Bloomberg to Obama and Romney: Where exactly do you stand on gun control?

posted at 6:01 pm on July 20, 2012 by Tina Korbe

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg joins the list of those who can’t bear to refrain from politicizing a tragedy for even one day:

“You know, soothing words are nice, but maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be [p]resident of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it because this is obviously a problem across the country,” Bloomberg said during an appearance on John Gambling’s radio show, the New York Observer reports. …

“I mean, there are so many murders with guns every day, it’s just got to stop. And instead of the two people – President Obama and [Gov.] Romney – talking in broad things about they want to make the world a better place, [OK], tell us how.”

Bloomberg’s immediate pivot from the movie massacre to one of his pet issues echoes tweets by Piers Morgan earlier today.

“More Americans will buy guns after this, to defend themselves, and so the dangerous spiral descends,” Morgan postulated. “When/how does it stop?”

Never mind that, as Michelle Malkin points out, armed Colorado citizens have, in fact, saved lives during mass shootings. The important point is to immediately pounce upon Americans’ natural response to this morning’s news. Morgan, Bloomberg and the rest know that Americans move quickly from “We mourn this moment” to “We must do something!” Not a minute to waste if they’re to ensure that the something Americans do is enact harsher gun policies!

Nor are they ashamed to so transparently seek to use heartache to advance their agenda.  Daily Kos editor David Waldman and fired John Edwards blogger Amanda Marcotte, for example, explicitly defend “the messy business” of dancing on graves.

But, really, why should they be ashamed? They sincerely believe in the efficacy of the “solution” they offer. If I thought for one minute that stricter requirements and a longer process to obtain a gun would somehow remove the violent streak so persistent in human nature, I’d join them in clamoring for ‘em.

That’s just it, though: Violence has exerted itself again and again in the gruesome and glorious history of humanity and it will again. As Judge Janine said on Fox News this morning, “In a free society, it happens.” We seek reasons and explanations for it, but, all too often, we find none. It is — as we so often say — senseless. As the mother of Columbine shooter Dylan Klebold put it, “I will never know why.” A sense of alienation, depression, distress … Any or all might drive an otherwise passive soul to desperate, destructive action. Greed,  hunger and ambition drive violence, too. For that matter, so, too, at times, do a sense of honor, justice or love. None is sufficient to explain the existence or persistence of violence in general. We’re reduced to this admission: Violence is in our nature as humans.

It’s not necessarily, then, a “problem” to be “solved,” but a constraint under which we must live. We rightly seek to deter violence, for its effects are brutal, painful and altogether undesirable. How do we best do that? Most proximately, we ensure that justice is served in our legal system so that would-be criminals know they will not escape punishment should they perpetrate a crime — and we arm the law-abiding populace as a further deterrent. More indirectly, we support the institutions and systems — the family and church, for example –  that produce adults less likely to commit crimes. We might not know why children of two-parent homes are less likely to be violent delinquents, for example, but we know that they are. It makes sense that we would seek to foster the family if we wish to reduce violence. Sadly, none of the systems we put in place to deter violence will eliminate it entirely.

On the other side of violence, though, we see something more positive. The something we do in response to tragedy is as equally human as violence itself, but far more humane: We hurt alongside, we pray for, we speak words of comfort to, we hug, we feed and we love the victims and their families. Isn’t that enough for today?

Tina Korbe is Policy Impact Director at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and a former associate editor at HotAir.com (but you knew that!).


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

My claim is that the American murder rate is considerably higher than our peers. Given our current level of development, we kill our fellow Americans at much greater rate than Western Europe, Australia, or Japan. This is my claim – what I’m looking for is an answer as to why. Mr. Bloomberg is suggesting that it’s because Americans can easily access guns. I disagree. I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Are you including the U.S. abortion rate in those number of murders?

Dr Evil on July 20, 2012 at 8:47 PM

My claim is that the American murder rate is considerably higher than our peers… I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

That’s so racist, Che.

BTW, no one cares how you feel. Why don’t you tell us what you think?

Akzed on July 20, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Romney is pro gun control just to let you guys know.

jdun on July 20, 2012 at 8:48 PM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Really? Who killed 800,000.00 Rwandans?

Dr Evil on July 20, 2012 at 8:49 PM

I stand with the 2nd Ammendment – we know where you stand Nanny-boy.

Hill60 on July 20, 2012 at 8:51 PM

If you want to see a show that is breathtaking in its stupidity on what happened in Aurora, may I suggest “The Ed show.”?

Especially the segment with Phillys mayor.

BallisticBob on July 20, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Bloomberg to Obama and Romney: Where exactly do you stand on gun control?

Americans to Bloomberg: Where exactly do you stand on defending the Constitution? My guess is that you feel the document is flexible.

Happy Nomad on July 20, 2012 at 8:56 PM

it’s because we are an inherently murderous people. Going after guns will change nothing.

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:14 PM

You really have become quite deranged within the past year.
Did something bad happen in your life that you have become such a moron?
Bcs that is a supremely stupid statement.

Badger40 on July 20, 2012 at 8:56 PM

“More Americans will buy guns after this, to defend themselves, and so the dangerous spiral descends,” Morgan postulated. “When/how does it stop?”

IT stops when criminals are more afraid of the average citizen than they are interested in robbing them.

IT stops when the government recognizes that adults are adults and are responsible in large part for their own safety.

IT stops when 99% of the gun laws on the books are repealed and people carry openly or concealed (or both) and criminals look for other ways to make a living.

IT stops when liberals quit pandering to the criminals. (I guess that will only happen when liberals are extinct as a species.)

Hope that helps a bit Morgan…

ProfShadow on July 20, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Sorry if someone already posted this.

Here is a 71 yr old man a few days ago in an internet cafe who started shooting 2 robbers, one with a gun, after the other one smashed a computer with a bat.

They ran out of there and no one was killed. They were injured and arrested. If only some decent law abiding citizen had a gun in that movie theater.

These mass shootings didn’t happen years ago when I was younger. Because criminals are cocky and don’t expect people to fight back.

And kids are raised by the media and schools who teach them not to respect life or God.

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm9o3vhKoF8

Elisa on July 20, 2012 at 9:04 PM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

This has to rank up there with the most absurd of conclusions drawn here on HotAir in a long long time.

Besides the “I feel” part even.

Cleombrotus on July 20, 2012 at 8:43 PM

I did not want to ask him why he feels more predisposed to kill.

I assume if they think he is a threat the PTB on HA will notify the authorities.

farsighted on July 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM

My claim is that the American murder rate is considerably higher than our peers. Given our current level of development, we kill our fellow Americans at much greater rate than Western Europe, Australia, or Japan. This is my claim – what I’m looking for is an answer as to why. Mr. Bloomberg is suggesting that it’s because Americans can easily access guns. I disagree. I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

(1) America is much more diverse nation, with larger immigrant populations than those you comparing us to. It has always been that way.

(2) How ever over the last 100 years Western Europe and Japan have been far more violent than the U.S. in terms of total body counts, because of two World Wars and various colonial conflicts and wars. This is something they never account for, which is the controlling socialist governments of Europe basically caused world wide massacres that dwarf anything our freedom loving, gun loving, gangster loving nation has ever done in our entire history.

William Eaton on July 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Well, with Fast and Furious not working, as designed, against the 2nd Amendment, and with Bloomberg so quick to jump in as well as others in the media, what are the chances this was Fast and Furious II? At this point I wouldn’t put anything past liberals, human lives to them are just cannon fodder as proven by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim and Castro, among others, in their zeal to reach goals.

CC is the only way to go, even liberals are not stupid enough to stake their own lives against someone right next to them having a ready to reach for gun.

The only reason Gifford’s shooting did not result in more casualties is a CC owner who was first to reach the gunman.

But asking liberals to actually think is well beyond any reason by now.

riddick on July 20, 2012 at 9:09 PM

You know, soothing words are nice, but maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be [p]resident of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it because this is obviously a problem across the country,”

In other words, Bloomberg wants to know which of the two candidates is more willing to gut the Constitution. Obama is clearly his guy since he decided to kill hundreds in an attempt to lop off the Second Amendment.

Happy Nomad on July 20, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Alright then Bloomberg, how about you get rid of your armed security detail, if it’s so wrong to defend oneself with a gun.

Sharke on July 20, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Piers Morgan: please go home and take your abysmal ratings with you…

Khun Joe on July 20, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Alright then Bloomberg, how about you get rid of your armed security detail, if it’s so wrong to defend oneself with a gun.

Sharke on July 20, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Add in that he dump the 45,000 NTPD cops at his beck and call.

The shickenchit coward, who is worth $1 billion

Liam on July 20, 2012 at 9:19 PM

I did not want to ask him why he feels more predisposed to kill.

I assume if they think he is a threat the PTB on HA will notify the authorities.

farsighted on July 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Well, we’ll give him a few points for disagreeing with Bloomberg’s suggestion that it’s our easy access to guns.

Cleombrotus on July 20, 2012 at 9:21 PM

My claim is that the American murder rate is considerably higher than our peers. Given our current level of development, we kill our fellow Americans at much greater rate than Western Europe, Australia, or Japan. This is my claim – what I’m looking for is an answer as to why. Mr. Bloomberg is suggesting that it’s because Americans can easily access guns. I disagree. I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

By that table, the US is only one place ahead of Europe, and certainly not killing “at a much greater rate.” But of course in your ignorant liberal mind, this is irrefutable proof that Americans are “more predisposed to kill.”

Of course if you were intellectually honest (which you’re not), then you would acknowledge the entirely different demographics which constitute Europe versus America, and admit a couple of politically incorrect facts. Firstly, that the US murder rate is considerably skewed by the rate of murder among African Americans (seven times higher than the white population), and secondly by the rate of violence in Hispanic communities. Europe doesn’t have anywhere near the same number of these groups. In fact, if you look at the murder rate among blacks in London, you’ll see that it’s many times higher than the national average (there is even a separate police division devoted to investigating black on black murder). What this means is, if the black population in London (or indeed any European country) was as big as it is in America, then any lead we have over them in the murder stakes would be considerably narrowed, if not reversed.

Of course I say this as a simple matter of statistical fact, there is nothing racist about it (before your over excitable little lib mind goes into overtime).

Sharke on July 20, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Big Gulp! That ban soda and guns and everyone will live in peace.

Mr. Joe on July 20, 2012 at 9:36 PM

And they have to ride the subway too!

Mr. Joe on July 20, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Holy cow. Racism, per Webster- “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities…”
 
 

it’s because we are an inherently murderous people.
 
ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:14 PM

 

However, there must be SOME explanation for the unique regularity with which Americans shoot one another.
 

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:29 PM

 

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation
 
ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

 
FBI website:
 

Of the 12,996 murder victims in 2010 for which supplemental data were received… Of the offenders for whom gender was known, 90.3 percent were males… Of the offenders for whom race was known, 53.1 percent were black

 
(Black males being <7% of the total population)
 

it’s because we are an inherently murderous people.
 
ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:14 PM

 

There is no other plausible explanation
 
ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

 
 
I’m guessing you don’t even realize what you posted, meaning it’s an actual belief and not just trendy election-year stuff.
 
Wow, Ernesto.

rogerb on July 20, 2012 at 9:39 PM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto

Give me a break. The global average is 6.9 murders per 100,000 people. The U.S. average is 4.8 per 100,000. You and Pukeberg can drop the straw man argument that we’re gunning people down left and right with regularity in this country, because it’s not true.

xblade on July 20, 2012 at 9:40 PM

In other words, Bloomberg wants to know which of the two candidates is more willing to gut the Constitution. Obama is clearly his guy since he decided to kill hundreds in an attempt to lop off the Second Amendment.

Happy Nomad on July 20, 2012 at 9:12 PM

The only reason Bloomie brought it up was because he knew BHO would gladly agree it’s “time to do something” and pander to the left some more…and he’s banking on Romney “stuttering” on it when pressed…

Bloomie is a danger to this nation…

Tim Zank on July 20, 2012 at 9:45 PM

On July 1st, 2004 Mitt Romney signed a statement in support of a state Assault Weapons ban as Governor. Upon signing he made this statement “Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts”, Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
…Yes, yes, I know Mitt’s changed his mind now. And I’m sure our current president holds to these same beliefs. But Mitt is the only candidate running for president who’s actually banned guns.
Like Reagan said “Trust but verify.”

RAN58 on July 20, 2012 at 9:45 PM

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4441420/Baracks-nuts-for-Beckham.html

Guns? Ban Guns? How about banning Beckham from the States? The Celebrity President strikes again.

Bloomberg, how about we ban cars?

How about we ban motorcycles?

How about we ban salt?
Oh, wait…….you got that one covered.

PappyD61 on July 20, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Bloomberg, who has police protection whenever he wants it, on demand; and Salman Rushdie, protected 24,7,365 by armed guards; think that guns aren’t a useful method of protection and defense… even though they use them regularly.

Oh wait, that can’t be right.

I guess they want a “caste-based” system of rights where only the “nobility” in the US should have the right of self-defense… and the rest of us don’t deserve the same rights.

Anyone persuaded to adopt caste-based system with nobility by these guys?

Yes Michael Moore, we know, you do support them… any non-elite support them?

gekkobear on July 20, 2012 at 9:52 PM

I am pleased to announce that, after a hiatus, Yeastie Noyz has returned to the ebony screen of PHUP and is now starring in:

Broad Brushes Paint Wide Swaths

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/07/broad-brushes-paint-wide-swaths.html

M2RB: Louis XIV

“You like me! You really, really like me!”

- Yeastie Noyz, accepting his “Squirrel!!!” for Best Hypocrite from the Academy of Progressive Blamers, Shifters, Frauds, Liars, “Move along, folks, there’s nothing to see here” Automatons, and Dolts. He was presented his award by last year’s winner, Lucky Pierre, who won for Dances With Dunces.

Resist We Much on July 20, 2012 at 9:55 PM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto

Give me a break. The global average is 6.9 murders per 100,000 people. The U.S. average is 4.8 per 100,000. You and Pukeberg can drop the straw man argument that we’re gunning people down left and right with regularity in this country, because it’s not true.

xblade on July 20, 2012 at 9:40 PM

That the global rate, here is the U.S. compared to other first world countries

Australia: 1.16
United Kingdom: 1.23
Germany: 0.84
Canada: 1.62
United States: 4.8

All the other countries have strict gun laws while the United States does not. If guns aren’t responsible for the increase homicide rate, then what is?

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Aside from thought experiments, are there any data to support your claim?

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Yes. Washington DC and Chicago.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Circumstances. Bloomblob may be more the totalitarian, but little Bammie is in a far more powerful position and more malicious.

slickwillie2001 on July 20, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Not only has Mikey spoken often of running for the White House(as an Independent, no less), something he could do well given his personal fortune…but they’ve speculated him as Veep potential for numerous tickets including Romney’s.

Obama is one term down. The most he can get is another. Bloomberg could get two, and it would only take one for him to use executive power in ways that make Obama look positively Constitutional.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:08 PM

All the other countries have strict gun laws while the United States does not. If guns aren’t responsible for the increase homicide rate, then what is?

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Liberalism.

chewmeister on July 20, 2012 at 10:12 PM

That the global rate, here is the U.S. compared to other first world countries

Australia: 1.16
United Kingdom: 1.23
Germany: 0.84
Canada: 1.62
United States: 4.8

All the other countries have strict gun laws while the United States does not. If guns aren’t responsible for the increase homicide rate, then what is?

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Wikipedia for crime in Chicago…

The African American murder victimization rate was approximately 34 per 100,000; the Hispanic rate was 11 per 100,000, and the white rate 3 per 100,000.

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:13 PM

All the other countries have strict gun laws while the United States does not. If guns aren’t responsible for the increase homicide rate, then what is?

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Demographics. Remove inner city gangs from the US stats and our rate comes down to that of other western nations.

Th sad thing is, liberals would rather disarm law abiding people than try to stop the black on black massacres. Liberals don’t care about blacks except to bribe them into voting 95% Democrat.

juliesa on July 20, 2012 at 10:13 PM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto

Give me a break. The global average is 6.9 murders per 100,000 people. The U.S. average is 4.8 per 100,000. You and Pukeberg can drop the straw man argument that we’re gunning people down left and right with regularity in this country, because it’s not true.

xblade on July 20, 2012 at 9:40 PM

I don’t normally reply to ernesto even indirectly, but I think before he concludes that we are just naturally murderous and everybody else is somehow morally superior, he should look at this;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Listed in order by number per 100,000 population;

Japan; 7th 23.8

Switzerland; 16th 18.0

Cuba; 31st 12.3

Canada; 38th 11.3

United States; 41st 11.8

Australia; 46th 9.7

United Kingdom; 61st 6.9

You could argue that we’d have fewer suicides without guns, I suppose- but then how do you explain Japan? Also, consider Canada; a slightly higher suicide rate than ours, with stringent anti-gun laws. Switzerland is higher than ours, with a loaded assault rifle in practically every home, but so is Cuba, where having even an air gun gets you thrown in prison- if you’re lucky and the Castro boys are in a good mood that day.

I think you’ll find that the causative factor is cultural, but not the way ernesto thinks. Or the way Bloomberg and most progressives think. The fact is that in the Japanese culture, people tend to blame themselves for failures and believe that the only honorable way to expiate their shame is to sacrifice their own lives (going back to the ancient code of Bushido).

In some elements of our culture today, people are taught that when anything goes wrong, it’s always Somebody Else’s Fault, and that it’s OK to take their frustrations out on that Somebody Else. Up to and including entire ethnic groups, as either “victims” or “victimizers”.

Then of course there are people who just want to use anything that happens as an excuse to either (a) gain power over everyone else to make themselves feel important, or (b) hurt people for the same reason. In each case, it’s generally due to an overinflated ego- which is why it’s a behavior characteristic of politicians, and other such “social reformers”.

The bottom line is that there are a lot of people out there who are not operating in a rational state of mind. And their cultural background often (but not always) defines how they behave as a result.

The tools that may or may not be available are largely irrelevant.

clear ether

eon

eon on July 20, 2012 at 10:24 PM

So…criminals and crazy people who break laws against murder are going to comply with laws against owning/carrying guns? Suuuuuuuuuurrrrre…okaaaaay…that makes sense.

(Does this really need a sarc tag? Because–no, no it doesn’t make sense. Not at all.)

butterflies and puppies on July 20, 2012 at 10:25 PM

In the preface to “N*groes With Guns,” Robert F. Williams, a civil rights leader, the president of the Monroe, North Carolina NAACP chapter in the 1950s and early 1960s, author,promoter of armed black self-defence in the United States, self-professed Black Nationalist, supporter of liberation, and exile, who lived in both Cuba and communist China writes:

“I have asserted the right of N*groes to meet the violence of the Ku Klux Klan by armed self-defense — and have acted on it. It has always been an accepted right of Americans, as the history of our Western states proves, that where the law is unable, or unwilling, to enforce order, the citizens can, and must act in self-defense against lawless violence.”

Resist We Much on July 20, 2012 at 10:26 PM

All the other countries have strict gun laws while the United States does not. If guns aren’t responsible for the increase homicide rate, then what is?

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:01 PM

In 2010, Switzerland continued to have one of the smallest rates of homicide by firearm in the world, about .5 people per 100,000. While they have a lower rate of firearms per person, they are still one of the most armed nations in the world. If guns aren’t responsible for the decreased homicide rate, then what is?

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:26 PM

OK, Ric, I will play along, having lived in three of those countries for more than a year. (BTW, that is the MURDER rate, not the rate for gun deaths, so i am gonna use your data, as it will bite you in the ass.)

Germany: Murder rate is low because they are a homogenous society. (91% German born) That is, everyone is German. They all speak German, and act German, and alles in Ordung!

Canada: Heavily populated cities have murder rates close to that of comparable size US cities. Homogenous culture (90% white) Also, entire population of second largest nation on planet in geographical size is less than the most populous US state. (Also, I think that killing Quebecois is not considered murder by the rest of Canada…)

United Kingdom: Polite Police State. (Compared to old Soviet Union or North Korea, being RUDE police states) Bobbies can and do stop anyone at anytime and search them if they are suspicious of them. Warrants to enter houses granted by judges because the police ask for them. No right to attorney or remain silent. Island nation w/ absolute control of borders. Homogenous culture (92% white) History of shipping off antisocial elements to colonies. Mental health commitment can be indefinite in duration.

Notice a few similarities? Having a homogenous culture reduces the amount of violence. (But the nutburger in Colorado was probably a fame seeking spree killer tired of being ignored. He got his fame. It wasn’t cultural.)

MunDane68 on July 20, 2012 at 10:29 PM

The African American murder victimization rate was approximately 34 per 100,000; the Hispanic rate was 11 per 100,000, and the white rate 3 per 100,000.

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Even removing minorities from our per capita murder rate the U.S. still has a much higher murder rate than other first world countries. I’m not saying that correlation has to equal causation but when the U.S. deviates so far from the mean lax gun laws has to factor into the equation somehow.

Demographics. Remove inner city gangs from the US stats and our rate comes down to that of other western nations.

juliesa on July 20, 2012 at 10:13 PM

It actually doesn’t even when you take Blacks and Hispanics out of the equation. And remember, other countries have immigrants as well.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Sadly, none of the systems we put in place to deter violence will eliminate it entirely.

Sure it’s sad. What is even sadder is attempting to deny human behavior.

Create and maintain a permissive culture of esteem worship and lack of consequence and,

here you are.

98ZJUSMC on July 20, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Even removing minorities from our per capita murder rate the U.S. still has a much higher murder rate than other first world countries.

You have any proof of that?

What I quoted was the murder victimization rate which includes whites victimized by blacks in an urban area (Chicago). The rural rate is likely to be less than that for the state.

when the U.S. deviates so far from the mean lax gun laws has to factor into the equation somehow.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Why? Because you want it to be true?

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:36 PM

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

ugh, gawd………..

Really?

98ZJUSMC on July 20, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Hey Mayor Gloomy, on the best of days a lot of us don’t give a bleep what you say and can’t stomach your drivel, so today, just shut the blank up!

stukinIL4now on July 20, 2012 at 10:40 PM

“More Americans will buy guns after this, to defend themselves, and so the dangerous spiral descends,” Morgan postulated. “When/how does it stop?”

It stops when you shut-up.

Honestly, can we go back to war with England?

Please?

98ZJUSMC on July 20, 2012 at 10:41 PM

when the U.S. deviates so far from the mean lax gun laws has to factor into the equation somehow.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Or lax enforcement . Or stupid laws. Or laws that only the law abiding obey. I could go on and on.

You’re too simple for this game. You must be one of those black and white thinking type of people.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Why? Because you want it to be true?

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:36 PM

So the unsupported assertion that it “has to factor into the equation somehow” is not enough to convince you it must, absolutely must, be a contributing factor in some way, and a significant one at that?

Yeah, me neither.

farsighted on July 20, 2012 at 10:48 PM

It actually doesn’t even when you take Blacks and Hispanics out of the equation.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Yeah, it really does. Top murder rate in the nation? DC, at 24 people per 100,000. Second highest? Louisiana, with 12. Then New Mexico, 10. Those are the only three-digit murder rate states. From there, it’s quite comparable with most of the rest of the world.

Well…except for Switzerland, the second most civilian-armed country in the world, with one of the lowest murder rates in the world.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Yeah, me neither.

farsighted on July 20, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Ric is just another pompous know is all jerk. We’ve seen plenty and he won’t be the last. He’s a flamer as well…..not that there’s anything wrong with that.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 10:52 PM

So the unsupported assertion that it “has to factor into the equation somehow” is not enough to convince you it must, absolutely must, be a contributing factor in some way, and a significant one at that?

Yeah, me neither.

farsighted on July 20, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Liberals are very good at magical thinking. If they want it to be true… then by golly it must be true!

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:53 PM

MunDane68 on July 20, 2012 at 10:29 PM

Interesting, thanks for the information. Although I suspect your putting to much emphasis on having a homogeneous culture. Back in the 1800′s I read in Gladwell book Outliers that in the south white scots were murdered each other at a astronomical rate. His theory was that Scottish culture puts a high emphasis on personal honor, which leads to lots of family feuds that can last generations. As I wrote before correlation doesn’t necessarily equal causation.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Thanks for the interesting data point. It definitely weakens my hypothesis. Switzerland gun laws are still much more stringent than ours (you can only carry a gun outside of the house if you can prove you have a need for self defense)but your right about their homicide rate. Much lower than ours.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:54 PM

Bloomy is looking and sounding like Adolf more and more each time he opens his mouth. What an absolute control-freak. Hey, Bloomy, how about banning knives, anything that can be considered an explosive, a poison? How about two federal watchdogs for every private citizen — just to make sure we taxpayers do what’s “right” in your control-freak mind?

RobertMN on July 20, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Ric is just another pompous know is all jerk. We’ve seen plenty and he won’t be the last. He’s a flamer as well…..not that there’s anything wrong with that.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 10:52 PM

I don’t respond to bigots. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM

I don’t respond to bigots. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Yet you responded.

Pompous jerk and a flamer to boot.

How is calling someone a flamer bigoted . Most gay people I know are not flamers…now there are a few that are …like you.

Embrace it.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Percent of firearms ownership by state. The top ten, with their respective murder rates in parentheses:

1. Kentucky (4.3)
2. Utah (1.4)
3. Montana (3.2)
4. West Virginia (4.9)
5. Alaska (3.2)
6. Wyoming (2.0)
7. North Dakota (2.0)
8. South Dakota (3.6)
9. Oklahoma (6.5)
10. Arkansas (6.3)

Average: 3.8 murders per 100,000 people.

First, note how the majority of the ten most armed states have rates less than 5 per 100,000. Then note how the jump occurs further down the list.

Now let’s do the bottom ten armed states:

42. Florida (5.5)
43. Delaware (4.6)
44. California (5.4)
45. Massachusetts (2.7)
46. Maryland (7.7)
47. Rhode Island (3.0)
48. New York (4.0)
49. Hawaii (1.8)
50. New Jersey (3.7)
51. District of Columbia (24.2)

Average: 6.3 murders per 100,000 people.

The point I’m trying to make here, Ric…is that you’re kind of a twit. You’ve barely skimmed the surface of the facts about gun ownership and its relationship to murder, and so your blase musings about that relationship have the depth of a bottle cap. If you’re going to get into the debate, get your damned hands dirty. Don’t rely on the same oversimplified statistics that your average Brady Campaigner has memorized.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:06 PM

I don’t respond to bigots. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM

And by the way, grow a pair. If you’re not going to respond to people, jut don’t respond to them. Making a comment just to tell them that you’re not going to comment to them not only makes you look like a drama queen, but is self-defeating.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:07 PM

drama queen,

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Careful now or ric “up twinkles” flair will call you a bigot and maybe even cry.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Most gun violence in this country is carried out by blacks (Democrats) who obtain their firearms illegally. This story is big news because the shooter is white and the victims weren’t gang bangers. But, in terms of actual body counts, this is an average (below average?) weekend for Obama’s home town.

The Count on July 20, 2012 at 11:17 PM

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Your table MadisonConservative doesn’t help your argument. 3.8 is still much higher than the first world countries I listed previously. If gun ownership was the solution than the average murder rate should of been around 1 to 1.5 per 100,000. Although I will agree that the problem of homicide in the country isn’t as simplistic as I thought it was. Switzerland really is a fascinating case which I’m going to study more of.

Also, I’m not going to respond to anymore of your posts tonight. As your resorting to petty name calling. Which is a shame since you brought up some interesting points. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:19 PM

shame since you brought up some interesting points. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Shame , shame.

Did you give him a good smack across the face? Eh ric?

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Someone talk to ric. Ric now has nobody to talk to. He’s a charity case…oh so sad.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Also, I’m not going to respond to anymore of your posts tonight. As your resorting to petty name calling. Which is a shame since you brought up some interesting points. Have a good night.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Goddamn, you’re whiny. Like I said…grow a pair.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:23 PM

The fact is bad guys only like guns when they have them. They avoid armed good guys.

Interesting PDF…see the information on polling of felons.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/publicfiles/GunFacts_BFA.pdf

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Also, I’m not going to respond to anymore of your posts tonight. As your resorting to petty name calling.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Namecalling constitutes 50% of MadCon’s arguments, twinkletoes. Learn to deal with it or just ignore him entirely.

MelonCollie on July 20, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Namecalling constitutes 50% of MadCon’s arguments, twinkletoes. Learn to deal with it or just ignore him entirely.

MelonCollie on July 20, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Heh.

Its not like you don’t know what someone’s going to get from MadCon…or myself. Its like going to McDonalds after seeing their commercial and complaining they sell hamburgers.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:27 PM

If you care about the 2nd Amendment, you must read this.

Schadenfreude on July 20, 2012 at 11:30 PM

MadCon, the Scots and the Irish are not similar cultures. They do not share a similar language or even a similar religion. Today they get along as part of the British whole because they have weeded out the asocial aspects of the population through forced emigration, and in the Scots case, the modern ethnic cleansing of the Glens. (Those Highlander Regiments gave them a nice dumping ground for malcontents.)

Cultural similarities do make for greater general peace. As a microcosm, look at high schools. When you have a high school that has a clear racial majority (70% of one ethnic race*), no matter the race, the school is much less violent than one that is without a clear majority, and the worst schools are those generally with a hodgepodge of racial groups.

*This leaves aside the traditional tribal animosities that plague some schools. Such as the high school with 85% Asian, but divided among the Vietnamese, Chinese (Taiwan), Japanese and Korean. Koreans and Japanese hate each other, but they both look down on the Vietnamese. The ROC kids were either the biggest behavior problems or the best kids, etc.

MunDane68 on July 20, 2012 at 11:31 PM

Namecalling constitutes 50% of MadCon’s arguments, twinkletoes. Learn to deal with it or just ignore him entirely.

MelonCollie on July 20, 2012 at 11:26 PM

No, it really doesn’t. More like 20%, and reserved mostly for the hypersensitive or the condescending.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:31 PM

MadCon, the Scots and the Irish are not similar cultures.

MunDane68 on July 20, 2012 at 11:31 PM

…okay? I didn’t say a word about either, or about any European cultures others than Switzerland.

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Even removing minorities from our per capita murder rate the U.S. still has a much higher murder rate than other first world countries.

You have any proof of that?

What I quoted was the murder victimization rate which includes whites victimized by blacks in an urban area (Chicago). The rural rate is likely to be less than that for the state.

sharrukin on July 20, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Homicide Offense Rate by Race (1976-2000)

White 5.1 per 100,000
Blacks 39.3 per 100,000
Others: 5.2 per 100,000

There yah go. I think that most people on hotair are overestimating the effect of our homicide rate by Blacks and Hispanics.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Its not like you don’t know what someone’s going to get from MadCon…or myself. Its like going to McDonalds after seeing their commercial and complaining they sell hamburgers.

CW on July 20, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Ayeah. Reminds me of when a webcomic artist posted on his blog to the effect of “Will people please stop acting like a little old lady who got redirected to Playboy.com?”

The reason for this post? Because among other subtle hints (/sarc) he had proclaimed to be a cranky rightwing jacka$$ in the blog’s subtitle. Between that and browsing a half-dozen posts at random, you either had to be terminally stupid and/or legally BLIND to not get that he was an incurable wingnut and would respond as such if you didn’t agree…

MelonCollie on July 20, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Namecalling constitutes 50% of MadCon’s arguments, twinkletoes. Learn to deal with it or just ignore him entirely.

MelonCollie on July 20, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Twinkletoes lol. I’ve been reading hotair since Ed came here from his old captain quarters blog. And while I enjoy most of Ed’s and Allah’s posts I’m really appalled by a lot of the hateful rhetoric that goes on. It’s going to be tough, by I’m going to try to be civil and polite and not respond to petty name calling and insults. If people take my politeness and civility for weakness then so be it.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:55 PM

My bad, that was Ric…sorry. Saw your tag in his response.

MunDane68 on July 21, 2012 at 12:04 AM

Guns? Ban Guns? How about banning Beckham from the States?

PappyD61 on July 20, 2012 at 9:48 PM

I’m down with that. :)

Myron Falwell on July 21, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Twinkletoes lol. I’ve been reading hotair since Ed came here from his old captain quarters blog. And while I enjoy most of Ed’s and Allah’s posts I’m really appalled by a lot of the hateful rhetoric that goes on.

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:55 PM

Wah wah. I’ve been reading HotAir since it’s best days, with Allah and Bryan Preston, both of whom shared that snarling snark and vitriol that, I believe, drew so many people to the site to begin with. It was well matched to Michelle’s similarly harsh, sharp tone. Nothing against Ed, but he made the site more mainstream…which I think left a lot of the original commenting community swinging in the wind, and forced to listen to people whining about how mean those people were.

Sack up.

MadisonConservative on July 21, 2012 at 12:10 AM

I swear if either of you starts talking about having to walk uphill, 5 miles in the snow just to post on Hot Air…

Well, I will cut your stewed prune ration in half! SO there!

MunDane68 on July 21, 2012 at 12:23 AM

MunDane68 on July 21, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Any more backsass and you’ll be picking up the sticks in the backyard for a nickel, rather than a dime!

MadisonConservative on July 21, 2012 at 12:25 AM

ROFLMAO!

MunDane68 on July 21, 2012 at 12:25 AM

When a Representative said the problem was that no one had a gun to stop the shooter Bloomberg actually said that was the stupidest idea he ever heard.
You think depriving American’s of their natural right of self defense saves lives, well James Holmes is alive, a lot of other people were killed and injured all according to every gun control freaks plan.

No Mr Bloomberg, you sir are the idiot, the very reason this person was successful was no one stopped him, your incredibly moronic gun owner abuse schemes only serve to make defenseless sheep of the people this evil person slaughtered.

Slaughtered just as easily with a home made explosive devise, or do you also propose to ban propane?

Speakup on July 21, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Your table MadisonConservative doesn’t help your argument. 3.8 is still much higher than the first world countries I listed previously. If gun ownership was the solution than the average murder rate should of been around 1 to 1.5 per 100,000. Although I will agree that the problem of homicide in the country isn’t as simplistic as I thought it was…

Ric on July 20, 2012 at 11:19 PM

And your “solution” of gun bans and gun control getting us closer to the 6.3 of the most restrictive states does help YOUR argument?

How is that exactly? Or did you not bother to actually read his post?

Top 10 firearm owners, 3.8
Bottom 10 firearm owners, 6.3

So we remove guns, and get closer to 6.3 because your goal is 1.5.

Do you even want to try that again?

gekkobear on July 21, 2012 at 12:29 AM

I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

You are a fool or a product of public education. Maybe both. The greatest killer of humans in the last century is GOVERNMENT. Hands down.

61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill
20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist Regime
5,964,000 Murdered: Japan’s Savage Military
2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey’s Genocidal Purges
1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
1,585,000 Murdered: Poland’s Ethnic Cleansing
1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State
1,072,000 Murdered: Tito’s Slaughterhouse
1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea
1,417,000 Murdered? Barbarous Mexico
1,066,000 Murdered? Feudal Russia

Go read a book. http://www.amazon.com/Death-Government-Genocide-Murder-Since/dp/1560009276

AZ_Redneck on July 21, 2012 at 12:45 AM

All I got to say is, ‘From my cold, dead hands!’

old school on July 21, 2012 at 1:27 AM

I just read homicide statistics from the feds: Male to male, 68%. Male to female, 22%. Female to male, 7%. Female to female, 3%. And yet, mayor nanny thinks the problem is guns. Go figure.

centre on July 21, 2012 at 1:27 AM

“40 Reasons to Ban Guns
1.Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, Detroit & Chicago cops need guns.
2.Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’s high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.
3.Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”
4.The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates,which have been declining since 1991.
5.We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6.The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7.An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.
8.A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
9.When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense – give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die – People Do, 1981, p. 125).
10.The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.”

cavalier973 on July 21, 2012 at 1:27 AM

“40 Reasons to Ban Guns:
11.One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.
12.The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.
13.The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.
14.These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.
15.“The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.
16.Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.
17.Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.
18.In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting,government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s,anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations,variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.
19.The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.
20.Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.”

cavalier973 on July 21, 2012 at 1:28 AM

40 Reasons to Ban Guns:

21.A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.
22.Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”
23.Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
24.Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.
25.A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.
26.Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”
27.Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.
28.The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
29.Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.
30.The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

cavalier973 on July 21, 2012 at 1:29 AM

While they have a lower rate of firearms per person, they are still one of the most armed nations in the world. If guns aren’t responsible for the decreased homicide rate, then what is?

MadisonConservative on July 20, 2012 at 10:26 PM

I think the law dictates there that every household must have a gun.

Israel as well, plenty of guns what with a good part of the country on constant military duty, you see them on every bus stop commuting to/from bases, M16 in hand.

riddick on July 21, 2012 at 1:30 AM

40 Reasons to Ban Guns:

31.Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA was a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
32.Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.
33.We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
34.Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.
35. Private citizens don’t need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.
36.Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.
37.“Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.
38.When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.
39.Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.
40.Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.

cavalier973 on July 21, 2012 at 1:30 AM

I’d really like one of these gun-control statists to explain to me how this murderer would have been stopped by more stringent gun laws. For some strange reason they believe that criminals are willing to break any law except those preventing the purchase of a firearm. In that regard they supposedly will be overwhelmed by an urge to be a law abiding citizen. Insane.

Reggie1971 on July 21, 2012 at 1:40 AM

The male gender commits 90% of the homicides in this country, so why should women be subjected to a gun ban? Does anyone know the answer to this?

centre on July 21, 2012 at 1:41 AM

The simple truth is that anyone who wants to take your gun away wants to do it for one reason only: they want to make you less powerful. If it’s a criminal, it’s because they want to hurt you, if it’s the government, it’s because they want to control you. Statistics prove that gun control increases armed crimes.

If they can pry it from my cold. dead. hands.

JustTruth101 on July 21, 2012 at 2:01 AM

Now it makes sense to me. Thanks, JustTruth!

centre on July 21, 2012 at 2:11 AM

The twit who shot Rep Gifford was a nutcase. They cannot even prosecute him because he is so nuts he cannot help in his defense. Sane people were aware of him, but did nothing. So, he was able to buy a handgun and all the ammo he needed.

The twit who shot up Virginia Tech was a nutcase. Sane people were aware of him, but did nothing. So, he was able to buy a gun and all the ammo he needed.

Now this Aurora twit. His own mother said the cops had the right man when they contacted her. Sounds like she must have known he was a problem waiting to happen. I’m betting that the shrinks will find that he is a cow short of a roundup like the other twits.

All three of these twits are products of a continuing/advanced educational environment. All three of these twits are nutcases but were still able to buy weapons and ammo because no one would point out that they were nutcases. No body wanted to point a finger at the nutcase. Why the hell not?

The immediate response from the control the guns crowd is control the guns. Looks to me like we need to control the nutcases.

WestTexasBirdDog on July 21, 2012 at 2:21 AM

My claim is that the American murder rate is considerably higher than our peers. Given our current level of development, we kill our fellow Americans at much greater rate than Western Europe, Australia, or Japan. This is my claim – what I’m looking for is an answer as to why. Mr. Bloomberg is suggesting that it’s because Americans can easily access guns. I disagree. I feel that it’s because as Americans we are somehow more predisposed to kill. There is no other plausible explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

ernesto on July 20, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Ernesto, let me lay it out for you, as Liberals are blind as a bat on this subject. Whites abuse firearms at the same level as the Swiss, about 1.2 per 1K. Black abuse firearms at the rate of Nigeria or Somalia, or about 37 per 1K (which frankly I think is low). Whites are not doing what happens in Chicago every weekend, Philadelphia every day, Detroit every second. (SEE: HERE and click on Race of perps) and click on “race of perp”.

Whites are tired of their rights being ripped from them because some groups can’t deal with the responsibility, especially when the results of such removal of rights are things like the Knoxville Horror or the Chicago 4th where every “block party” or “Funeral” becomes a firefight between gang members.

Liberals can see differences when it comes to “educational gaps” but can’t see the the problem when it comes to “violence gaps”.

Bulletchaser on July 21, 2012 at 2:33 AM

I’ll explain my stance to NYC’s mayor-for-too-long in typical Liberal fashion: Shut up, Bullyberg!

Olo_Burrows on July 21, 2012 at 4:02 AM

Reggie1971 on July 21, 2012 at 1:40 AM

Everyone knows that criminals will respect gun laws. What I don’t understand is, instead of making a bunch of smaller laws, shouldn’t we just make murder illegal? That should take care of it.

DrMagnolias on July 21, 2012 at 7:21 AM

It took the cops 2 minutes to show up. How many more people could have been killed in that time period. The shooter didn’t get away but could have. We have to be able to protect ourselves which is something most people have forgotten how to to. Maybe we’re doing it backwards. We could take the class, learn how to shoot, get the permit and then get the gun.

Kissmygrits on July 21, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4