" to whom the Second Amendment right is accorded are the same "people" who enjoy First and Fourth Amendment protection:

You were saying?

J Bowers said...

Arse. Still up for grabs.

dhogaza said...

Yes, we understand that Scalia is a right-wing judicial activist who has shown himself willing to bend the constitution to meet his own philosophical and poltiical beliefs.

This is not news.

J Bowers - were you thinking of the fact that the Scalia majority opinion held that bans on concealed weapons (which typically would be hangguns) were constitutional under their ruling?

Anonymous said...

"Yes, we understand that Scalia is a right-wing judicial activist who has shown himself willing to bend the constitution to meet his own philosophical and poltiical beliefs."

He is in good company then with Mason, Madison, Jefferson, Washington, Hamiltion.

Seems you are the odd one out.

dhogaza said...

When did those five serve on the supreme court? To be a judicial activist, one must be a judge, in this context, a judge on the supreme court.

Help me out, here. I can't seem to remember when those five were serving on the Supreme Court.

I'd say Scalia's in the Taney mold, and I suspect history will eventually agree with me.

Anonymous said...

Dhog is a good goal post mover, subject changer, and straw man builder.

Not much good for anything else though.

J Bowers said...

As someone pointed out elsewhere, RWNJ's and the GOP won't trust a teacher to teach science, but if given a gun they're suddenly a Navy SEAL.

@ dhogaza, read the 'So you think you know the Second Amendment' link further upthread.

J Bowers said...

NYT: Party Identity in a Gun Cabinet

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

The silence of American conservatives on this tragedy speaks loudly to their moral and political bankruptcy. I asked our local gun nut for his solutions, and not only did he have none to give, he couldn't even be bothered to respond!

It's the climate debate in miniature--the conservatives have nothing constructive to offer, so they attack those who are trying to address the problem. In both cases they are saying their convenience, comfort--hell, even their leisure activities trump even the survival of our children. Of course with climate change, it is likely 20 million children who will die unnecessarily, rather than 20. This is not even conservatism, but rather egoism masquerading as conservatism. In the end, it is why they will fail. They bring nothing constructive to the discussion.

Anonymous said...

No a_ray we are saying let's discuss and propose actions that may prevent the next mass murderer from going on a killing spree in a school or elsewhere. Gun control measures written via emotion will not prevent such a situation, as we have we Sandy Hook, in the future.

The person closest to Lanza, his mother, knew what a danger he was and yet she kept unsecured guns and ammo in the house and even took him to the gun range. Please enlighten all of us on how additional gun control legislation would have prevented this?

That is the problem with liberals, they want to apply fixes that make them feel good emotionally without thinking if the solution fixes or even addresses the problem.

I have read and heard plently of blame on conservatives, NRA, gun rights advocates, but not a single negative word toward the mother and family who knew the killer and who were careless with him.

Earlier in the thread someone said something about ".22LR or .223 does not matter, they both kill" Well yes this is true, so if you finally define and ban "assualt weapons" will that include Marlin 60 configured in 22LR with a 14 round tube magazine? If someone cannot buy a Bushmaster perhaps they will buy this one or a Ruger .22 with 10 round clip.

The only way gun control will work is if you can ban all guns and confiscate the ones that exist, which we all know is not going to happen.

So perhpas we do need to increase security systems at schools, have the states implement better registration procedures for gun purchases with education materials. We should look at increasing and diagnosing those that present dangers to themselves and others, in the local communities.

Shouting "Gun Control" now will not save a single child yet it will make a_ray feel better so let's do that.

J Bowers said...

"Shouting "Gun Control" now will not save a single child yet it will make a_ray feel better so let's do that."

More arse.

Not one school shooting since the UK's 1997 Firearms Act in response to the Dunblane school massacre. 58 firearms homicides in England and Wales in 2010/2011. Air weapons and imitation firearms were involved in most firearms offences here by a huge factor.

J Bowers said...

For Lumpus and Anonymous armchair lobbyist.

Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No.

* Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia: Law enforcement stopped it.
* Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania: Shooter had probably already finished.
* High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi: Shooter had already finished, was gunned down by Army Reservist.
* New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado: Stopped by a security officer and former cop, and the church was already on high alert.
* Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada: Shooter shot by a US Marine.
* Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington: Shooter surrenders to police after shooting armed hero.
* Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas: Armed hero shot dead by shooter with an AK-47.

Go figure.

willard said...

I point to this:

> Gun control measures written via emotion [...]

And I point to this:

> That is the problem with liberals [...]

That is all.

J Bowers said...

Soledad O'Brien hands John Lott his ass in a sling:

Gun Expert Decides To Make Stuff Up. Reporter Decides To Shut Him Down.

Anonymous said...

"Go Figure"...

"Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.

-- Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead: Two. -- Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead: Three.

-- Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates -- as well as the "trained campus supervisor"; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead: Two.

-- Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman's head, ending the murder spree. Total dead: Two.

-- Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead: One.

Yes please go figure.

Anonymous said...

Like I said J Bowers here in the USA Gun Control measures will NOT work unless you also confiscate existing weapons.

Again please describe the Gun control Law that would have preveneted the Sandy Hook Massacre.

Anonymous said...

"Soledad O'Brien hands John Lott his ass in a sling:"

Only if you are drugs, omg "they were using automatic or semi-automatic weapons." idiot.

Hey Soledad he could have shot out that glass with any standard semi-auto rifle. Every rifle cartridge, by design, is "high velocity.

FWIW I do not agree with Lott to eliminate any current gun control/

Anonymous said...

Bottom line: The 26 victims in Newtown paid the price for your right to keep and bear arms. They and all those like them are the true cost of the Second Amendment.

Anonymous said...

"Bottom line: The 26 victims in Newtown paid the price for your right to keep and bear arms. They and all those like them are the true cost of the Second Amendment."

Ah the idiocy in that statement is endless.

Anonymous said...

Well color me stoopid, that is why they call me "Hey Stoopid".

New York Times collation of statistics world wide "On Guns, America Stands Out"


In the real world, it truly shows the very strict Japanese gun control laws and regulations, truly do save lives when compared to the extremely lax versions that apply in the 'United States', period.

An example of a mentally impaired totally irresponsible/incompetent gun owner/supervisor, living in a town called Ashford, Connecticut circa 27th October, 2008.


Meanwhile, the other day in the once 'Golden State' and now bankrupt California, another illegal cache of guns were seized.


Who indeed will save the children of America, from these mentally impaired incompetent delusional fools, who lie to themselves and worship the "Gun" as a false idol?

You pays your money and takes your choice, as the NRA peddles message of death, dressed in fancy propaganda, such is life!

dhogaza said...

So as rebuttal to the claim that armed civilians aren't particularly effective at ending mass shootings, one of our anons comes up with six instances in 14 years where a killer has been stopped.

33% of the time by cops, who are not "armed civilians", even if off duty.

So 4 times in 14 years.

We've had one horrific mass shooting in Newtown, and a mass shooting in Oregon made less horrific only by the apparent inability of the shooter to hit the side of a barn (60 shots, 3 hits, two killed one injured).

Two in two weeks. And in the Oregon shooting, there was an off-duty security guard trained and licensed to carry a sidearm as part of his job. Who couldn't get a shot off at the shooter because of bystanders in the way.

Here's a novel alternative to turning malls and schools into shooting galleries subject to frequent firefights among the good and the evil:

Get rid of the friggin' guns in the first place.

dhogaza said...

"Every rifle cartridge, by design, is "high velocity.""

Not the 0.22 shorts I learned to target shoot with.

If every rifle cartridge were, by design, "high velocity" then the term wouldn't be used as a market differentiator, would it?

Nor would we have people doing physiological comparisons between high-velocity rounds vs. others (important in emergency room treatment).

Anonymous said...

Clearly the other annony didn't like the statement of the true cost of the second amendment, but thanks for repeating it anyway.

Anonymous said...

You're right Dhog, every center-fire rifle cartridge by design is high velocity.

the .22 rimfire is an obvious and one of the few exceptions.

So you want to ban all semi-automatic weapons that use a center fire rifle cartridge?

Was not a matter of liking or not liking your statement. Next time I see a car accident I'll be sure to blame the vehicle. Makes the same amount of sense as your idiocy.

You know you all could save a lot more lives by making cigarettes illegal. You could go big and ban alcohol that would save a lot more lives than guns.

Still waiting for a description of the Gun Control Law that would have prevented the Sandy Hook Massacre.

All these people advocating gun control as the solution and not one can translate their politics and emotion into law that would be effective.

All save one from above whose point was to ban and confiscate most guns in the US.

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Anonytroll, perhaps I was unclear. I was not asking what would not work or what "liberals" are proposing. I was asking what you would propose to address a problem that just cost the lives of 6 heroic educators and 20 first graders.

Do you have concrete proposals, or is the murder of children just collateral damage to your pursuit of leisure?

dhogaza said...

"Was not a matter of liking or not liking your statement. Next time I see a car accident I'll be sure to blame the vehicle."

One fine sunny december morning, 35 years ago, I sat in my Datsun 510 sedan at a red light, waiting for it to change.

A large truck lost its brakes, couldn't stop, ran the red light, was t-boned, and thrown into my car.

Totaling it. I walked away without a scratch.

The truck driver was killed.

Yes, the official investigation blamed the vehicle, or rather one crucial component of the vehicle ...

Anonymous said...


I did. Please read back and find it.

Still waiting for a description of law beyond "Gun Control".

And if large trucks were banned that guy would still be alive today.

EliRabett said...

Now some, not Eli to be sure, find it very curious that trucks and cars are subject to an endless series of safety regulations yet others argue that baby shredders should be regulation free.

Anonymous said...

No one here is arguing for guns to be free of regulation.

I see even Eli is not up to the task to add a further description to a gun control law that would have prevented the Sandy Hook Massacre. Too busy pulling emotional strings that will not prevent a single child death in the future. If you are looking for blood, just look at your own hands as you have done nothing and continue to do nothing about it.

willard said...

> [Y]ou all could save a lot more lives by making cigarettes illegal.

A few hours ago, an anonymouse was talking about strawmen eating red herrings on their way to a slippery slope.

Too busy pulling pride strings to play by one's rules, I suppose.

> Next time I see a car accident I'll be sure to blame the vehicle.

I prefer the "spoons kill the obese" version.


Are are these tricks part of the mandatory cursus of constitutional studies?

J Bowers said...

"Still waiting for a description of the Gun Control Law that would have prevented the Sandy Hook Massacre."

Obama's on it. he knows his law and shit.

And it's still a fact that there have been no school massacres in the UK since legislators acted to curb firearms ownership after Dunblane.

A number of US gun owners seem a bit too attached to their penis extensions, willing to offer child sacrifices to their Moloch.

Anonymous said...

Ah yes Obama's is on it. Let the Federal Government do everything for me, because I only can talk big, but my actions are limited and always deferred to the government.

Still waiting on the details of a gun control law that would have prevented the Sandy Hook Massacre.

Is it really that hard? You made it sound real easy in the beginning of this discussion. Control guns, ban guns, do what they do in England, blah blah blah.

Then here at the current end of the discussion. Obama knows his law and shit he'll firgure it out for us.

LMAO Priceless.

J Bowers said...

"Let the Federal Government do everything for me"

Straw man. I was specific to guns, which also addressed having to wait for the specifics.

Look, I don't have to shit my pants when walking the streets or when youngsters offer a suggestion for something to do, or be paranoid about Feds knocking at my door to the point of incapacitating my empathy for small children and their parents. It's not what normal people do. I don't have to worry about kids being gunned down more frequently than law enforcement each year. Thank fuck the UK doesn't have fetishes for 18th Century pieces of paper written by 18th Century smart folk who never imagined a Bushmaster in the hands of poorly regulated citizens. I feel really sorry for you, Anon. I mean REALLY sorry for you.

Anonymous said...

I am none of the things you describe, but of course you knew that.

I have lots of empathy for what happened at Sandy Hook, I cried during the intial and several of the following news reports. Being a parent of three, it hurt me deeply.

What I am not for are vague solutions of Gun Control with no details or thoughts about how effective those laws maybe at preventing these massacres. That is why I am asking for the details from those that say gun control is the answer.

Earlier I suggested some areas of discussion, but those were ignored.

Take your feeling sorry for me and direct it back at yourself.

J Bowers said...

I'm off out for a couple of pints now. The only thing I have to worry about is slow bar staff, a bass solo or a Xmas office party gone a bit too mad. I never have to even let the idea of being shot, even by acccident, or being held up at gunpoint, enter my head. It's great. If the army wanted to break down my door, there's bugger all I'd be able to do about it even if I had a tank or an Apache gunship, becuase they've got things to sort them out and I'm not a Navy SEAL. 'Night.

Gaz said...

Re Dhogaza's comment: "So as rebuttal to the claim that armed civilians aren't particularly effective at ending mass shootings, one of our anons comes up with six instances in 14 years where a killer has been stopped."

The other thing that stands out from those 6 examples is that the killer was only stopped in each case after he had shot several people.

After. Not before.

So even when the killer was shot by an armed hero, it didn't stop numbers of people from being shot in the first place.

That's a clear illustration of the stupidity of the idea that if everyone carries guns everyone will be safer.

Americans just have to face facts.

There is a choice:

A. Restrict gun ownership to people who really need them or to recreational users under very strict conditions, and strictly limit the destructive power (including magazine capacity and automatic reloading capability) of those weapons. That may mean confiscation, or buybacks as we had in Australia. It might require a change of the 2nd Amendment. It may mean a national recogntiion that Rambo movies are just make-believe. It would not be easy.


B. Accept the fact that massacres a much higher rate of shooting deaths than in other countries, and the fear and pain and sorrow that go with all that, are a normal, regular, routine part of life in your country.

You actually don't get any other choices and it would be a good thing in Americans stopped pretending oterwise.

Anonymous said...

Is there moderation, or did I just lose a big post?


EliRabett said...

For starters how about the California gun laws, with a complete ban on sales without background checks.

And yes, stop moving the goal posts. No law by itself is going to eliminate this problem, but laws such as California's will limit the number and intensity of them.

We need to challenge the gun nutters whenever they spew. Take a look at that video up blog. The guy thinks his semiautomatic is his "baby". As Mark Ames wrote what the NRA and the right wing has been doing is "creating a political culture of atomized, fear-fueled citizens who think they’re literally at war with each other, and their only way out is to fend for themselves and their family."

And yes, Eli has seen the same sort of demands for the perfect used against those trying to limit damage from tobacco, climate change, freons, etc. It's right out of the Fred Singer playbook and it's still spinach

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Anonytroll, Actually, you've had no concrete suggestions--unless you consider the risible suggestion of arming the citizenry to be a solution to the problem of grade schoolers being gunned down.

It is you who are claiming your leisure trumps the survival of our children. I would say it is incumbent on you to develop solutions to address the problems created by unrestricted access to firearms. I'm waiting.

Mal Adapted said...

Anonymous @ 20/12/12 8:48 AM

"Bottom line: The 26 victims in Newtown paid the price for your right to keep and bear arms. They and all those like them are the true cost of the Second Amendment."

That's the most succinct statement I've yet seen, of the stark choice we as Americans face WRT the 2nd Amendment. The defenders of gun rights should be prepared to say "The lives of all the innocents killed by kooks and criminals with guns, is a price I'm willing to pay for my freedom to own them." Anyone who tries to dismiss, downplay or explain that away is a craven hypocrite.

Anonymous troll @20/12/12 9:08 AM:

"Ah the idiocy in that statement is endless."

What a cute little boy. Do you actually have anything to contribute? Why don't you come up with a meaningful gun-control proposal, troll? Is it because you really don't care how many children are killed? Or is it just that you like making noise on blogs, and have chosen this one for some unfathomable reason? What will it take, then, to get you to go away so the rest of us can have a conversation?

David B. Benson said...

Complete ban on ammunition except at the gun range.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Mal Adapted, that was exactly the point I was making.

And it has to be made over and over and over again.

Anonymous said...

" would say it is incumbent on you to develop solutions to address the problems created by unrestricted access to firearms. I'm waiting"

Where is there unrestricted access?

Eli I agree the California gun laws are a good model for the nation and I would support a national push on those. Thank you. Now while that is in the works I think some national discussion to get local communities to increase police patrol or hire private security needs to also happen. A revisist on identifying people with mental health issues and their too easy access to guns.

I do not agree that ammunition should only be obtainable at the range.

All the others who were blaming me and trying to define me as some right wing gun loving nut job with blood on his hands can take your anger, your hate, and your single mindedness and well you know...

willard said...

> And it has to be made over and over and over again.


I'm less sure about the "has to be" than the "it", and the "it" is not that clear.

Mal Adapted said...

Anonymous @21/12/12 8:45 AM:

"All the others who were blaming me and trying to define me as some right wing gun loving nut job with blood on his hands can take your anger, your hate, and your single mindedness and well you know..."

So who are you? For all we know, you're being blamed for what some other anonymous troll said. You could undersign your comments with a moniker, like some others here do, without creating a permanent identity.

OK: was this your first comment on this post, @17/12/12 1:44 PM, responding to John Mashey?

"Your ignorance of guns is astounding.

Your ignorance in general is astounding."

If that was you, then you may not be "some right wing gun loving nut job with blood on his hands", but you're self-evidently an angry person yourself, who has a single-minded hate for Dr. Mashey.

If it wasn't you, then give us some way to distinguish you from that other anonymous troll. No matter who you are, you're responsible for the impression your words create. On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, but everyone can see you're a jerk. It's not up to us to give you the benefit of any doubt.

Gaz said...

Hey, here's a thought.

The 2nd Amendment, as I understand it, is designed to allow the citizens to defend themselves against a tyrannical government.

What are the odds that if tyrannical government did come to pass, that the NRA would come out in full, vociferous and belligerent support of it?

I think the odds would be pretty short, frankly.

How ironic would that be?

Anonymous said...

(sarcastic comment will follow, hello, crowd at echelon) the defenders of the free use of guns scored yet another victory against institutions:
It seems you are back in the normal level of gun violence so the 20 something dead children did have an effect. The teachers shot were of course part of the institution so they do not count.

Anonymous said...

^ Ah but the liberal lax policies of letting murders out after 17 years has no bearing on this incident, right?

The guy murdered his grandmother and the liberal crime policies let him out after 17 years and as if by magic he kills again. If only he had been sentenced to death, got one or two appeals and was put down, those firefighters would be alive.

More blood on the liberals hands.

Hmm this game is fun, unfortunately nothing about this is fun and the continual blaming of an inanimate object for the actions of people will doom our society further into chaos.

dhogaza said...

"The guy murdered his grandmother and the liberal crime policies let him out after 17 years and as if by magic he kills again."

A jury of his peers convicted him of nothing more serious than manslaughter. I suppose in anon's fevered mind all of those jurors were "liberals". I imagine anon's solution is to condemn all criminals to death, for instance, jaywalkers ...

Rattus Norvegicus said...

And he served 17 years, which is considerably longer than the 11 years 10 months average term.

Anonymous said...

I see the two above are glad this guy got out so he could kill again.

I'd golf clap but my disgust keeps getting in the way.

Anonymous said...

It's a pity he killed himself, now we can't execute him, because of liberal.

dhogaza said...

"I see the two above are glad this guy got out so he could kill again."

No, we just pointed out that he was convicted of manslaughter, not murder, by a jury of his peers.

Your disgust is matched by my disgust that you weren't put to death for jaywalking, or going 1 mph over the posted speed limit, or entering an intersection on a yellow light, etc.

Because you apparently think that all crimes deserve the death penalty.

Just for your eductation, which you obviously aren't interesting, distinctions between manslaughter and murder go far, far back in English law, long before those who were in charge of administrating it could be accused of being "liberal" in the modern american sense.

dhogaza said...

"It's a pity he killed himself, now we can't execute him, because of liberal."

Pesonally, I think this trend of killing oneself after killing others is cowardice. I'd much rather see thm face court and sentece.

I have non idea regarding "because of liberal" clause.

Anonymous said...

Dhog and Anon are glad man is released after killing grandmother so he could kill again. If onl;y it was illegal for this man to have a gun maybe those firefighters would be alive, oh wait.

Remember criminals, Dhog and other liberals find it ok for you to kill, just get a manslaughter charge serve some time and come back and kill again, it makes them happy.

Meanwhile liberals are also complaining that laws should not be for them, because they are above the laws they are wanting to enforce upon the rest of us. If David Gregory was Joe Sixgun he would be arrested.

Another day in bizarro liberal world, good for thee but not for me liberal "logic".

Anonymous said...

It was the guns fault.

"William Spengler, 62, has a history of brutality against his family. In July 1980, he beat his 92-year-old grandmother Rose Spengler to death with a hammer. He served 17 years in prison after pleading guilty to manslaughter. He was released in 1998."

Here we see Dhog is full of crap and wrong once again. The guy pleaded guilty to manslaughter in an obvious bargain with our weak liberal justice system. It never went to a jury.

Ah the ole manslaughter with a hammer, nah this guy was not violent. Nah this guy did not benefit from lax enforcement and a punishment matching the crime.

This is Dhog's poster boy of why we should have more gun laws, because this model citizen would have followed stricter gun laws.

Dhog does this guy look like you? I imagine this is kinda of what you look like.

susan said...

I feel significantly less safe after reading comments from some haters who feel they have an infinite right to be armed. I call it hate because the thought processes are so garbled and prejudiced. Somebody reference the NYTimes article on how the NRA influences judge selection, including Sotomayor and Kagan, with very little basis. Here are a few excerpts of the illuminating language:

"Instead of majority rule, we have minority totalitarianism....
"It's about racketeering. It's about special interest groups using extortion to get their political way. All this being done under the protection of the first amendment....
"The NRA operates like an organized crime syndicate. That is the deeper issue and is what causes me to fear for my freedom, and everyone else's. (I define freedom as one's ability to live, not kill dozens in one minute.)"

The above was a comment; here's some more from the main article:
"Senator Mitch McConnell ... to shore up his caucus, ... asked a favor of his friends at the National Rifle Association: oppose the Sotomayor nomination and, furthermore, “score” the confirmation vote. An interest group “scores” a vote when it adds the vote on a particular issue to the legislative scorecard it gives each member of Congress at the end of the session. In many states, an N.R.A. score of less than 100 for an incumbent facing re-election is big trouble.

"Note that the N.R.A. had never before scored a judicial confirmation vote. Note also that Sonia Sotomayor had no record on the N.R.A.’s issues. .... The N.R.A. had all the reason it needed to oppose Sonia Sotomayor: maintenance of its symbiotic relationship with the Republican Party. Once it announced its opposition and its intention to score the vote, Republican support for the nominee melted away. ....

"The following year, after the N.R.A. opposed Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court and announced that “this vote matters and will be part of future candidate evaluations,” Republican support for another nominee without a record on gun issues shrank to five senators.

"At least Supreme Court confirmation debates take place in the light of day. Members of the public can tune in and decide whether they are persuaded that Elena Kagan represents “a clear a present danger to the right to keep and bear arms,” to quote the N.R.A.’s statement of opposition to her nomination. (Justice Kagan had never owned or shot a gun, but since joining the court has taken lessons and gone hunting with Justice Antonin Scalia, pronouncing the experience “kind of fun.”)"

It gets worse: more at:

I think talk about how biased liberals might or might not be pales in comparison to this, don't you.

Anonymous said...

"I think talk about how biased liberals might or might not be pales in comparison to this, don't you."


When is David Gregory going to be arrested?

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

The verdict is in: Anonytroll is simply dumber than owlshit.

Anonymous said...

And a_ray_in_dumbass_space contributes nothing, as usual.

Tell me a_ray what is it like living in dumb ass space and fantasizing that you live your life inside the "reality" of a comic strip? LMAO What an idiot.

Anonymous said...

It seems men are about 7 times more likely to get shot in the US than women. Is there a similar statistics on the gun users in homicides and suicides? Of particular interest migt be the level of children gun users in these cases.

jyyh said...

Once you get some regulation on the guns, here's for a comparison, the frequency of (legal) private guns in Finland by municipalities:

very unsurprisingly areas with more forests are also more gunny :-P (moose hunt). The Åland islands is explained by the waterfowl hunt (waters keep open the longest time).

Actually I'm a bit surprised for the cities aren't showing out well here but then many cities have also rural areas here.

Anonymous said...

I see normal conditions in US gun culture continue: