Don’t hold your breath for new gun laws

posted at 12:31 pm on July 22, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

We’ve already seen the sadly inevitable rush to capitalize on the tragedy in Colorado as an excuse to start passing strict gun laws, ranging from Bloomberg to Rendell and more. But as we sort through the aftermath of the disaster and the victims begin to pick up the pieces, is this opportunism going to result in any new legislation along those lines? One study linked by the AP seems to indicate that the gun grabbing crowd may wind up being disappointed.

Once, every highly publicized outbreak of gun violence produced strong calls from Democrats and a few Republicans for tougher controls on firearms.

Now those pleas are muted, a political paradox that’s grown more pronounced in an era scarred by Columbine, Virginia Tech, the wounding of a congresswoman and now the shooting in a suburban movie theater where carnage is expected on-screen only.

“We don’t want sympathy. We want action,” Dan Gross, president of the Brady campaign said Friday as President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney mourned the dead.

As this look at history lays out, there was a time in the nineties when gun control garnered a lot more public support. A ten year ban was placed on certain types of rifles while Bill Clinton was in office and the Brady Campaign obviously felt like they were winning the day. But then, slowly but surely, the tide began to shift.

By 2004, when the assault weapon ban lapsed, congressional Democrats made no serious attempt to pass an extension. President George W. Bush was content to let it fade into history.

Public sentiment had swung.

According to a Gallup poll in 1990, 78 percent of those surveyed said laws covering the sale of firearms should be stricter, while 19 percent said they should remain the same or be loosened.

By the fall of 2004 support for tougher laws had dropped to 54 percent. In last year’s sounding, 43 percent said they should be stricter, and 55 percent said they should stay the same or be made more lenient.

While many of the Democrats in this article bemoan the ascendency of the NRA in the modern era, the fact is that they have deftly handled a campaign of public awareness which has been winning support on both sides of the aisle. There are some cycles where their financial support to campaigns has been almost exclusively to the GOP. This year 12% of their donations went to Democrats. And the far Left side of the Hill hasn’t been able to swing anything close to a majority of their own members to take a big stand on this. Obama himself said we must protect our 2nd amendment rights after the tragedy. The issue is simply too politically toxic.

This isn’t to say that 2nd amendment supporters shouldn’t be vigilant in the weeks and months ahead. But I also don’t think it’s time to panic.


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 3 4 5 6 7 8

Oh, come on. You are being totally disingenuous now. The idea that an American citizen would actually need a Constitutional guarantee in order to protect themselves or their families from criminals would be so utterly bizarre as to be unbelievable to the Founders.

Wait. What??

How did you get to there from what I wrote?

I think it’s time for Ed and Allah to let more “Liberals” on the site, because now you people are literally just making stuff up to attack, when there is total agreement.

This entire post can serve as an example of how the Internet is completely inefective for communication.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:14 PM

If you really did what you state here, then you really are an idiot.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Ah. Another anti-open carry bigot. Lovely that you finally admit you don’t believe in the Second Amendment, because news flash: it was the only legal way to carry in Wisconsin prior to November of 2011.

If you don’t want to open carry, that’s your business. That you insult me for using the only legal means of defending myself with a firearm confirms that you have no respect whatsoever for the right of self-defense.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Show me where I EVER state that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:03 PM

When you spend time speculating on the potentially negative aspects of law-abiding citizens having been armed in an attack without acknowledging the potentially positive aspects, you demonstrate clear fear of armed law-aiding citizens.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM

I never did that. You’re lying again.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:16 PM

And thanks for jeopardizing MY 2nd Amendment Right by being such a fool and just handing “Liberals” a case study on idiots who shouldn’t own guns on a silver platter.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

And by the way, you coward…I was one of many in the last few years that was hassled by law enforcement for open carrying. The result? A successful counter-suit against the Racine Police Department, followed by the legalization of full and easy-to-obtain concealed carry.

That’s what we’ve done for “your” 2nd amendment rights…which are clearly the only 2nd amendment rights you care about, coward.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

At close range? Sorry you are mistaken. A .38, .380, .357 9mm, .40 or .45 at close range, i.e. 25 feet or less most assuredly will knock you down.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 5:23 PM

I was shot by a .45 from 8ft away. I was only 14 at the time and probably weighed around 130lbs. The shot knocked me back, but not down.

And no, it wasn’t a glancing blow. It entered my lower abdomen and exited my upper left back. Going through both my lungs and numerous other parts.

I stayed conscious the entire time. In fact, I initially didn’t think I was shot because I felt no pain. Until my knees went weak and I collapsed.

ButterflyDragon on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

If you really did what you state here, then you really are an idiot.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Ah. Another anti-open carry bigot. Lovely that you finally admit you don’t believe in the Second Amendment, because news flash: it was the only legal way to carry in Wisconsin prior to November of 2011.

If you don’t want to open carry, that’s your business. That you insult me for using the only legal means of defending myself with a firearm confirms that you have no respect whatsoever for the right of self-defense.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:15 PM

If you’re really too stupid to understand the danger you put yourself and police officers in, the negative publicity you brought onto the 2nd Amendment, the poor judgement you exercised (you probably are unfit to actually carry in my opinion for doing such a stupid thing) then you wont ever understand what I’m telling you.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Forgive the interrupting OT, but has Zero landed/made his Aurora visit, yet ?
Can’t find anything on it, yet, and thought he’d be in the middle of that by now.
Anybuddy know?

pambi on July 22, 2012 at 6:19 PM

So… how many Milk Duds fit in a Beta C-Mag?
Is it better to use an Alpha C-Mag?

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 6:19 PM

When you spend time speculating on the potentially negative aspects of law-abiding citizens having been armed

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM

I never did that. You’re lying again.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:16 PM

But understand, my point is that the chances of being successful were awfully, awfully slim.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 5:35 PM

You won’t even admit to holding your own points. You’re a despicable, lying coward.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:20 PM

(you probably are unfit to actually carry in my opinion for doing such a stupid thing)

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

F**k you, you fascist swine.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Wait. What??

How did you get to there from what I wrote?

I think it’s time for Ed and Allah to let more “Liberals” on the site, because now you people are literally just making stuff up to attack, when there is total agreement.

This entire post can serve as an example of how the Internet is completely inefective for communication.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:14 PM

No. It’s not.
It’s not irrelevant at all, because in this case we all have to accept that there will be instances of insanity in the world, evil people will do evil things. Sometimes they are beyond our control, as this was. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with this scenario, it’s purpose has nothing to do with stopping crimes or being a force of good in everyday society.It’s important to remember why the 2nd Amendment is so important, what the true purpose of it is, and why when horrible things such as this happen, we cant have knee jerk reactions to it

.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

MC- 6:12.

No he doesn’t.

Again, provide evidence he suggested people be disarmed.

You lose.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Blah blah blah blah blah
KMC1 on July 22, 2012, ALL DAY LONG

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 6:24 PM

And by the way, you coward…I was one of many in the last few years that was hassled by law enforcement for open carrying. The result? A successful counter-suit against the Racine Police Department, followed by the legalization of full and easy-to-obtain concealed carry.

That’s what we’ve done for “your” 2nd amendment rights…which are clearly the only 2nd amendment rights you care about, coward.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Dude, that’s not you in the photo, is it?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:24 PM

People who will judge you unworthy of a right because you stood up for it in a lawful matter are not worth another word.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:25 PM

You have obviously never been hit with 400 plus pounds in the chest. While the impact is between 375 and 550 ft lbs for a 200 grain .45 that also translates to 20,000 plus pounds per square inch, and the slug is, .45 inches in diameter. That is a hell of a lot of force to get hit by.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 6:14 PM

I know of a guy who was shot at about 6′ twice with a .40 3 years ago. He took one in the right shoulder and on in the lower right abdomen. He didn’t know he was shot, and continued to move in on the perp and effected the arrest. Never saw the gun. Now he is a big guy, about 6’3″ and around 235, but still didn’t even stop him from tackling the perp, and wrestling him into a submission hold, then putting the cuffs on him.

He had a really tough recovery from the surgery however, as the round did a lot of damage to his intestins.

I saw another shoot himself in the leg with a .40 pulling his weapon out of his holster incorrectly in a draw match. Didn’t know he had done it at first (no did we, we were all nervously looking around to see if everything was ok) until he tried to take a step and his leg gave out.

Handguns just don’t have that knock down power a lot of people think they do.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Obama is speaking about the shooting at 730pm EST

El_Terrible on July 22, 2012 at 6:27 PM

F-u facscist swine??

Grace.

He’s rigbt. Your an idiot.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:28 PM

The indisputable fact remains that if guns were illegal, FAR fewer people would die from shootings in this country…

pm123 on July 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Far from being an indisputable fact, it is demonstrably false.

Banning firearms ownership would do one thing. It would massively increase the ratio of unlawfully armed criminals to lawfully armed citizens.

novaculus on July 22, 2012 at 5:11 PM

I would argue both assertions are wrong.

If guns were illegal, career criminals would still get guns, would still use them in furtherance of their criminal activity, and far less people would be able to defend themselves. That killings would go down is, in fact, in dispute.

However, novaculus’ analysis falls short, in that it fails to recognize that the typical murder in this country, even a typical handgun murder, is not committed by a career criminal. The typical murder is, as a LEO friend once put it, a cousin comes over for Thanksgiving, has a few drinks, he and the host argue about the last turkey leg, things get out of hand, he gets his gun and kills the host. And usually, right after doing it, stands in disbelief at what he had just done.

A gun ban likely would turn some of those homicides into simple or aggravated assaults. How many? Who can say for sure?

JohnGalt23 on July 22, 2012 at 6:28 PM

I can’t help but think that with the media calling for gun control, and Obama going left every chance he gets, that he won’t do so tonight or soon.

El_Terrible on July 22, 2012 at 6:28 PM

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

As I said, how you got to where you did, I have no idea.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

MC-6.25.

I hope so. STFU.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Dude, that’s not you in the photo, is it?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Nope. I was never arrested for my incident, because I wouldn’t take the cop’s bait. He asked me if I was “demonstrating my Second Amendment rights” and I simply responded “lawful self-defense”. That really pissed him off. Then he tried to claim that I could be arrested for open carrying if I ever did it again. I responded “Huh. Am I free to leave?”. He departed with a lightning-fast “Haveanicedaysir”.

I went home, knocked back Jameson like a madman, and broke down from fear. Later I requested and received an incident report claiming that I said I was demonstrated my Second Amendment rights, among other flat-out lies like where my gun was placed.

And you know what? Concealed carry was worth every bit of it.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

(you probably are unfit to actually carry in my opinion for doing such a stupid thing)

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

F**k you, you fascist swine.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:21 PM

As I told you in a past “discussion”, it’s only a matter of time before you lose composure and threaten someone with physical violence. I am absolutely convinced you are not a sane individual.

And your actions, prove it.

You are a very poor reflection on ever person who considers themselves conservative.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

I know of a guy who was shot at about 6′ twice with a .40 3 years ago. He took one in the right shoulder and on in the lower right abdomen. He didn’t know he was shot, and continued to move in on the perp and effected the arrest. Never saw the gun. Now he is a big guy, about 6’3″ and around 235, but still didn’t even stop him from tackling the perp, and wrestling him into a submission hold, then putting the cuffs on him.

He had a really tough recovery from the surgery however, as the round did a lot of damage to his intestins.

I saw another shoot himself in the leg with a .40 pulling his weapon out of his holster incorrectly in a draw match. Didn’t know he had done it at first (no did we, we were all nervously looking around to see if everything was ok) until he tried to take a step and his leg gave out.

Handguns just don’t have that knock down power a lot of people think they do.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

And I watched a cop here in San Diego take 2 rounds in the chest from a .38 from about 10 feet. His vest saved his life, but those two round knocked him unconscious, if his partner hadn’t been there, he would have died when the perp shot him again while he was down.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

As I told you in a past “discussion”, it’s only a matter of time before you lose composure and threaten someone with physical violence.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

If I made a threat, report it. I’ll do the same for any more false accusations.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Forgive the interrupting OT, but has Zero landed/made his Aurora visit, yet ?
Can’t find anything on it, yet, and thought he’d be in the middle of that by now.
Anybuddy know?

pambi on July 22, 2012 at 6:19 PM

We have Fox muted for awhile, but about an hour ago (5:30 P.M. EDT) I saw at the news break a vid of Air Force One landing at Buckley AFB in Aurora, CO. Can’t verify the actual time, though, because of the sound being muted.

KendraWilder on July 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Dude, that’s not you in the photo, is it?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Nope. I was never arrested for my incident, because I wouldn’t take the cop’s bait. He asked me if I was “demonstrating my Second Amendment rights” and I simply responded “lawful self-defense”. That really pissed him off. Then he tried to claim that I could be arrested for open carrying if I ever did it again. I responded “Huh. Am I free to leave?”. He departed with a lightning-fast “Haveanicedaysir”.

I went home, knocked back Jameson like a madman, and broke down from fear. Later I requested and received an incident report claiming that I said I was demonstrated my Second Amendment rights, among other flat-out lies like where my gun was placed.

And you know what? Concealed carry was worth every bit of it.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

And one false move and who knows what could have happened. Innocent officer(s) just doing their job that day could have died or lot their career and livelihood, just because you have such extremely poor judgement.

Hurray for you.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM

As I said, how you got to where you did, I have no idea.
KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM

You made the point that self-defense of the individual or the society at large was not the purpose of the Second Amendment. I was attempting to educate you on the views of the framers of our Constitution regarding the right of Americans to defend themselves not only against a tyrannical government but against criminals. They would no more have thought it necessary to include such a right in the Constitution than they would have thought it necessary to include a Constitutional right to breathe. They would have known that when things came to the point that such a point was in question the Republic itself was doomed. We are at that point today.

Your point seems to be that our Second Amendment rights are so important that we should refrain from exercising them. You’ll have to forgive some of us here if we question just how vital you really think they are.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:38 PM

And I watched a cop here in San Diego take 2 rounds in the chest from a .38 from about 10 feet. His vest saved his life, but those two round knocked him unconscious, if his partner hadn’t been there, he would have died when the perp shot him again while he was down.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Isn’t that amazing how you can have such different reactions from such similar situations? It intrigues me the way that variables all come into play Iike that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Your point seems to be that our Second Amendment rights are so important that we should refrain from exercising them. You’ll have to forgive some of us here if we question just how vital you really think they are.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Yeah, um….NO…that was NOT my point at all. No I understand why you posted that stuff anyway, but you’re totally off base.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

You can have a nice day sir. I think smart individuals get it.

KMC1,, good job. Exposing an a$$hole.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

And one false move and who knows what could have happened. Innocent officer(s) just doing their job that day could have died or lot their career and livelihood, just because you have such extremely poor judgement.

Hurray for you.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Wow. So you’re saying that it’s better to stand idly and pacifistically by while our Constitutional rights are slowly stripped away? I guess you must have a really low opinon of the Civil Rights activists who braved the water cannons back in the 60′s, huh? Just think — their selfish actions in demanding their civil rights be honored could have caused Bull Connor to slip and fall in a puddle.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

As I told you in a past “discussion”, it’s only a matter of time before you lose composure and threaten someone with physical violence.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

If I made a threat, report it. I’ll do the same for any more false accusations.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:35 PM

You do that “fascist swine” or whatever off the wall outburst is the “in” outburst for you today.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

KMC1,, good job. Exposing an a$$hole.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Yeah, now pull up your pants

Rio Linda Refugee on July 22, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Yeah, um….NO…that was NOT my point at all. No I understand why you posted that stuff anyway, but you’re totally off base.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

So what was your point then?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:43 PM

You can have a nice day sir. I think smart individuals get it.

KMC1,, good job. Exposing an a$$hole.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Have a good one bud! I never saw such crazy posts as today…. I’m about to go get some work done myself.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Yeah, now pull up your pants

Rio Linda Refugee on July 22, 2012 at 6:43 PM

But we’re not done talking about genitals yet, are we?

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:45 PM

You can have a nice day sir. I think smart individuals get it.

KMC1,, good job. Exposing an a$$hole.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Ditto. not to mention that said hole ‘elevated’ the discussion to new, unimaginable heights with the infamous ‘f- you, swine’….

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Isn’t that amazing how you can have such different reactions from such similar situations? It intrigues me the way that variables all come into play Iike that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

And it’s also amazing how SWalker has consistently shown that your insistence that armed resistance from the movie audience would have been futile is patently FALSE.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Have a good one bud! I never saw such crazy posts as today…. I’m about to go get some work done myself.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:44 PM

That’s nice. And you can go away with indisputable knowledge that nearly everything you have said on this thread has been shown to be absolutely baseless and wrong.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Wow. So you’re saying that it’s better to stand idly and pacifistically by while our Constitutional rights are slowly stripped away? I guess you must have a really low opinon of the Civil Rights activists who braved the water cannons back in the 60′s, huh? Just think — their selfish actions in demanding their civil rights be honored could have caused Bull Connor to slip and fall in a puddle.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Wow. From one extreme to the other with you guys today. It’s not a good reflection on us folks, that’s all I’m saying.

Putting lives at risk to make a point over the right to carry concealed vs segregation in the 60′s?? Really?? You put those on the same level???

I wouldn’t. I have better judgement than that. I would have hired a lawyer instead.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:48 PM

You can have a nice day sir. I think smart individuals get it.

KMC1,, good job. Exposing an a$$hole.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Ditto. not to mention that said hole ‘elevated’ the discussion to new, unimaginable heights with the infamous ‘f- you, swine’….

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

He has that effect……

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Isn’t that amazing how you can have such different reactions from such similar situations? It intrigues me the way that variables all come into play Iike that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

And it’s also amazing how SWalker has consistently shown that your insistence that armed resistance from the movie audience would have been futile is patently FALSE.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

No, actually if anything I think we’ve established that in some instances, getting shot with a handgun has no effect, even without body armor.

Meaning that with armor, with an AR pumping lead at you, you would have been mowed down in seconds, with no effect.

But, thanks for playing.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:51 PM

The indisputable fact remains that if guns were illegal, FAR fewer people would die from shootings in this country…
pm123 on July 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

The data suggests otherwise.

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE? (PDF document)

ButterflyDragon on July 22, 2012 at 6:52 PM

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Isn’t that amazing how you can have such different reactions from such similar situations? It intrigues me the way that variables all come into play Iike that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Yes, in this case the variable is the Kevlar. While a 20,000 pound per square inch force concentrated into a half inch area will punch a hole in you (very possibly a lethal hole) the Kevlar spreads the impact area out so that while the impact isn’t lethal, it can cause a loss of consciousness via blunt force trauma.

This was specifically what we were researching for DARPA. Ways to minimize the blunt force trauma associated with getting shot while wearing various forms of body armor. The wounds while not lethal can be pretty traumatic. Broken ribs can seriously slow down an individuals response time in a critical response situation.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Wow. From one extreme to the other with you guys today. It’s not a good reflection on us folks, that’s all I’m saying.

Putting lives at risk to make a point over the right to carry concealed vs segregation in the 60′s?? Really?? You put those on the same level???

I wouldn’t. I have better judgement than that. I would have hired a lawyer instead.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Of course you would have. And I suppose you’d hope that your heirs would be bringing a wrongful death action against James Holmes had you had the misfortune of being in that movie theater that day. That would certainly make your point in a civilized manner, would it not? Tut, tut! I guess ‘the price of freedom is eternal litigation’ in your book. That’s okay, there are enough patriots willing to get their hands dirty in order to try to preserve our freedom without you troubling yourself. Just please don’t try to act like you care about this country.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Ditto. not to mention that said hole ‘elevated’ the discussion to new, unimaginable heights with the infamous ‘f- you, swine’….

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

If you think I don’t deserve a right because I stood up for it, then I consider you swine, yes. The “f**k you” is a bonus for claiming that anyone was in danger because I was lawfully open carrying, as thousands of Americans do every day in this country.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 6:55 PM

What variables? You mean like a body armored from head to toe sicko with a 100 rd drum?

Yea,, that’s a variable.

But I could take him. With my trusty 25.

The police caught me with it once, but I stared them down. They were powerless over my superior knowledge of the law. They were scared and told me to have a fine evening.

I went home, and told everyone on hotair I had a slightly larger than average appendage.

I polished my bb gun and made my mom make me a sandwich.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:57 PM

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

No, actually if anything I think we’ve established that in some instances, getting shot with a handgun has no effect, even without body armor.

Meaning that with armor, with an AR pumping lead at you, you would have been mowed down in seconds, with no effect.

But, thanks for playing.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Amend that to “No immediate effect” and I would agree. I was shot once with a .32, the immediate effect was rather small, some seven or eight minutes later though I was ready to pass out from the shock.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Again,, someone show me where either I or KMC1 suggested people shouldn’t carry..

Waiting…..

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I was shot by a .45 from 8ft away. I was only 14 at the time and probably weighed around 130lbs. The shot knocked me back, but not down.

And no, it wasn’t a glancing blow. It entered my lower abdomen and exited my upper left back. Going through both my lungs and numerous other parts.

I stayed conscious the entire time. In fact, I initially didn’t think I was shot because I felt no pain. Until my knees went weak and I collapsed.

ButterflyDragon on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Wow. Just wow.

You were knocked back, but not down, because the bullet dumped only a portion of its energy into your body and over a relatively longer time frame than a bullet striking a vest.

A bullet striking a vest from a sufficiently direct angle is going to dump virtually all its all its energy, and very quickly. That impact is much greater and far more likely to knock down the target than a bullet that passes through soft tissue taking most of its energy with it on exit.

novaculus on July 22, 2012 at 7:05 PM

No, actually if anything I think we’ve established that in some instances, getting shot with a handgun has no effect, even without body armor.

Meaning that with armor, with an AR pumping lead at you, you would have been mowed down in seconds, with no effect.

But, thanks for playing.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:51 PM

You are wrong. In the dim smoke-filled theater, the shooter would have been relatively easy to pinpoint by the flash of his rifle. At one point his AR-15 was even jammed — yet he had time to calmly move on to another weapon because no one could return his fire. Period. As SWalker has illustrated in a number of different ways, had he been struck by a high caliber round from say a .357 or .44 from even 15 to 20 feet away, he would have felt the impact. There is absolutely no doubt that James Holmes had never, ever in his life been shot at before. In the aftermath of his recovery from that, even if he were basically UNHARMED, more innocent people would have had time to escape. The shooter himself might have even fled through the door he entered. You can stand there all day and proclaim that the moon is made of green cheese, but that doesn’t make it true. It just makes you sound stupid.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:06 PM

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 et al.

I haven’t been on HA much today, but I can tell that you are the biggest feminine hygiene product I have ever seen.

I would call you an idiot, but that would be a disservice to idiots everywhere.

Wolftech on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

El_Terrible on July 22, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Thanks for the info … and
KendraWilder on July 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM
too.

Hubby’s busy watching his weekend SyFy movies, and didn’t want to interfupt him until the last minute.

There SHOULD be a thread for it, no ??

pambi on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

I’ve spent a lot of time talking about this with my family. My bro and I have CCW permits and he carries a .40 and I have a 9mm. Both KMC and Madcon’s points came up: If you chose to do anything (rush or shoot back) it’s either him or you, but someone is going to die. But, if you risk it, you have a chance at saving lives. If you don’t, you might live – you might not -but guaranteed lots of people are going to die.

So assuming you choose to do something, what do you do? The guys got armor everywhere, so I assume any shot you take is going to be either a “knock him back” shot or just a distraction to his in-process firing. The only way I could imagine success is if you could tackle the guy and go from there. And that depends on how smokey it was, how close you would have been etc.

What do you think Madcon? It seems like if you were there and carrying, you would have tried to do something. Any other thoughts? I assume KMC1 would have stayed down because of the unequal odds?

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Amend that to “No immediate effect” and I would agree. I was shot once with a .32, the immediate effect was rather small, some seven or eight minutes later though I was ready to pass out from the shock.

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Were you and Butterfly Dragon is a shoot-out? :0

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Were you and Butterfly Dragon is a shoot-out? :0

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Well, there has been a lot of sniping on this thread.
/

VegasRick on July 22, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Was there a lot of curse words on this tread?

SparkPlug on July 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM

What do you think Madcon? It seems like if you were there and carrying, you would have tried to do something. Any other thoughts? I assume KMC1 would have stayed down because of the unequal odds?

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Hey guys, this is the gas mask Holmes was wearing. He also had on a helmet. Is this a magical, bullet-repelling gas mask? Is it made from transparent Kevlar?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Well, there has been a lot of sniping on this thread.
/

VegasRick on July 22, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Yeah, but one of the parties is shooting blanks. Guess which one.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Isn’t that amazing how you can have such different reactions from such similar situations? It intrigues me the way that variables all come into play Iike that.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM

And it’s also amazing how SWalker has consistently shown that your insistence that armed resistance from the movie audience would have been futile is patently FALSE.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Not futile by an means, and he didn’t argue that, at all…I think he argued that instinctively he would have done exactly what you said you would, under the circumstances and assuming he had a gun on him…the larger point that nobody addressed is would you (the generic ‘you’) have had any concerns at all that, for instance, you might not be such a good shot and absent law-enforcement type of training you could have accidentally shot lethally someone (or more ) of the panicked individuals in the audience who were running scared for their lives, while at the same time failing to harm the killer, or injure him but not enough to debilitate him and make him stop…I mean the chaos and the darkness in the auditorium, people’s massive pannic and the screaming and running around, all that could have made this scenario perfectly plausible….vigilantism has its limits….and question is, would people recognize that under pressure, and would they have the right amount of self-control and composure (as opposed to pannic) to make a quick determination and assessment of whether their intervention would do more harm and compound the problem (make additional victims, casualties, etc) than help…this is the real question…

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

What variables? You mean like a body armored from head to toe sicko with a 100 rd drum?

Yea,, that’s a variable.

But I could take him. With my trusty 25.

The police caught me with it once, but I stared them down. They were powerless over my superior knowledge of the law. They were scared and told me to have a fine evening.

I went home, and told everyone on hotair I had a slightly larger than average appendage.

I polished my bb gun and made my mom make me a sandwich.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Omg…lol….and with that I’m out… I can’t possibly laugh any harder than I just did reading that.

You have to admit madisonliberal, he’s got you pegged.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 7:17 PM

So assuming you choose to do something, what do you do? The guys got armor everywhere, so I assume any shot you take is going to be either a “knock him back” shot or just a distraction to his in-process firing. The only way I could imagine success is if you could tackle the guy and go from there. And that depends on how smokey it was, how close you would have been etc.

What do you think Madcon? It seems like if you were there and carrying, you would have tried to do something. Any other thoughts? I assume KMC1 would have stayed down because of the unequal odds?

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Here’s the thing: in almost all self-defense situations, you are operating on pure adrenalin. The only thing that can help you is more training…and there’s never an “enough”. Some people will snap into their action…some won’t. Nobody can predict or judge what a person’s actual reaction will be.

However, the answer for how to damage an armored opponent, oddly enough, hasn’t changed in centuries. Go for the neck, the hands, the feet, the groin(although he did have a groin protector). Ultimately, if they look bulky, it’s best not to aim for center-mass, but because few encounters will include an armored opponent, most trainers will teach you to go for center mass.

Ultimately, though…it comes down to whether fight or flight is best, and against an armed opponent, you need to be armed yourself to have both options.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I stayed conscious the entire time. In fact, I initially didn’t think I was shot because I felt no pain. Until my knees went weak and I collapsed.

ButterflyDragon on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

SWalker on July 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Also, glad you guys are okay and lived to tell about it. I’ll never complain about another bee sting again! :0

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Hey guys, this is the gas mask Holmes was wearing. He also had on a helmet. Is this a magical, bullet-repelling gas mask? Is it made from transparent Kevlar?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:14 PM

There are bulletproof gas masks, but I don’t believe they’ve ever been sold on the civilian market. I could be wrong.

However, I read that he wore a combat helmet. I haven’t seen a picture yet, but that would make a bigger difference.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Obama is speaking about the shooting at 730pm EST

El_Terrible on July 22, 2012 at 6:27 PM

El_Terrible on July 22, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Thanks for the info … and
KendraWilder on July 22, 2012 at 6:37 PM
too.

Hubby’s busy watching his weekend SyFy movies, and didn’t want to interfupt him until the last minute.

There SHOULD be a thread for it, no ??

pambi on July 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM

I can’t wait to hear what he has to say. /

Have your barf bag at the ready if you watch.

AP will post a thread about it once he finishes brushing his cat and cleaning the litter pan.

Cloture on July 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Agree on importance of not making the bad situation worse.
Perhaps a matter of opportunity as much as skill.

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM

ButterflyDragon on July 22, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Wow. Thank God you are alive.

SparkPlug on July 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Omg…lol….and with that I’m out… I can’t possibly laugh any harder than I just did reading that.

You have to admit madisonliberal, he’s got you pegged.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I am glad that you two have each other to comfort one another. Maybe you’ll get to meet up at the next Handgun Control, Inc. meeting.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Not futile by an means, and he didn’t argue that, at all…I think he argued that instinctively he would have done exactly what you said you would, under the circumstances and assuming he had a gun on him…the larger point that nobody addressed is would you (the generic ‘you’) have had any concerns at all that, for instance, you might not be such a good shot and absent law-enforcement type of training you could have accidentally shot lethally someone (or more ) of the panicked individuals in the audience who were running scared for their lives, while at the same time failing to harm the killer, or injure him but not enough to debilitate him and make him stop…I mean the chaos and the darkness in the auditorium, people’s massive pannic and the screaming and running around, all that could have made this scenario perfectly plausible….vigilantism has its limits….and question is, would people recognize that under pressure, and would they have the right amount of self-control and composure (as opposed to pannic) to make a quick determination and assessment of whether their intervention would do more harm and compound the problem (make additional victims, casualties, etc) than help…this is the real question…

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Hell of a sentence.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:26 PM

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 6:57 PM

You gotta post more often. Too funny.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:27 PM

However, I read that he wore a combat helmet. I haven’t seen a picture yet, but that would make a bigger difference.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Regardless, if there had even been ONE person returning fire, let a lone a handful of people, he would have been on the defensive. Instead, he was shooting fish in a barrel. Taking his time, switching out guns, picking and choosing his victims.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Meaning that with armor, with an AR pumping lead at you, you would have been mowed down in seconds, with no effect.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Not necessarily true.

The odds may be against you in that situation, but that’s no reason to go t!ts up and grovel before evil.

As long as you have the means, it’s worth the chance.

Solaratov on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

I don’t think he is suggesting he would have stayed down. For God sake, unless given a tactical opportunity, what are you gonna do? Pull your .25? Commit suicide?

I don’t know what happened, but apparently it was quick. Maybe somebody could of, but they didn’t. The dude was ready. Planned.

Under normal conditions, yea. But this was off the grid. It was different.

It’s ashame when folks denigrate others that see it for the tactical nightmare it was. Maybe someone could have. Maybe not. We’ll never know.

But it was a nightmare. Any armed citizen whatever caliber.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Regardless, if there had even been ONE person returning fire, let a lone a handful of people, he would have been on the defensive. Instead, he was shooting fish in a barrel. Taking his time, switching out guns, picking and choosing his victims.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:30 PM

No, but see, what’s important is that that person might not have succeeded.

Why is that important? Well, it would only be important if I were asserting that people shouldn’t carry. But that’s not what I’m saying, at all.

And if you disagree, you should be allowed to carry.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

And if you disagree, you shouldn’t be allowed to carry.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Ugh.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

You have to admit madisonliberal, he’s got you pegged.

KMC1 on July 22, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I still think MadCon’s point is more valid than yours. Given the option, I’d wager every damn one of the people at that theatre would have chosen to be armed rather than at the mercy of a psychopath.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

It’s ashame when folks denigrate others that see it for the tactical nightmare it was. Maybe someone could have. Maybe not. We’ll never know.

But it was a nightmare. Any armed citizen whatever caliber.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 7:31 PM

It’s a shame when someone thinks potential failure was a worse outcome than complete failure.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

No, but see, what’s important is that that person might not have succeeded.

Why is that important? Well, it would only be important if I were asserting that people shouldn’t carry. But that’s not what I’m saying, at all.

And if you disagree, you should be allowed to carry.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Exactly. It’s like I always say about the importance of Freedom of Religion: that’s why I insist that all the places of worship be closed down — to protect that freedom.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Ugh.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

I knew what you meant. :)

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:35 PM

I still think MadCon’s point is more valid than yours. Given the option, I’d wager every damn one of the people at that theatre would have chosen to be armed rather than at the mercy of a psychopath.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Well, only if they were carrying concealed. If they were openly carrying, in accordance with state laws, then they don’t deserve the right to carry a weapon at all.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:36 PM

I still think MadCon’s point is more valid than yours. Given the option, I’d wager every damn one of the people at that theatre would have chosen to be armed rather than at the mercy of a psychopath.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:32 PM

But what those poor fools wouldn’t realize is that they’d be playing right into the shooter’s hands. Or something.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Well, only if they were carrying concealed. If they were openly carrying, in accordance with state laws, then they don’t deserve the right to carry a weapon at all.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:36 PM

You’re gonna have to explain that one to me. If it’s in accordance with state law and they are carrying, they don’t deserve to be carrying? HUH?

Here in Maine, it is legal to open carry.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:39 PM

The “odds” are not everything. Statistics apply to populations, not individuals. You can’t win if you don’t try. And there’s worse things than being a dead hero. What do you have to live for that’s so important compared to 70 innocent men, women and children getting shot?

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 7:42 PM

However, the answer for how to damage an armored opponent, oddly enough, hasn’t changed in centuries. Go for the neck, the hands, the feet, the groin(although he did have a groin protector)…

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM

That makes sense, but with the darkness, the smoke, the commotion, I’ll freely admit that I probably couldn’t hit the guy in any of those places. At least unless I could rush in closer. My bro is always talking up the power of the .40 vs. the 9, but you have a lot more shots with the 9.

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:43 PM

You’re gonna have to explain that one to me. If it’s in accordance with state law and they are carrying, they don’t deserve to be carrying? HUH?

Here in Maine, it is legal to open carry.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:39 PM

I was summing up KMC1′s position. Open carry used to be the only carry option in Wisconsin, and on one occasion was threatened by a large group of police officers for doing so. KMC1′s opinion is that I was endangering others, as well as endangering “innocent police officers”, as those “innocent police officers” surrounded me, with my gun unloaded and encased and out of my reach per state law at the time. He’s also of the opinion that people who open carry damage his Second Amendment rights, which must mean he doesn’t live in Wisconsin, because the Open Carry movement was credited with contributing to the legalization of Concealed Carry last year.

And if you disagree with him, you’re not conservative.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:44 PM

So what was your point then?

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 6:43 PM

*crickets*

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:46 PM

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Yeah, I figured that out after I posted.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:46 PM

That makes sense, but with the darkness, the smoke, the commotion, I’ll freely admit that I probably couldn’t hit the guy in any of those places. At least unless I could rush in closer. My bro is always talking up the power of the .40 vs. the 9, but you have a lot more shots with the 9.

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Yeah, the whole “9MM vs .40/.45″ debate is no more helpful or worthwhile than the “Ford vs. Chevy” debate. None of these squabbles is going to save a life, for precisely the first point you make: there’s no guarantee you’ll even hit your attacker. Again, most people are operating on adrenalin and animal instinct in life-threatening moments. Training is the only thing that will help, but it’s no guarantee.

The only guarantee is that without a weapon, your life is entirely in the hands of your attacker.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:43 PM

The average theatre in these multiplexes are no bigger than the average pistol range. Imagine getting hit center mass with 6 .40 caliber rounds.

I don’t care how much Kevlar you have on. At that range your plans take a serious readjustment if you’re the shooter.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Not futile by an means, and he didn’t argue that, at all…I think he argued that instinctively he would have done exactly what you said you would, under the circumstances and assuming he had a gun on him…the larger point that nobody addressed is would you (the generic ‘you’) have had any concerns at all that, for instance, you might not be such a good shot and absent law-enforcement type of training you could have accidentally shot lethally someone (or more ) of the panicked individuals in the audience who were running scared for their lives, while at the same time failing to harm the killer, or injure him but not enough to debilitate him and make him stop…I mean the chaos and the darkness in the auditorium, people’s massive pannic and the screaming and running around, all that could have made this scenario perfectly plausible….vigilantism has its limits….and question is, would people recognize that under pressure, and would they have the right amount of self-control and composure (as opposed to pannic) to make a quick determination and assessment of whether their intervention would do more harm and compound the problem (make additional victims, casualties, etc) than help…this is the real question…

jimver on July 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM

When you have a situation (a nightmare scenario as called by another poster) with a gunman who is going to kill as many people as possible, I’d say the risk of accidentally shooting an innocent in the crossfire is worth the chance to stop the killing. If you succeed, you accidentally shot someone but saved how many? If you are worried about hitting someone and don’t try, you’ll most likely have way more casualties.

I totally agree with having to be mentally prepared ahead of time AND that this was an “off the grid” crazy situation. But with more random shootings of this type, they become less “off the grid” and more possible. That’s why we should be talking about this now. I pray that I’ll never have to be in a circumstance like this, or VTech, or that mall shooting etc., but I should think about what to do ahead of time in case I ever am.

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Generally speaking, for effective terminal ballistics bigger is better. But I would rather hit them once with a .38 Spcl than miss three times with a .357 Magnum.

novaculus on July 22, 2012 at 7:51 PM

The only guarantee is that without a weapon, your life is entirely in the hands of your attacker.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Very well said MadCon. That’s one of the reasons I would default to take action rather than hide. You’re gambling with your life either way, but only one way gives the chance to save others as well.

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Generally speaking, for effective terminal ballistics bigger is better. But I would rather hit them once with a .38 Spcl than miss three times with a .357 Magnum.

novaculus on July 22, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I’d rather hit them a few times with a .357SIG, but the price of ammo is something to take into consideration, as well as the price of the weapon.

However, if more energy is what you’re looking for, there are higher powder count versions of 9mm and even .380 that make the differences ultimately moot.

MadisonConservative on July 22, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I don’t care how much Kevlar you have on. At that range your plans take a serious readjustment if you’re the shooter.

Cleombrotus on July 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Especially if you’re the pampered product of the San Diego suburbs whose only prior experience was playing video games. This guy wasn’t ex-military. Even if he were jacked up on something, I’ll bet he would have turned tail and run away. He sure didn’t go out in a blaze of glory when the police started talking to him.

cynccook on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Cynook. I was about ten when I took up gun rights. My aunt and cousin were murdered going home from Thanksgiving dinner Nov. 26, 1979. Marion and Joshua. She had beautiful long hair. They rest in Unionville PA. She was 8 months pregnant. Head shot. Thru and thru. I helped clean the car out.

Gauranteed, you won’t find me ….

I moved to AZ so I Could carry.

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

I’d say the risk of accidentally shooting an innocent in the crossfire is worth the chance to stop the killing.

Free Indeed on July 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Strongly disagree. You are 100% liable for every round downrange. You must function within your scope of competence. If you need to close distance to get placement, do it. If you are killing bystanders by mistake, you are wrong, IMHO.

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

wolly4321 on July 22, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Damn dude, that really sucks, sorry to hear. Ouch.

Kenosha Kid on July 22, 2012 at 7:59 PM

There is no law that, if passed, would have stopped the Batman massacre.

Dollayo on July 22, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7 8