School Shooting: Sparks, Nevada; Teacher Killed

Image from source, CNN

I swear I heard a guy on the radio say--practically in the same breath--that this happened because it was a no-gun zone, and that it shouldn't be politicized. Idiot.

[Excerpt]

Nevada school shooting: Teacher killed, two students wounded

A student opening fire with a handgun he took from his parents. Screaming students running for cover. A teacher, trying to help, shot dead. Two students wounded. The terror lasted just a few brutal minutes. . .

Read more at: CNN

Gun Violence: A Recurrent American Problem

For some reason, we're not allowed to point to guns themselves as any part of the problem. Which is curious. When they say "guns don't kill people, people kill people," I always wonder how well these killers would do with a cocked finger. The guns are positively part of the problem. And our fetish for them is no excuse for denying that fact.
 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Another Mass Shooting: Washington Navy Yard

How many times is something like this going to happen? Arguably, on into infinity, since it is apparently impossible to do anything whatsoever about guns. At all. At all. At all. No matter what, our gun fetish is so all-consuming, its place in the Constitution so somehow overriding of every other right, that nothing is ever going to change. So, this will happen over and over.

As usual, the chorus from the right that "if only there were more good guys with guns. . ." is ringing out. It's an overly simplistic, best-case-scenario, dream-world, go-to response. It doesn't take into account friendly fire, people mistaking the good guy for a bad guy, or the fact that your average Joe isn't freakin' Dirty Harry. Also as usual, if you visit Right Wing World, you'll find a hyper-defensiveness, and a readiness to assign motives that fit their world view. And odd, repurposed (and vaguely racist) insults of President Obama, stuff like, "is he going to say the shooter looks like his son?" [Story continues below]



And as usual, there will be mutterings of doing something, but after getting bupkis despite a big push after Sandy Hook, nobody will have the energy to do so. And nobody seems to have the clarity of mind to say out loud that "the answer to gun violence is more guns" is a lot like mutually assured destruction.

[Excerpt]

Washington Navy Yard shooting leaves at least 12 dead plus gunman Aaron Alexis

A former Navy reservist went on a shooting rampage Monday inside a building at the heavily secured Washington Navy Yard, firing from a balcony onto office workers in the cafeteria below, authorities and witnesses said. Twelve people were killed, plus the gunman. . .

Read more at: CBS News

 

The Black NRA

Black NRA from Sarah Silverman

Gun March Coming to DC Because: Tyranny!

Image from source, Liberals Unite

It just keeps rolling in. If you'd never been to this blog before, you'd think I was a gun control activist, but no. It's just that the news cycle is top-heavy with gun nutters these days. And I find myself on the--I don't know, sane?--side of the issue.

I hardly know where to start with this bizarre, deliberately provocative, paranoid, batshit event, but I'll make two observations:

1) The group and the leader of this event illustrate no evidence of this "tyranny" they're railing against. But how are we to discern from their actions and words that they are patriots rather than traitors? And how would the authorities make that decision?

2) What would this group's reaction be if an identical protest were taken up by a group of militant, fundamentalist Muslims? And I'm not talking about the white, Russian type, but the full-on, Middle-Eastern, turbaned and bearded variety. I have a funny feeling that Adam Kokesh and his lunatic band of idiots would have a brand new definition of the 2nd amendment, and who it applies to. Don't you?

[Excerpt

Fomenting Rebellion In An Armed March On Washington

". . .This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. . ."

Assholes.

Read more at: Liberals Unite

And if you want to read a really good blogger write on this subject, go to rudepundit.blogspot.com, and scroll to "In Brief: Wayne LaPierre Is Gonna Get Us All Killed" 

Texas: Another Reason I'm Moving to the Gun Control Camp

People who look at this and are inspired,
scare the crap out of me. Image from source.

If it isn't clear why a formerly neutral-on-guns guy like me is becoming ever more in the gun control camp, here's one reason: Texas. I don't think I really even need to elaborate, just look at Governor Goodhair there, posing like Yosemite Sam. Then scroll down and read the plastic gun story, the guns for kids story. . .anything from the NRA, especially any utterance by Wayne LaPierre. This cultish, fetishistic, addiction to guns we have as a country is really starting to rub me (and a whole lot of people) the wrong way. And the lunacy of people who proclaim themselves to be patriots, ready to take up arms against the "tyranny" of the federal government? How would that go down exactly? If you think that is a likely outcome in this country, I'd love to hear from you in the comments, about how you think that would go down.

[Excerpt]

Texas House Approves 12 Firearms Bills To Put More Guns In Classrooms And Defy Federal Law

On Saturday, as Texas hosted the National Rifle Association’s annual convention, the Texas House passed 12 gun bills to make it even easier to obtain and possess firearms in the state. The onslaught of legislation contains provisions to allow college students to carry handguns in class and to block any theoretical federal bans on assault weapons or high-capacity ammunition. The 12 bills, a veritable goody bag for gun rights advocates, passed easily in the Republican-dominated House. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

Captain Obvious: We Shouldn't Sell Guns to Children

To have a driver's license in most states, you must be at least 16 years old. Cigarette sales are restricted to people who are at least 18 years of age. Voters must also be 18. Alcohol can't be obtained unless you're 21. It's hard to rent a car unless you're at least 25. But they're marketing guns to children?

Guns for kids, named "Crickett" and "Chipmunk?"
From Crickett.com (currently offline).

In the classic movie A Christmas Story, little Ralphie wants nothing more than a Red Ryder BB gun. Of course it's fiction, and takes place in the 1940s, but it's not an unknown desire. In fact, my brother and I received our Daisy (odd name for a gun) BB air rifles at a fairly young age, I'd say between 7 and 9. And we both fired real guns, though only in the immediate presence of a parent or grandparent. We grew up around guns, some locked (barely) away, and some out in the open. We were (mostly) taught respect, and the very serious nature of firearms, and (almost) never had any sort of incident. Well, nobody got shot.

But that was the 1970s, a time when my sister's car seat was a device to keep her still and out of Mom's hair. As a safety device, it was appalling, two hooks over the back seat,  maybe a lap belt fastened across it? There's no doubt it would have become a projectile in an accident. We did safety half-assed in the 70s, nobody denies that. And today, we might have a tendency to be overprotective. But in a world where child safety and "what about the children" is paramount, how in the world is it legal to market and sell real guns to children?

Barbie's Dream Rifle?

As President Obama has "evolved" on gay marriage, I'm evolving on gun control. I've been moving from sort of against it, to indifferent, to wary, to almost fully in the gun control camp. It's not just tragic and horrific gun deaths that has pushed me over, it is the appalling response and behavior from gun fetishists freaks nuts enthusiasts. When your first response to a mass shooting is, "Gubmint better not be thinking about taking my guns!" there's a problem. When there are instantaneous, ridiculous conspiracy theories after each new massacre, the problem is getting out of hand. The strange quasi-religious, fetishistic, near addiction some people have to guns is quite off-putting, even to a person who was raised around them. The fanatical, rabid defense of the 2nd amendment over all the rest of the Constitution is more than odd, it's hypocritical. And extending all of that into guns marketed to 5-year-olds is fucking insane.

[Excerpt]

Guns for Kids Marketing Debate Ignited by Latest Child Death

The tragic shooting death of a 2-year-old girl by her 5-year-old brother this week was compounded by the fact -- baffling to many who don't use guns -- that the .22 rifle the boy used has been given to him as a present. . .

Read more (with annoying, autoplaying video) at: ABC News

And I've saved the most appalling image from Crickett's website, via Mother Jones, for last.

Jon Stewart: 2nd Amendment the Only One Conservatives Care About?

Jon Stewart raised the topic of the odd conservative fixation on the 2nd amendment to the Constitution--seemingly above all others--in a way that just tickled me. Because I have made this argument countless times both on the blog and in conversation, but I never succeeded in making it this entertaining. Keith Olbermann did it once, but we don't have him to kick around anymore. So, thanks to The Daily Show for making the point so well.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Indecision Political Humor,The Daily Show on Facebook

Rude Pundit's "Guns for Gays" Plan

This is one of the funniest things I've read in a while.

[Excerpt]

Guns for Gays

"Here's what has to happen: we gotta get gays and lesbians by the thousands...no, no, by the tens of thousands to buy guns. No, wait, even better. Someone call George Soros for some major scratch. We gotta start a program to arm Ls and Gs and Bs and Ts and even Qs with the baddest ass guns currently legal, motherfuckin' AR-15s and fuckin' .50 caliber rifles, toss in some pistols like Glocks and Magnum revolvers. And get 'em all concealed carry and whatever other licenses they need. Then, once all the gays got themselves armed, they need to start showing up with their guns, all tricked out in the most over-the-top outfits. . ."

Read the rest (and then read his other stuff) at: The Rude Pundit

New Details About Newtown, 152 Bullets in Less Than 5 Minutes

Whatever your politics (if any) on gun control, this video is worth watching. For one, it will disabuse you of the notion that Rachel Maddow is a wild-eyed reactionary. Secondly, she gives an excellent account of the chain of events in the Sandy Hook Elementary mass shooting in  Newtown, Connecticut. It's easy to follow, and even handed (and comes with an advisory warning for people who'd rather not picture the events). Starting at about 1:45, she chronicles what happened, and only after about 6:30 is there any particular editorializing. And what editorializing there is, in my opinion, is hard to argue with.

152 bullets in under 5 minutes. Four reloads, with extended magazines. How different might it have been if the shooter had to reload 15 times, instead? It's a valid question, and a good one.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Joe Heck Considers Gabby Giffords a "Prop" for Gun Control Advocates

Image of Gabby Giffords from source, Think Progress

Joe Heck has been a politician in Nevada for as long as I can remember, and I've been here for over 18 years. Sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses. But he hit the jackpot in the 2010 GOP wave election, defeating freshman Congreswoman Dina Titus (who was swept back into congress in the 2012 election), and is now a two-term US Congressman. My take on Heck was mildly negative, for admittedly shallow reasons: he is a Republican, and he reminds me of a sister wife, minus the upswept hairdo. I don't know why, maybe it was just his photo on his campaign signs. Anyway. . .

My negative opinion of Heck has gained a little depth since my original assessment. I've since heard Heck several times in interviews and call-in segments on local Las Vegas talk radio. And from what I've heard, Heck is Meet the Press ready, with canned GOP answers for every question. Sure, the answer may not fit the question to a T, but it is guaranteed to match whatever the talking points of the day are. And now, Heck may have said too much to one of those local hosts, a blowhard named Alan Stock. I think Heck may have gotten to conversational, too comfortable in the right-wing echo chamber.

[Excerpt]

Congressman Considers Gabby Giffords A ‘Prop’ For Gun Regulations

Congressman Joe Heck (R-NV) on Tuesday agreed that he considers former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ), who was a victim of an assassination attempt two years ago, a “prop” in the debate over gun regulations. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

Guns, The Bill of Rights, and Sensible Regulation

Image from source, DailyKos

I have found that it is nearly impossible to have a civil, rational and fully engaged conversation about guns with people who consider themselves gun enthusiasts (or gun fetishists, if you prefer). Their metaphoric defenses go up instantly if they feel that their literal defenses are threatened in any way. If any discussion about the potential limitation, regulation or registration of any element of the category "arms" are discussed, they come out. . .uh. . .guns a-blazing.  To the gun enthusiast, the 2nd amendment is akin to a holy commandment, and is separate and apart from the rest of the document it resides within.

I've never understood the passion gun owners have for either the 2nd amendment, or guns in general, but I've also never been against guns either for sport or protection. Increasingly, my stance has been difficult for me to square with the lunacy I hear coming from the far right on the subject. And when I see their hair trigger (sorry) reactions to any notion of "gun control," I find my instinctive defense (sorry) of their position harder to justify. Wayne LaPierre comes off as such an unreasonable douche, I find myself identifying much more with the counterargument.

Why must this be so? Why is there such hyper-defensiveness about the 2nd amendment? It isn't as though we don't regulate other devices, such as cars. And while it's true that car ownership isn't declared a "right" in the Constitution, it is also true that other Constitutional rights are subject to delineation, regulation and restriction. Check out this (much better written) article for an excellent deconstruction of the issue.

[Excerpt]

Driving, Drinking, Shooting

. . .So really, there's no comparison between cars and guns. Or guns and fatty foods, or guns and alcohol. There's no comparison at all. Because gun ownership is a right. . .

So, when it comes to regulating gun ownership, if anyone suggests that we should require the kind of safety, training, and personal responsibility that we demand of anyone getting behind the wheel of a car, we can say... Absolutely. Why not? . . .

Read more at: DailyKos

Steven Weber: Myth Addiction

One of my favorite bloggers, actor Steven Weber, has done it again. He took what bugs me most about our gun-loving society, and put it in words I couldn't hope to match. Likening our society's relationship with guns to the town drunk from The Andy Griffith Show, Weber manages to turn a tragedy into an excellent lesson, and even manages to be entertaining doing it. That's good writing.

[Excerpt]

Myth Addiction

. . .Of course, it ain't the gun which causes the damage, it's the person wielding it (untouched, Otis's caustic rotgut was only damaging to, perhaps, the inside of the bottle in which it came). But just as culpable is an environment which consistently pardons the gun's misuse and abuse and even tacitly supports it, an environment which fetishizes, ennobles and enables it. It's the perfect environment to breed a nation of gun junkies. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

I Want a Gun Rights Activist to Respond to the Following

This quote is culled verbatim from one of my favorite blogs, Joe.My.God.:

"If roads were collapsing all across the United States, killing dozens of drivers, we would surely see that as a moment to talk about what we could do to keep roads from collapsing. If terrorists were detonating bombs in port after port, you can be sure Congress would be working to upgrade the nation’s security measures. If a plague was ripping through communities, public-health officials would be working feverishly to contain it.

"Only with gun violence do we respond to repeated tragedies by saying that mourning is acceptable but discussing how to prevent more tragedies is not. But that’s unacceptable. As others have observed, talking about how to stop mass shootings in the aftermath of a string of mass shootings isn’t 'too soon.' It’s much too late." - Ezra Klein, writing for the Washington Post.

So, how 'bout it, 2nd Amendment disciples? Why is gun violence the one bad thing we're not allowed to discuss without histrionics from the right?

Another Shooting, This Time Little Kids in Connecticut

Wow, we just had a shooting in a mall this week, and already a school shooting? And now I'm hearing that the teachers should have been armed, if it hadn't been a gun-free zone, blah, blah, on and on. And it's only considered "politicizing" a tragedy if you have even the mildest interest in discussing what could be done to prevent these tragedies. If you're pro-gun (and by that, I mostly mean the gun nuts, the fetishists), you're allowed to drone on about "gun grabbers" and whatnot, that's okay. Somehow, that's not "politicizing." [Story continues below]



Well, I'm tired of the line that nothing can be done. Guns are such an important part of America, the 2nd amendment so much more important than any other law, any other anything, we've just got to live with occasional (and much more frequent) shooting sprees? And it is particularly odd that it is conservatives who are adamant that nothing be done to make it harder to buy or own guns, or at least to track gun and ammunition buyers better. It's odd because they go entirely the other way if it is Muslims with any kind of weapons. If it's terrorism, than by golly, we'll give up all kinds of freedom and gut the Constitution to "keep us safe." Well, how are shooting sprees not terrorism? Why to we just shrug these things off a day or so after they happen?

[Excerpt]

Police: 20 children among 26 victims of Connecticut school shooting

Dressed in black fatigues and a military vest, a heavily armed man walked into a Connecticut elementary school Friday and interrupted the start of a typical school day, opening fire on two classrooms. . .

Read more at: CNN

Keith Olberman's Special Comment on Gabrielle Giffords Shooting

Well done, Keith.

Breaking News: Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) Shot

Image found at Democratic Underground

I'm not linking to any stories, because at this point--for some reason--the news agencies can't get their story straight. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot, along with a dozen or so other people today at a Safeway grocery store appearance. Some sources say she's dead, some say she's alive and in surgery, and some have reported both. It's bad no matter how you look at it, and the shooter could be of any political stripe, given Giffords position as a blue dog Democrat. No political position is deserving of an assassination attempt.  One more thing. Even if it has nothing to do with what happened today, Sarah Palin should be ashamed of her "SarahPAC" graphic with a bullseye on Giffords' location in Arizona. She should make a public statement to that effect, and without her standard defensive, snarky gotchas.

Sharron Angle Won't Refudiate "Second Amendment Remedies"

Sharron Angle has mentioned "second amendment remedies" several times, in a none-to-vague threat that if Republicans don't win at the ballot box, they may take up arms. There's really no other way to spin what she's saying, particularly when she ended one of those statements with "take out Harry Reid."  But the odd thing is, given several chances to try to spin away what she really meant, she really doesn't. 

Morning Joe on Sharron Angle: This Race is Over

One last video (at least for now), this one from Morning Joe. Though the show is on MSNBC--often derided as the flip side of FOX "News"--it is helmed by conservative former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough.  And somehow Joe missed that Nevada's Sharron Angle (Harry Reid's Opponent) had suggested "Second Amendment" solutions to things voters don't like in Washington.  And he makes no excuses for her. Good for you, Joe.

Keith Olbermann on the Loss of the Bill of Rights

Yesterday, I posted a piece where I created a graphic of The Bill of Rights, with the damaged parts crossed out. After doing so, I remembered a segment on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, where Olbermann does much the same thing, explaining why those parts of the Bill have been so damaged.

I found it today, and thought I should post it. The Bill of Rights segment is toward the end.