This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: How To Spot A Hypocrite In The Gun Debate And Other Reflections On Newtown
Via Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
- Justice Louis D. Brandeis
For those of you that follow me on twitter, some of the statements and themes you will read in this article will sound familiar. What happened on December 14, 2012 was obviously a horrific tragedy that my simple mind can’t possibly wrap itself around, but what I can do is send my deepest thoughts, prayers and sympathies to all of those affected. I can’t imagine the level of pain and suffering you are all experiencing. This article; however, isn’t directed at you. There is nothing I can do to ease your pain. This article is for the rest of us who weren’t directly affected by the incident, but may be indirectly affected by certain parties’ emotional response to it and by those that will exploit it to justify agendas.
One of the key lessons from all of human history is that the easy way to deal with any tragedy is to scapegoat. In some cases, like in Nazi Germany, the scapegoat proved to be unpopular minorities, especially Jews. These days, many Americans have fallen into the trap of scapegoasting Muslims and the Islamic religion for all the bad things that happen on the planet. The key similarity I see in these sorts of situations is that the population affected by some trauma (hyperinflation and economic collapse in Germany and 9/11 in the United States) tends to resort to the knee-jerk reaction of scapegoating an easy target rather than diving into the complexities of the issue and engaging in societal self-reflection. This is extraordinarily dangerous.
From what I can tell, some of the most ridiculous policies are the direct result of a trauma, people getting emotional, and then begging for a response. In my own lifetime, 9/11 is the perfect example. Our national response to a gruesome attack that killed thousands of innocent civilians was to tear up the Constitution, specifically the cherished Bill of Rights, with insane Big Brother type legislation like the “Patriot” Act. We basically launched the war on terror by waving a white flag. Truly defeating terrorists wouldn’t have consisted of running to the mall and shopping, as George W. Bush insisted, or giving up the freedoms that made America the most attractive country to move to for the last two hundred years. The way to judge victory or defeat in the ”war on terror” eleven years later is not to check the statistics on terrorist attacks. The way to judge victory or defeat is to look at the nation economically, socially and politically and ask yourself are we better off or worse off? I think the verdict is clear on that front, and I do in large part blame our childish and emotionally reaction to the national tragedy of 9/11.
Well here we stand in mid-December 2012, just days from the Mayan end of the world and another national tragedy has been unleashed on the land. Most of the victims were innocent, helpless six and seven year old children that never even had the chance to fulfill their potential on this planet. Unfortunately, just as Ron Paul told us, key parts of the Patriot Act were written and desired by certain factions well before 9/11, there is a powerful faction in the highest echelons of the elite that have wanted and continue to want to remove guns from the hands of innocent American citizens. These people are not interested in easing violence; these folks want to disarm the public before the mathematically inevitable economic collapse occurs (see my article “Slaves are Always Disarmed”). While many of these folks claims publicly that there is an “economic recovery” and happy days are just over the horizon, they know better and privately want to get all their ducks in a row before the final and horrific collapse occurs. This is why the surveillance state is making such aggressive strides at the moment. It is also why there is a panic to remove firearms from the public.
The person who bothers me the most on this entire topic is Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of my hometown NYC. You can tell when someone is disingenuous if they freak out over gun violence like it is the biggest issue in America today and at the same time protect the banksters and their “too big to fail” culture, which has and continues to systemically steal trillions of dollars from the poor. This is Michael Bloomberg to a tee, so this man should have no credibility on any moral subject when he protects and coddles the most dangerous criminal organizations on this planet. I guess there is something “liberal” about white collar crime.
The other way to spot a hypocrite is to see whether they ever speak out about other acts of violence, or if they only open their mouths when it comes to gun incidents. I see this attitude all over the “fake left” landscape. If someone you know, or someone in the media never decries American drones strikes that kill children regularly in the forgotten parts of the globe, yet jumps at every gun incident like it is the end of the world, that person has an agenda. That person hates guns, not necessarily violence. They do not have a clear head in this argument.
Zerohedge put together an excellent article yesterday called Newtown Shooter Had Asperger Syndrome, And Some US Gun Facts, which I suggest everyone read. They go into the fact that mental illness seems to be the determining factor in most of these shooting incidents and also points out that the deadliest school massacre in U.S. history was The Bath School Disaster, which was carried out with dynamite, not firearms. Care of justfacts.com we learn that:
In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year.
These emergency room visits for non-fatal firearm accidents resulted in 5,045 hospitalizations, constituting 0.4% of 1.4 million non-fatal accident hospitalizations that year.
During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower.
The homicide rate in England and Wales has averaged 52% higher since the outset of the 1968 gun control law and 15% higher since the outset of the 1997 handgun ban.
Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the Chicago murder rate has averaged 17% lower than it was before the law took effect, while the U.S. murder rate has averaged 25% lower.
Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the percentage of Chicago murders committed with handguns has averaged about 40% higher than it was before the law took effect.
The interesting thing about all of this is because of differentiated gun laws in these United States we can see how effective gun bans really are in the places where they are in effect. The answer seems to be not very effective. This shouldn’t come as much of a surprise, as what ends up happening with gun bans is that only criminals end up with guns. A criminal will not obey the law, and even in the Newtown shooting case, these weren’t Adam Lanza’s guns. He stole them from his own mother.
For the record, I’d love a world without guns, but as long as criminal governments have them and start wars, the people have the right as well. The actions of one or several mentally ill people should not lead to the restriction of a Constitutionally enshrined right for the hundreds of millions of law abiding, honest citizens that use firearms responsibly. In fact, with an estimated 300 million firearms within these United States, I’d say it’s somewhat impressive how little gun violence there is.
Unfortunately, going forward, I expect gun violence to escalate. I don’t think this is a result of the number of guns as much the result of increased poverty and societal marginalization as a result of the economic catastrophe we are witnessing. A direct result of criminal theft by the TBTF financial institutions that gun haters like Michael Bloomberg protect and serve. It is also the result of the increasingly sick culture that has developed in America. One that is in many ways a reflection of the sickness and depravity at the very top of U.S. society emanating from the political and economic oligarchs. It reminds me of the anti-drug commercial from the 1980?s where the son says to the father “from you dad, I learned it by watching you.” It’s the same with violence in America. Our own government leads by example.
Recall the words of Justice Brandeis before jumping to emotional conclusions on the gun debate. We already made that tragic mistake once this millennium.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
Peace and wisdom,
Mike
»
- 32956 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Chupacabra,
I'm with you brother. I have been saying the same thing for at least the last 5 major shooting incidents. Problem is: Just like the Obama reelection event, this country is controlled by the covertly evil, who rules over the most debased, disconnected, apathetic, self absorbed, fat assed humans ever to walk the planet. Making you and I a micro minority. There is absolutely no hope in changing anything that has to do with what Obama wants while he's got the people (for the lack of better word) behind him...And make no mistake, in America - When you have 50% of the voting population, and 100% of the media (Govt. Fed, TBTF) - You got all you need!
In my future world you're in it :-)
Things happen far less by chance than we know... (9/11 was the beginning of the cover-up to all this financial fraud [which, if really exposed, would take down the global economic system and set all these fuckers' heads on pikes])
I wonder if Lanza and Holmes have any connection to the exec at CNBC in Manhattan. He and the wife have a latina nanny for their small kids. The nanny murders the kids then "kills" herself or tries to. I think she survived. This happened a few weeks ago.
Lanza and Holmes fathers with connection to Libor scandal. What are the chances? One in 50 billion?
Hillary falls down and gets hurt to dodge Bengazi which is far worse than people here realize.
I think this false flag was to grab guns but also cover up Bengazi and the election theft. Fiscal cliff was being used to block any Bengazi invetsigation.
Most people own guns because they believe they need them. Just like government to go after the symptom rather than the cause. The optimistic view would be the disaster of unintended consequenses. A darker view would be that this was always their intention. Violence and social breakdown.
Well written discussion of the gun control debate .....suprisingly from Bloomberg......
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-...
Bloomberg is incredible. He proudly proclaims how he believes that politicians should impose their will on citizens like banana republlic dictators. In a sane, responsible, informed society, there would be instant outrage and uprising at his brashness.
Unfortunately, we no longer live in a sane, responsible, informed society. Be ready folks, it’s getting ugly fast.
Note Bloomberg's personal comments. Here is a Republican calling for more gun control. When are conservatives, tea partiers and Republicans going to get wise to this asshole's statist agenda and boycott his financial news channel?
Wake the fuck up.
Bloomberg was a democrat until he switched parties to run for mayor to fill the vacancy left by Giuliani. He didn't take too long to become an "independent". Get your facts right.
The most important thing to Bloomberg is a 16 oz Slurpee!
"He proudly proclaims how he believes that politicians should impose their will on citizens like banana republlic dictators"
~~~
Typical jew line of reasoning...
Bloomberg is a douche. I believe I have that 100% correct. I also sense you are as well.
They won't because he's a "capitalist."
After 9/11 New York City became untouchable: "Never forget!"
I stopped reading that BBW article when I got to: " The Second Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, says that’s not happening."
That told me all I needed to know about his agenda.
A Constitution is just a piece of paper that can be ignored, and it is, every day. But a heavily-armed populace can not be ignored or taken for granted. So the risk of giving a Govt a monopoly on lethal defensive violence is too great. Govts have already dropped atomic bombs on whole cities. That's the real-politic level of restraint and decency they actually possess.
So I don't fall for all this political goody-two-shoes routine we're about to see, as the liars in suits put on their sad face and wringing their hands and saying how terrible it all is. The moral-relativism schtick is hypocritical bunk because they're butchering innocent people every day right now without a second thought.
The intent of the Constitutional codification was to put it permanently beyond Govt control. So what the politicians in effect will really be saying over the next few days, weeks and months, is that they do not want to uphold and protect the constitution that they swore a legally binding oath to uphold and protect.
The election result was only valid because it was constitutional.
I beleive they call it "legal fiction" and there's a work-around for that.
Aye
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2012/12/14/the-federal-government-is-guilty-...
The whole idea that these simple people have that they can pull guns off the streets is a failed theory prima facie. The guns and ammunition are out there. Just as in economics, if you outlaw something, they'll just go into hiding. The guns will go into hiding. Add to that that there is little stomach for many local law enforcement to execute such a draconian legislation. They would turn millions into felony criminals overnight. The guns and ammunition caches would dissapear into hidden locations across America. From what I hear there's far worse already buried throughout the wilderness of the United States.
A Law scholar went through the hypothetical scenario of a draconian ban of guns in the United States. His results were that the US has a 400 year supply of guns even in a full black market. That doesn't account for new technologies of printing weapons systems. The paper was called "imagining gun control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem" by Nicholas J. Johnson. It was originally published on Wake Forest Law Review, but the link is broken. Points to anyone who can find a live copy.
Imagining gun control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem" by Nicholas J. Johnson
http://www.christopherjhoffman.com/pdfs/theremainder.pdf
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1326743
If people even had a clue to how many people have fully automatic weapons and even bigger thundersticks they would have stroke.
Tell me again, in what intra-state conflict worldwide has easily accessible small arms lead to less pain for the civilians or a shorter duration of hostilities? It was so long ago I looked into those peace- and conflict databases.
Those cases you're looking at/thinking about are almost certainly going to be in regions where the average civilian is too poor to have a gun, or, if they can afford one they aren't allowed to have one.
I recall years ago reading about an account of someone in a small town in Macedonia witnessing the UN dropping off a pile of weapons in the middle of town square. Why Macedonia? It was on an oil pipeline project map. How it works:
1) Stir up trouble (even dropping weapons- when people aren't used to weapons all sorts of ugly things can happen);
2) Deploy "peace" forces, backed by the "international community";
3) Get a better foothold for removing dissidents (opposed to mega-corps projects);
4) Remove "leaders" if necessary (create political instability- do an "orange revolution" or such);
5) Move in new "leaders" and their security (security for project);6) Bring in the "professional" businesses to perform work;
6) Declare "success" for the people there.
Here's something to chew on...
The Jews who resisted the Nazis had a higher survival rate than those who did not.
I like some of the older rules of law that had the guilty essentially working for the victim/family of the victim (in some cases for life).
Comparing shootings with the "too big to fail" culture in the banking system... Nice. Second Amendment likely was not passed to put automatic weapons in the hands of citizens. Let's see you staunchly you defend the gun rights when it is your 6yr old laying on a classroom floor with 11 bullet holes in her.
Consequences of gun control.
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: Ottoman Turkey: 1915-1917
Victims: Armenians NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 1 to 1,500,000 MILLION INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law:1886-1911
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: SOVIET UNION: 1929-1953
Victims: Anti-Communists; Anti-Stalinist’s:
NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 20,000,000 MILLION INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law: 1929
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: NAZI GERMANY & Occupied Europe 1933-1945
Victims: Jews, Gypsies, Anti-Nazis: NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 13,000,000 MILLION INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law:1928-1938
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: CHINA 1949, 1952, 1957, 1960, 1966, 1976
Victims: Anti-Communists, Rural Populations, Pro-Reform Grou:
NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 20,000,000 MILLION INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law: 1935-1957
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: Guatemala 1960-1981
Victims: Maya Indians: NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 100,00 INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law: 1871-1964
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: Uganda 1955-1970
Victims: Christians, Political Rivals NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 300,000 INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law: 1955-1970
PERPETRATOR or GOVERNMENT DOING the KILLING: Cambodia 1975-1979
Victims: Educated Persons NUMBER Murdered (estimate): 1,000,000 INNOCENTS
Date of GUN CONTROL Law: 1956
Yes, but these are just facts! What about the emotional side of the argument? Somebody died that can't be directly blamed on government so something must be done! WE MUST BE PROTECTED!
Exactly! More the reason to arm and protect yourself. Throughout histor Government's have killed more people than all the world's Militaries combined.
Didn't the Bible say something about in the end times they would cry out to their governments to fall over and protect them?
"And the high places of [Beth-]a?ven, the sin of Israel, will actually be annihilated. Thorns and thistles themselves will come up upon their altars. And people will in fact say to the mountains, ‘Cover us!’ and to the hills, ‘Fall over us!’
Oh yeah in Hosea.
Oh well.
No, I home school my kids. The morals and values of the kids in public school are pretty skeetchy. School is just a place to hook up and show off your new clothese from about 7th grade up.
And the 1st amendment likely was not passed to allow you to spread your sophistry over a world-spanning computer network.
If you were limited to standing on a soapbox down in ye olde towne square, your serpent's tongue couldn't fool too many weak minds because so few would hear you.
But with the reach of the internet, that type of talk is dangerous because it can reach multitudes, and you must be stopped from spreading your heresy so widely.
See how that works?
I would suggest that an abusive tongue has ruined the lives of more children than guns ever have...........
So, you wish to live in a country where the only people who have guns are the police and Federal government agents?
Is that what you really think? You think that would end well?
Really? Have you seen the assholes in your local and state police? Have you dealt with many government agencies?
You should give that some real thought.
I still think the best way to combat diabetes/obesity is to ban forks, spoons and knives. It's the best way to get at the root of the problem.
And if guns were illegal, people would surely stop killing. And if guns were illegal they would surely be taken off the street...perhaps we should make meth and heroin illegal.
Nutcase!
Guns kill people. More guns kill more people.
Look at countries with tight gun controls. One heck of a lot fewer gun deaths.
Look at the UK. Even the police don't carry guns.
The US is simply insane.
I don't care about the UK and their police most certainly carry guns.
Are you an American? Because if you are not an American, you can butt the fuck out now.
No, you are an emasculated twit who has never known Liberty, who suckles at the tit of a Nanny State in which even knives are banned. Your government owns you lock, stock, and barrel. They can do with you what they will at any time without inhibition.
Well-armed Americans are the only brake left on government overreach. All of our other Checks and Balances have been largely neutered.
And well-armed Americans are the only thing that keeps roving gangs out of people's homes. You, on the other hand, are at their mercy.
I pity you.
+100, Except the part about pity. I don't pity anyone who is so fucking selfish and afraid that he would rather see his countrymen enslaved than to stand and fight for the most basic of God given rights; to defend one's own life and property against the tyranny of the State.............
***Well-armed Americans are the only brake left on government overreach.***
Do you really believe that a bunch of yokels with rifles and shotguns are going to stand up to the 1st, 2ed. and 3ed armored divisions. Its time to put this silly myth to rest. The time is long past when citizens can violently resist the U.S. government successfully.
The debate over gun control will take place, but forget about having gun to resist the government as one of the arguments. It's just silly. And yes I'm a gun owner and have been all my life.
I couldn't defend myself against a gang of hooligans either. According to your reasoning I should just let them kick my ass, take my stuff, and leave me for dead. (both the hooligans and the government) You will be first in line to get a free ipad when the time comes for the "buyback" LOL.
Having a gun for self defense against common criminals is a completely different argument. Everyone should be entitled to self defense in that case
"Do you really believe that a bunch of yokels with rifles and shotguns are going to stand up to the 1st, 2ed. and 3ed armored divisions. Its time to put this silly myth to rest."
The US government can't even pacify Afghanistan, a country with 9% of the US population and 7% of its land mass. And this is a (tribal) people stuck in the seventh century; about as "yokel" as it gets. Get a grip.
It all depends on the nature and scope of the conflict. In a civil war or secession type scenario, some of the armories would end up in anti-government hands. Not to mention all the weapons dealers that would come out of the woodwork around the globe looking to profit off the conflict, or foreign countries looking to take advantage of an opportunity to assist in destabilizing the US government.
Initially, the small arms would probably be used against fed gov sympathizers, not armored divisions.
If the government starts using armored divisions and air force to put down small, civilian uprisings, it’s exactly the type of spastic response that guarantees a loss of the moral high ground, i.e., a loss of legitimacy and support. A win for the opposition.
"Do you really believe that a bunch of yokels with rifles and shotguns are going to stand up to the 1st, 2ed. and 3ed armored divisions. Its time to put this silly myth to rest."
History has quite a bit of information for us. Countrysides are always problematic. Oh, and how did those divisions do over in countrysides of Afghanistan and Iraq?
Maybe folks in cities might not be so fortunate, but it's still not a place that militaries like to operate.
I understand what you're saying. I tend to temper folks' attitude that they'll STOP the US military. If you are one of only a handful of rogues you are a gonner. BUT, and here's the part that I believe most here are trying to get across, if there are large numbers then the US military will NOT succeed; the reason being, as is always the case in war- wide-scale wars stretch militaries. However, if we all allow more and more drones to permeate our skies we're going to be in for some pretty tough times: TPTB are waging a war against time, trying to get this kind of stuff in place because it requires very few "loyal" people to operate systems such as these. NOTE: yes, drones can be taken out; but figure they'll get used to pull fire for protected launches (which no one has any defense for, except, perhaps, a group of nuns).
Explain Switzerland! Idiot!
Snow. Aps. Heidi.
Do I win the prize?
chocolate, watches, manicured bushes, literal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting
etc, etc etc
Hatred tends to be an equal opputunity employer.
Please check your facts before you spout this crap off.
Gun ban in the UK was enacted in the late 60's. Homicide rates kept going up. Sure, maybe less gun deaths, but not less deaths. Or maybe thats somehow better in your mind?
Same stats in Australia, or any major metro area in the US with strict gun control laws.
How many children has Obama MURDERED in his Drone Wars?
The best estimate is 168 - just in Pakistan.
Places like Oman, Yemen, Libya, Syria on now on the list as well.
It is vital to beat back this dangerous emerging gun grabbing attempt and the complete contrast of Obama KILLING children in HIS wars is more than enough proof of this gun policy hypocrisy.
Bloomberg hates guns that challenge his authority in the United States. Bloomberg loves guns in Israel.
I like the sneaky way this "mental illness" meme is being rolled out with the permission to own a gun.
More Lists for you and me to be on and be monitored.
Hold Fast.
"Bloomberg loves guns in Israel."
'assault rifles' no less...
Armed Israeli Settler
Zionist Settlers
Where's the outrage about this?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9749217/Conne...
preparing for desaster has become a desaster in itself
I'm glad the article mentioned that complete lying scumbag Bloomberg. The murder rate (and all crimes in fact) are down dramatically in recent history. For example 20 years ago New York City reported 2400 murders, but this year the total will be about 800. The whole gun debate thing is a farce, just an excuse to disarm everyone so the police state can officially begin.
Demographics has a lot to do with it. I'm thinking that the connection is that retirement accounts are going to be emptied (in plain view)... at That point there could be quite a bit of commotion...
Well yeah we are in trouble.
Here is some food for thought...if the world is suffering from an epidemic of gun violence, if everybody everywhere is under threat from some lunatic with a gun, if our kids were dying in the schools...then why does population keep expanding?
Why are there more than 300 million Americans and 7 billion people on this planet?
You can say the same for any other statistic about death rate from some cause or another. Alright, so people are dying from car crashes and cancer and terrorism and AIDS and hurricanes and this or that?
Well, where's the beef? Everywhere I go it's more crowded than ever.
We have not seen SHIT yet when it comes to gun violence.
Yes, a non violent society would be preferrable, especially when we are being sent to our re-education camps.
Peter Kropotkin (sp?) wrote "Mutual Aid" back in the early 1900s. He argued that man was more cooperative than competitive and that was the reason for our increasing numbers: the book mostly provided examples of cooperation within the "animal kingdom;" some amazing observations.
At some point it's inevitable that the too-many-rats-in-the-cage situation will come, at which point we cannot be expected to behave anything like "humans." When there is no chance for dignity then what's the point?
Keep your guns and ammo separate. Teach your children, like my father did, to respect the weapon! The first time I saw a 30-30 winchester rifle discharged in the desert`/ I got the clue really fast! I was 6.
I had my daughters shoot my revolver with my supervision. The kick and the sound provided all the respect i wanted my kids to have toward guns
On a lighter note they enjoy shooting my ruger rifle with scope and make targets depicting bad guys to aim at
Great! Teach them to shoot humans!
Create MORE reasons for TPTB to generate more propaganda to crank up the tanks...
PEOPLE! Can we be a bit more discrete? I want a world in which people have a better appreciation for humbleness, not one that replaces one set of arrogance -TPTB- with another.
No, you teach them that the guns are always loaded, and to treat them as if they are ALWAYS LOADED, and act accordingly: Store your go-to guns loaded, with a round in the chamber(depending on weapon...it must be ready). Make sure they've seen and heard and felt the recoil, seen the damage done, not just to paper but stuff that really shows the destruction wrought, such as, oh, an animal with a big exit wound, still twitching, ideally dying as they watch. Watch their reaction carefully, of course. Most kids will respect guns enormously at that point, eschew them, recoil, fear the thought of touching one. Also tell them you will personally inflict hell on them if they touch a gun outside of your supervision, that it is the WORST thing they could do. The worst. But keep your damned go-to guns loaded, with a round in the chamber preferably.
Without a Constitutional amendment which fully repeals the 2nd amendment, any law abridging the right to keep and bear arms is invalid. It seems the only thing more repulsive to a Fascist than a gun is a Church.
Yes, but don't forget the scum in office will pass the law and it will be 5-10 years before the Supreme Court acts and strikes it down. So, the damage would be done. For example here in Maryland you MUST surrender your firearms if a woman comes into court and makes up a story about you while seeking a protective order (Google Terrel Suggs, Ravens linebacker). This is totally illegal and unconstitutional, but no Court has yet struck it down. So a Judge can take away your guns based on hearsay of one person until a full hearing which could be months. Yet, the Second Amendment says "the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed". SHALL NOT. Just ignored.
Now Maryland just had another gun law overturned. The State was requiring people to give imminent danger of death reasons before you can get a license for carrying a concealed weapon. A very brave Federal Judge struck it down - saying you don't need permission because you already have it but Maryland is appealing (last I heard) of course. In the meantime, all the applications for carrying a concealed weapon --I'm hearing-- are being "delayed" until the courts final ruling. So unless you are "connected" you can't get a license to carry a firearm. Period. And if you ever break that law, you are going to prison and your gun rights are revoked for life.
And that is the reality.
In Maryland it is illegal to have more then three dogs. No wonder the north east is so screwed up.
My Neighbor in Maryland has 8 dogs. I love them all. They are very territorial about my Property as well as their own. I am very grateful to have them next door. It gives me a sense of protection as I know when someone is on the property and when 8 dogs are all chasing you it is very intimidating for a Trespasser. I would NEVER complain about them.
It is the duty of the people to strike down Unconstitutional "Laws". I fear that we will lose the majority of brown eyed people in this country should they pass a law mandating that they kill themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDnE-5lD7w8
never let a crisis go to waste....
Obama's hate mongering and financial nonsense has frightened many people--some become preppers--some have children who cannot handle the stress--the prepper's kids may feel that it is better to spare their families, themselves and kids life in a horrible future society
Riiiight. So what you are saying Gimlet is that is that shooting all those kids was actually a charitable act. The shooter was a well-informed prepper who was just saving these kids from a dystopian future. How foolish of me not to realize that straight away. I bet the parents will feel a whole better when they see things in this light.
ZHers never cease to amaze me.
Gimleteye would not be a sockpuppet of your's now would he?
Both your screen names suggest a common literary genre.
Well, I know of one person who had the nickname "Ol Gimleteye"- Smedley Butler, and he was no sockpuppet. But... I kind of figure that this one ain't no friend of Smedley's...
nicely spotted.
I have heard rumors that I "claim credit when no credit is due." That is certainly not true, I am sure.
Where is the outcry for the estimated 200+ MILLION people murdered over the past 100 years by governments (democide)...yah they all had guns...more like they wish they did.
Our nation has become a bunch of sheep. They are more willing to be fleeced with each passing year. It wouldn't suprise me to see a bbq coming in the not too distant future.
Where are the articles about Bernanke being a worse killer than this guy from CT??
Bernanke caused riots and revolts in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iran, China, Greece, Spain and many other countries. People went hungry by the tens of millions because of his insane economic policies.
When all of what Bernanke has done to the world economy comes to fruition, he will be the biggest murderer in human history...
We should outlaw private gun ownership because there is a chance that bad things could happen and besides, I don't want to have to worry if my neighbor has more guns and ammo or is a better shot that I. We should also outlaw incomes over $200,000. because they really don't need it and I don't really want to have to work that hard to compete. People with money make me feel weak and small and I don't like it. Its about me and how I feel about me and I don't like feeling insecure. Obama says I should feel proud of my failures and those that are more successful are cheaters and only made it becasue of MY sacrifices. They owe me and they, especially shouldn't be allowed to have guns.
Good start, keep practicing, we need another miiillion dollar bonus.
Gun ownership is not an item open for discussion. Because if it is, then what the point of owning guns in the first place, if the people you fear can simply talk you out of them?
Well, it's worked pretty well for Madison Avenue: talking you out of stuff, esp money...
Not meaning to quibble but...
Since the shooter in CT didn't trip and accidentally shoot anybody, using statistics on the 4% of people accidentally shot and killed each year in the US seems incorrect.
Also, using an increase in gun deaths after handgun bans doesn't prove that without the bans the death rate wouldn't have been even higher.
I agree that TPTB seem to be putting a lot of effort into getting better at "controlling" the population and watching what we do and say (and think, read articles on attempts to monitor facial expressions as well as early resaearch on scanning brain activity).
Taking guns away would certainly make it a lot easier to enforce the state monopoly on violence.
In agreement.
Since I'm not American, I am not affected by US legislation and neither do I have an agenda. What I do want however, is an honest debate for the sake of Zerohedge. This is supposed to be a a brutally honest website. Can't call it balanced - and it doesn't have to be and I'm fine with that. But blatantly skewing the argument with only a subset of irrelevant facts, puts this site into disrepute. This event had nothing to do with fatal firearm accidents. You could just as well have posted Iraqi war deaths caused by firearms and the facts would have been just as irrelevant. US homicide and suicide rates caused by firearms each year in the US, are in the tens of thousands. That is a relevant fact. What value it has for the discussion is not for me to decide however.
Those marking these critical posts down, should just stop for a moment and think what they want from a website like Zerohedge. I want articles to be based on all the relevant fact and see these presented. It authors come to different conclusions, so be it. At least I will then be capable of making an informed judgement for myself. Please lets keep the high level of quality reporting and analysis instead of slipping into myopic partisan bullshit.
President Nobel Peace Prize and the MSM are going to whip this up so that they can get away with banning: private-party sales; military-style (so called "assault") rifles; AND standard (so called "high") capacity magazines. But the frenzy will have been such that gun owners will consider themselves lucky to still have anything left. For now.
This thing has the reek of a false flag.
Gun Owners are the ones Hoarding all the Food. How else will the Government feed all of those who do not prepare, without taking the Guns away from those who do prepare.
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
Aleksandr I Solzhenitsyn
This all happened after the people were disarmed. Not many Russians at the time could ever think that their government would do this to them. Same same here.
Every time some little event occurs the henny-pennys run around hyping-out what is of course an insignificant real-world hazard, and claiming politicans should be involved to save us all from the insigniciat nothings.
Fight Club? ... where art thou? .. why hast thou forsaken me? ... all I've got now are a bunch of sooky dependent statist panzies!!!
WHHAAHAHAH!!!
Oh, don't like it? Just tap the red button and fuck-off.
So why give anarchy a bad rap:
From Wikipedia for lack of a better reference:
Outside of the U.S., and by most individuals that self-identify as anarchists, it implies a system of governance, mostly theoretical at a nation state level. There are also other forms of Anarchy that attempt to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable society.[5][6]
If anarchism has any tenet it's this: No coercive force is to be used. That's it! Most of the stuff you hear is done by TPTB to make anarchism some ugly thing (when what they have had to offer is about as ugly as it can get; until, that is, it gets uglier and then all blows up).
The LOGICAL expansion is then that centralized powers wouldn't exist. However, nothing is forbidden because open and free association is how anarchism is to be conducted.
Those that wish to become "informed:"
http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/practice/sp001689.html
While modern anarchist thought regarding coercion may be different from what existed around the end of the 19th century, most historians still think of Anarchism in terms of things like McKinley's assassination, as well as bombings of institutions and public servants, e.g. "propaganda of the deed", "reprise individuelle", "Two Red Years"... and even modern anarchism carries this on in the practice of black blocs and other tactics of insurrectionary anarchism. One of the most amusingly named anarchist groups, the "Conscientious Arsonists", burned up over sixty cars in Greece in the late nineties and bombed a parliamentarian's office. That's modern anarchy for ya.
the bottom half of the class rules the world. by their nature, the bottom half of the class is easily lead ....to slaughter. all .gov has to do is convince the bottom half of the class that guns are bad and the people who defend the right to bear arms are wacko and dangerous.
i haven't owned a gun in 30 years. i am buying a few of them, unregistered. i have a feeling this just got real serious.
I think if one or two of the teachers had the presense of mind to push a child out of harms way, at the cost of her own life, then I can not help but think that she would have used a gun, if she had one , to protect herself and the kids. Therefore, the argument of allowing teachers, a la airline pilots to carry, may have some merit.
The 2nd amendment allows citizens, as potential or "drafted" members of a "well organized militia" in the event the "security of the free state" is threatened, "to keep" guns. This does not mean only hunting guns. Sorry gun grabbers, the amendment directly applies in context to the right to keep military assault weapons: the kind used to repell a military force.
Trying to be equal handed, my criticism of the gun owners is that some or many of them leave their high powered rifles etc unlocked, often in small soft targets, rural homes especially, which can easily be broken into, or as in this case, removed right off the openly displayed gun rack.
My feeling is that for home defense or personal protection, fine, carry your Sig concealed or open as the law allows, or have your shotgun or 45 ACP at bedside for your reasonable home defense needs at night , etc. But when you leave, if you don't take them with you, then lock them up...to prevent theft or accidents.
But if you have AR-15s, MIAs, AK's etc which you might reasonably like to go out on the range and shoot on the weekends, or to have on "standby" in the event that the whole country goes into a SHTF mode and the "security of the free state" is threatend and formation and mobilization of a militia theroretically becomes necessary, then keep them reasonably locked up when you are not around, but always at the ready as you see fit. Just saying.
Teachers should not be holding guns, their job is to hold roses. There should be an armed security guard(s) in every school (in America) - maybe one for every 100 students. Adam Lanza forced himself in through a window. Throw in some dollars to make that kind of entry near impossible. You will turn a school into a fortress but I do not think Miss Kindergarten Teacher should be walking around with a gun, that just sends the wrong message. Education has a higher purpose.
Great idea until the next fire kills hundreds who can no longer get out of the death trap that protects them from shooters.
OK. You can arm yourself with one pistol that does not automatically load and will only shoot when it is in your warm hand.
Want to play with bigger guns? Join the Army! If enough gun nuts do this, we can go back to using hand to hand combat on the field of battle, Braveheart style, thus eliminating the need for drones.
This is all so easy but the military industrial complex makes it oh so hard, don't they..
When a person starts out by shooting his own mother in her face, and then steals her firearms to murder others, we are simply outside the abililty of civil government to stop. Would this story have been reported differently had his mother been a law enforcement official?
I would point out that during the current rifle deer season, over a million citizens went into the wild and killed hudreds of thousands of deer and elk with no murders being reported.
And lots of those hunters were even drinking!
If this doesn't describe how real anarchism works then I don't know what does.
Hunters with automatic weapons??
Is it just too much effort for the media to distinguish between semi-automatic and fully automatic weaponry?
Hey, can't we simply pass a law that forbids shooting your own mother in the face? We probably shouldn't be letting people do that anyway.
Just think about all of the People that go to Gun Shows and all of the firearms present. Yet, not one Death or Murder.
Gangs of 5 or more have been known to carry out home invasions. Having a high-capacity magazine in your rifle is a force-multiplier and helps alleviate somewhat the disadvantage of being outnumbered.
More fucken shilly bullshit.
blah blah SSRI blah blah Aspergers blah blah gun control.
SHOW ME THE BODIES.
I do not, and have not believed a word of what is served up on television for about 14 years. newspapers, similar time, internet, perhaps 7 years. by this i mean, if i cannot verify it, i cannot accept it is true. Why? there are too many examples of us being lied to , deceived and deliberately confused by masses of conflicting information.
SHOW ME THE BODIES. for real. i'll pay my own way. i wanna see the dead cold proof. otherwise, this looks like, smells like and sounds like the Same Old Shit.
Was watching 60 Minutes and they're interviewing some ex-classmate of the shooter.
60 Mintues asked her to recall what kind of a student was he.
Girl answers that he was "odd" because he "didn't participate in class discussions" and "carried a briefcase to school instead of a backpack like everyone else".
I guess we should go after the strong silent type who don't conform to what's considered the "norm" these days.
Can't wait for the day when a nut goes on another shooting rampage and during the investigation they uncover that he was a "prepper" and that he owned lot's and lot's of gold coins and other bullion.
Next thing you stackers know, you get a knock on the door from the local police stating that you're under investigation for terrorism because you own some gold coins.
Amerika is fucked up!!!!!
Those students were right. People who carry briefcases shouldn't be trusted by anybody.
MSNBC has already quite carefully painted the mother as a 'prepper'.
Normally, I would agree with you. But I live in Sandy Hook, and know people who know people that were killed. So I am thinking that at minimum, from my experience, eight people were killed. I would like to add, however, that we have heard nothing recently about the second shooter that was reported by CBS.
MSM is expert at misreporting and telling lies.
My condolences to the people of the city of Sandy Hook.
or about those at least 1 maybe 2 other individuals that were apprehended by police.
Perhaps there should now be a rally call to save the children by unplugging and/or turning off one's TV.
I believe there are millions of citizens and gun owners who are carefully watching events as they unfold. As opposed to the 1994 Assault Weapons ban (which Clinton called a big mistake), this time everyone is ready and willing to turn in their banned guns.
Bullets first.
I cannot believe liberals want to start a bloody civil war. But if I am wrong I predict an exceptional unintended result. A bifurcated nation with a new confederacy - probably following red/blue distinctions.
Obama has managed to turn the gun owning public into an even more radical and prepared populace than his predecessors. I pray he is not foolish enough to think we would do as the Canadians or Australians.
Even worse, in a civil insurrection those who understand asymmetric warfare would destroy US forces in short order. Lose our infrastructure and you lose all ability to govern.
May cooler heads prevail. Let the Democrats pander to their extreme left, only to give up and say we tried but couldn't get enough votes to overcome those Republicans and NRA members.
If an insane gun control act passes the time for political action ends.
"I cannot believe liberals want to start a bloody civil war."
I suspect that that's what you want to believe (maybe so you can feel justified in shooting a lot of them?).
How about: "TPTB want to start a bloody civil war." (so that they can press their boot more firmly on our throats)
Just tell me why you need semi-automatic or automatic firearms? I can to some extend understand justifying owning a hand gun, but aumatic weapons?
Because in a panic and at night in the dark you might miss a few times. Or there might be 3 or 4 of them.
Feral pigs, hungry herds of them. Very tough animals. The standard AR round kills them, sure, quite a lot later in the day. Meantime, they keep going.
Sandy Hook was a terrible tragedy.
But everyone needs to bear in mind that the PERP did not OWN any of the weapons in question - he commited TWO CRIMES (murder and armed robbery) to OBTAIN the weapons he needed to commit the massacre.
Gun laws or no gun laws - you cannot stop the determined perpetrator of any crime unless you can read his mind and get to him first.
Hence the need to protect yourself. You cannot depend on the "police" to protect you for two reasons - first of all, they won't reach you in time, and second, even if they do and you somehow survive, YOU and your activites will be investigated (all part of normal police procedure) and the likely outcome, if you are a "prepper", "survivalist". or "gold bug" is that YOU will be carted off to jail while your assailant goes FREE - especially if he is a "minority", "undocumented", or member of another TPTB-protected group.
When it comes to your safety and security, only YOU are responsible for YOU. Not the police - not the authorities - especially if you aren't a bankster or other one-percenter who has them on the payroll. It is up to YOU to obtain arms, lawfully OR otherwise, get trained in their use, and to be prepared to use them without remorse on the slightest threat to your person or property.
Drastic? Not at all. Get used to "walking around strapped" and you will find that your improved body language and non-verbal cues will scare off all kinds of trouble.
And if the worst happens and you do take out a perp bent on killing you or taking your stuff?
Better tried by twelve than carried by six.
Just Sayin'
His mother had several assault rifles at her (his) home. Was that really necessary? It does make it easy for nutcases to get at such guns and start killing.
Do you really need a fucking assault rifle for self-defense? How many people prevent a, say, robbery of their home by the use of a military class assault rifle each year in the US?
The drywall repair bill alone would be prohibitive.
I say stick with a shotgun. One or two big holes might just be fixed with a lot of toothpaste and a little paint. But with an assault rifle, you're going to have a huge pattern across several panels to replace.
man, long time no see, thought someone must have caught the swordfish ... where u been?
After WWII my grandfather was forced to give away his rifles and guns. He was a Foerster (It cannot be compared with a ranger, but he was in charge of the local forest area and hunting was a part of his job) and could only keep one rifle. Government, which was mainly controlled by the French, promised a compensation after they had confiscated those rifles. In 1997, my grandfather was already dead then, we finally got a letter from the gov. They gave his kids (4) 1.500 DM. That might have been a lot at the time when my grandfather lived, but in 1997 it was just a joke and nothing more. And it was nothing compared with the value that those six rifles had. Of course, my grandfather was able to buy more rifles a few years after that confiscation. He needed them. He loved hunting.
.
.
clearly a blog that puts 20 statistics on its frontpage an how unrelated gun control is to rampage shootings has some agenda... ?
there is no downside banning at least those rifles, apart from some fellow citizens having to secondguess their passion for weapons.
Their theory may be that they need a fire arm as large and powerful as the bad guy. I don't know. But that makes the most sense. Mexican drug cartel move through this country, in the shadows, but they are still there. Home invasions are happening daily. Gangs go into neighborhoods, pick 2 streets and hit several houses at a pop. The gangs are who should not have weapons but they get theirs underground or perhpas the drug cartel (armed by the US govt).
It's a matter of being free enough to decide for yourself. If the infrastructure is flawed, and change the format, don't delete the entire faucet of life - right to bear arms. It was a gift to the people from the Founding Fathers and for fuck's sake, that means quite a lot. They warned us about this time and time again.
.
You don't need guns to become a vegetarian.
You don't need guns to protect yourself. In most parts of the world people dont own guns. So why cant 300 million in some privileged part of the world live without guns?
The argument that govt/military/wall street security has guns and therefore everyone else needs to own one is a pretty lame argument.
"You don't need guns to become a sheeple... In most parts of the world sheeple dont own guns." -Sambo
FYP
By the way, 'need' has nothing to do with it.
Less guns = less gun crime...it's common sense. Compare US stats on it with other countries and you'll realise this is a FACT. Your right to bear arms shouldn't come at the cost of kids and other innocents dying.
You need to watch this video. An hour that will leave you without a doubt knowing exactly what has happened throughout history when the leader in charge was criminally insane. Add desperation and a mob mentality and you've got yourself a nightmare situation that was avoidable. These uncertain times, the legalized fraud and bribery, poverty and despair at the hopeless outlook lends to civil unrest. Throw in "President Maniac"" and you'll see history repeat itself. It's happening other places as we speak. During a time of lawlessness, being unable to protect your home and property is essential. Being a victim changes teh course of one's life. Traumatized and scarred, angry and suspicious ... carry that around in your head and see how much room is left.
Watch this fucking video you idiot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iDivHkQ2GSg#!
"Less guns = less gun crime...it's common sense."
Wrong. There is no logical correlation to your claim. "Less guns" held lawfully means that those who hold them unlawfully (criminals) are more likely to use them (or at least threaten to use them) because they will know that their victims are unarmed and defenceless, and the risk to themselves is greatly reduced. That is the reality.
"Less guns = less 'gun' crime" Perhaps. However it does not follow that less guns = less overall crime, or that less guns = less death.
~30 people/day are shot to death
~50 people/day suicide by gun
compare to:
~2260 people/day aborted (~8% for medical reasons)
~1640 fatal cardiac arrests/day
~1550 cancer victims/day
~370 COPD deaths/day
~320 accident victims/day
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm
Who will mourn for me when an illegally armed Criminal comes into my defenseless house and kills me? Will Bloomberg be outraged?
Bloomberg will be publicly outraged in a 10 second sound bite. But at least you'll be famous. For a few minutes.
"The government wants to disarm its slaves", you people are fucking spoons, thats the long and short of it.
Make no mistake, gentlemen, a "guns-ban" is nothing more than the threat to kill peaceable people.
"Hand over your property, or we will kill you." That's all it amounts to, when you get right down to it.
Your "crime"? .... refusing to comply with the wishes of other men.
These people are not interested in easing violence; these folks want to disarm the public before the mathematically inevitable economic collapse occurs (see my article “Slaves are Always Disarmed”).
This is exactly on point finally someone said it!
Here is the TRUE cause of most of this violence. Pass this link around and make it go viral. Enlighten the people on who their enemies really are. We shut down the criminality in psychiatry, big pharma and the FDA and that would end most all of these violent incidents.
This is excellent. This says it all people. Link put on at the beginning of a different ZH thread by "michaelwiseguy". These are professionals who are within these very camps (psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians, pharmaceutical account managers, etc. etc.) shining the light of truth on the evil. This is contributing to the downfall of our country (they are taking this tack in order to disarm America and continue the totalitarian take over). I'm going to pass this on to all family, friends and associates (my whole address book). Please do the same. Let's make this go viral. Americans need to know the true cause and effect for these horrific incidents of violence... and who our enemies truly are.
The TRUE SOURCE of RANDOM & MASS SHOOTINGS and VIOLENCE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhO0Pul_FcE
Illogical: Approximately 100 people die each day in the USA due to automobile accidents. Solution: Ban cars. Thousands die each day from heart disease. Solution: Ban fast food. Many people die from alcohol related use. Solution: Ban alcohol. Cars, food and alcohol don't kill people. People kill people because they are demented and many are on dangerous drugs. If you took guns away they'd use knives, explosives, cars, garrottes, hammers, poison water supplies, etc. etc. The increase in mass murders is date coincident with the flooding of psychotrobic drugs into our society.
I wonder how this debate would have gone if the perp decided to mow down those he killed with a car through the playground rather than with a firearm. He could have stolen the car, killed and sped away. Make running down people with cars illegal?
All too often we treat the symptom or the method rather than the root cause. In his mind he got to a terrible place where killing children was rationalized as being okay. Seeking to understand the hows and whys of how he got there would be the prudent and logical thing to do. But then it's much easier to react emotionally rather than use reason...
We would be better off and safer by taking away the guns from most cops and letting the public arm themselves. If you are interested in carrying some self-protection but are not interested in ballistic, lead-firing, lethal guns, check out this site. This weapon is non-lethal but you have to practice with it, know its limitations and rehearse, rehearse, rehearse different scenarios so that you know exactly what actions to carry out in different situations. You must THINK before you act, you must know what to do before you can think, this cannot be stressed enough! I carry this always along with other self-defense items. Having been in Vietnam as an infantryman, I quickly learned that you must have all your gear functional and ready to go at every minute, no matter where you were - those that didn't, put themselves and others in dangerous and sometimes, lethal situations.
http://www.piexon.com/
For the life of me, I can't understand how someone can be so stupid as to leave unlocked firearms and ammo around an obviously emotionally unstable person. I don't have any details but it doesn't seem they were secured at all. I just don't get it.
"... but may be indirectly affected by certain parties’ emotional response to it and by those that will exploit it to justify agendas."
This could just as easily be applied to the author's own emotional response to any idea of gun control. So meta.