Hickenlooper and the 2nd amendment

posted at 8:31 am on December 15, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper took a lot of heat from fellow Democrats in the wake of the Aurora shooting tragedy for keeping a cool head and not caving to immediate demands for suppressing Second Amendment rights at a politically opportune moment. At the same time, he earned some additional credentials from conservatives for being a fairly independent minded executive. After the latest dose of mayhem from another maniac, however, the local press seemed to catch him reconsidering his position.

In a significant shift from his statements earlier this year, Gov. John Hickenlooper now says “the time is right” for Colorado lawmakers to consider further gun restrictions.

The Democratic governor made his comments in an interview with The Associated Pressthat comes less than half a year after the mass shooting in an Aurora movie theater that killed 12 and injured at least 58. His latest words also follow a shooting in an Oregon mall Tuesday that left three dead, including the gunman, who shot himself.

“I wanted to have at least a couple of months off after the shooting in Aurora to let people process and grieve and get a little space, but … I think, now … the time is right,” Hickenlooper said in the Wednesday interview.

Actually, I’ve previously maintained that this is precisely the wrong time to leap all over this. It smacks of being an opportunistic approach and capitalizes on the emotions of a grief stricken public to begin tossing out and debating gun grabbing arguments right now. But that genie is clearly out of the bottle and interesting facts are already emerging. As with previous tragedies, the sad patterns we’ve seen before are playing out yet again. The guns used by the maniac in question were legally purchased by his mother - one of the victims of the shooting – and taken without her consent. The shooter was a legal adult, apparently having no significant criminal record which would have warranted blocking his access in any event. The family seems to have had more than their share of trouble and turmoil, but that can be said of far too many families in America. Some are also reporting that the young man had a history of “mental problems” which you can also find in every corner of the nation. Friends are describing him as, “quiet and not very social,” but not giving any indication that he might be prone to violence. Unless more details prove otherwise, this was, in short, the almost completely unpredictable result of the actions of an evil madman who had given no actionable signals before his horrific assault.

Let’s stop and think for a moment about how the shooter got these guns. He took them from someone else who legally obtained them. He stole those guns. And this, of course, demonstrates yet again that those who are willing to employ guns to engage in violence aren’t going to pause and think about whether or not they should commit a robbery along the way. To stop an action like that which we witnessed yesterday you would have to eliminate the existence of guns, and we’ve all seen the figures on how well that works.

And let’s not forget that Connecticut already has some of the toughest gun laws in the country.

So is Hickenlooper caving to the pressures of the far left wing of his party? That’s not clear yet.

Reached while traveling Thursday, the governor told The Denver Post, “I don’t think I flip-flopped at all. The AP was asking, ‘Should we have that discussion (about gun restrictions)?’ I said, ‘Sure. This is not a discussion that a free, open society should be afraid of,’ ” he said.

In that respect perhaps the Governor is right, at least in terms of the timing of the conversation. Generally, conservatives urge calm and quiet after one of these random acts of domestic violence and mayhem, preferring time for empathy and prayers for the victims and those affected by the tragedy. Conversely, gun grabbers seize the moment for their own devices. (In case you missed it, Allahpundit’s Quotes of the Day last night contains a robust roundup of what the grabbers in question are saying already.) These events shouldn’t be a reason for people to shy away from defending their own freedoms, while still maintaining the proper respect and empathy for those lost. And in a free nation, we can have this type of debate, no matter how painful the circumstances.

Would it be nice to wait until the bodies were laid to rest and the tears of the mourning were dry? No doubt. But the debate will happen either way. And we shouldn’t be too quick to judge Hickenlooper in this. The real message will be delivered when we see what sort of legislation is proposed in his state in the weeks and months to come and how he responds. We should be willing to allow his actions to speak louder than his words as we continue to pray for the fallen.


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

End of argument. Case closed.

A good resource: Does Gun Control Equal Crime Control?

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Of course. Nobody ever gets shot in Chicago or D.C.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Notcoach- yep. Exactly. I can turn pic 1 into pic 2 with a hacksaw blade and flat black spray paint.

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:05 AM

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM

You’re losing.
Badly.

Mimzey on December 15, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Look at the weapons employed in past shootings and the difference in fatality numbers when the weapon is a handgun.
The only time you see a higher death toll is when the attacker combines a handgun with other weapons, such as bomb.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:51 AM

couple hundred thousand killed in the 1860′s by weapons you like.
revolutionary war, which actually ended up protecting you too, fought with fully single shot weapons. good thing nobody died then huh?

dmacleo on December 15, 2012 at 11:09 AM

… weapons. Perhaps you’re not as superior an intellect as you’d like to imagine.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Hey, Corky, we were talking about semi-automatic handguns , weren’t we? And RPG’s aren’t around because the demand isn’t there. Their use tends to attract a little too much attention. All the same, I’d wager that they’re available along our southern border.

M240H on December 15, 2012 at 11:11 AM

It happens. Not only that, but when a less efficient weapon is involved people have time to run away.

Keep it up, at least your’e trying to rationalize.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hero-teacher-reportedly-tackles-gunman-at-illinois-high-school/

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM

(lol, Google Boy. Did you even read the article?)

First, f#ck your condescension. Second, the kid fired a weapon into the ceiling and then laid the weapon down. (“Then” the adult grabbed it and him) Third, let’s examine the preponderance of these exchanges that result in a happy ending for the victims. Here’s the first.

(Try to keep up.)

As reported, Donald Nigel Jones was a 29 year old convicted felon, who had had committed dozens of robberies. After serving about eight years in prison and then being paroled, Jones set out to rob the Belmont Beverage liquor store in Fort Wayne, Indiana – a store that he had previously robbed nearly a decade ago. However this time, the clerk was armed and fatally shot Jones, putting a permanent end to his life of crime. Unfortunately, the clerk was also shot in the leg by Jones, although he is expected to make a full recovery from this non-life-threatening injury. Prosecutors are not expected to charge the clerk for this self defense shooting, and the store owner supports the clerk’s decision to defend himself.

Much different than like the unarmed victims of Tookie Williams robbery, no?

Do you want more?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:18 AM

It happens. Not only that, but when a less efficient weapon is involved people have time to run away.

Keep it up, at least your’e trying to rationalize.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hero-teacher-reportedly-tackles-gunman-at-illinois-high-school/

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM

(lol, Google Boy. Did you even read the article?)

First, “screw” your condescension. Second, the kid fired a weapon into the ceiling and then laid the weapon down. (“Then” the adult grabbed it and him) Third, let’s examine the preponderance of these exchanges that result in a happy ending for the victims. Here’s the first.

(Try to keep up.)

As reported, Donald Nigel Jones was a 29 year old convicted felon, who had had committed dozens of robberies. After serving about eight years in prison and then being paroled, Jones set out to rob the Belmont Beverage liquor store in Fort Wayne, Indiana – a store that he had previously robbed nearly a decade ago. However this time, the clerk was armed and fatally shot Jones, putting a permanent end to his life of crime. Unfortunately, the clerk was also shot in the leg by Jones, although he is expected to make a full recovery from this non-life-threatening injury. Prosecutors are not expected to charge the clerk for this self defense shooting, and the store owner supports the clerk’s decision to defend himself.

Much different than like the unarmed victims of Tookie Williams robbery, no?

Do you want more?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Notcoach- yep. Exactly. I can turn pic 1 into pic 2 with a hacksaw blade and flat black spray paint.

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:05 AM

He won’t answer because he doesn’t want to show how ignorant he is. Not answering though demonstrates it quite well regardless, so I’ll give away the real difference between the two.

The black Mossberg is a pump action shotgun. The brown Winchester is a semi-automatic shotgun. He keeps going on and on about semi-automatic weapons, but he doesn’t even know the difference and would certainly pick the Mossberg as the more “dangerous” weapon in his mind if he were being honest.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I’ve previously maintained that this is precisely the wrong time to leap all over this. It smacks of being an opportunistic approach and capitalizes on the emotions of a grief stricken public to begin tossing out and debating gun grabbing arguments right now. But that genie is clearly out of the bottle and interesting facts are already emerging. As with previous tragedies, the sad patterns we’ve seen before are playing out yet again. The guns used by the maniac in question were legally purchased by his mother – one of the victims of the shooting – and taken without her consent. The shooter was a legal adult, apparently having no significant criminal record which would have warranted blocking his access in any event. The family seems to have had more than their share of trouble and turmoil, but that can be said of far too many families in America. Some are also reporting that the young man had a history of “mental problems” which you can also find in every corner of the nation.

OBVIOUSLY, our current spate of politicians and anti-2nd activists ARE MISSING OR AVOIDING THE PROBLEM that exists: what in our current civilization’s conditions are inspiring various MALES WITH MENTAL/EMOTIONAL TROUBLES to act-out violently with guns against others (and it looks like the pattern is, against OTHER CHILDREN in some of these recurring cases, but also extending to PUBLIC and/or MEDIA figures (the Denver-theatre shooting was some crazed statement against a film, a film’s theme and/or characters and against the audience attracted to such).

SO IT ISN’T “GUNS” that are the problem just like so many people keep saying. It’s something IN OUR CURRENT CIVILIZATION that is encouraging or somehow “inspiring” troubled minds, all of whom are males (so far) to go on these shooting-spree-murder-crimes.

As much as I think GAMING is great, it seems to be the trigger here. ALL these perps have been gamers: not just gamers but gamers known to be “best or better than others” and all of them keen on violent-gun-gaming that includes a lot of shooting-humans-in-the-heads.

I do think it’s these violent games that are the issue, because they’re newly on the scene. Up until recently, these sort of games weren’t available to males and young males especially, and there weren’t any of these gun-spree-murders, either, despite there being a lot of guns available and used by many people.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Perhaps you’re not as superior an intellect as you’d like to imagine.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM

The shooter told at least one student he wouldn’t hurt them, Kennedy said, and after lining the remaining students up against a wall complained that no one was willing to listen to him about unspecified problems. The shooter then set the gun down and turned away from it.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Hold on now, B-52′s are also illegal in private hands…so obviously bans work.

Bishop on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Jazz, your step by step description of how gun laws did not prevent this horro is quite correct. It is also why the laws will be changed to take away a citizen’s right to bear arms. The actions of this killer were not predictable. The guns were legal. So the ONLY way to keep guns from falling into the hands of such a madman is to remove them from the hands of everyone. if his mother had not had these weapons, they will say, he could never have done this.The Left will use the doctrine of compelling state interest to overturn the 2nd Amendment or neuter it. By this time next year you will be able to purchase a bolt action rifle with 5 round capacity and a three round capacity shotgun and that will be it. Take thios to the bank.

xkaydet65 on December 15, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Every single minute of every single day in my life I have a 15 + 1, with 15 extra within arms reach. It’s gonna stay that way. Don’t even go there.

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Well, I guess all of us and the wealth of statistics available stand corrected by the magnificence of weapons expert bayam. Proving once again the difference between genius and stupidity: genius has it’s limits.

ghostwalker1 on December 15, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Something about these murderers all being known to other gamers as “better or best” among other gamers.

Maybe it sets off some sort of EGOTISTICAL NEED TO BE SEEN AS SUCH “out in the real world” or whatever. But clearly the gaming-association is something all these gamers share in common, and their reputation among other gamers as being better than the rest. It just might spur some deep irrational insecurity to go out and prove itself…

Tim McVey seems to be the only exception to the above but his go-switch seems to have been the disaster at Waco. Which COULD be viewed in “gaming dimension” of sorts.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Bayam, I’m waiting for your superior intellect to explain how putting a weapon down and walking away from it is equal to revolvers being safer for the public at large.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM

It happens. Not only that, but when a less efficient weapon is involved people have time to run away.

Keep it up, at least your’e trying to rationalize.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hero-teacher-reportedly-tackles-gunman-at-illinois-high-school/

[bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM]

So, an unarmed teacher stopped a student dangerously looking for attention. Just as with any other set, such as suicides — some want to kill themselves and some want attention — I don’t see this a clear evidence of your argument. You’d have a much better evidence if you provided a case where the unarmed citizen stopped the atrocity after someone was killed. Do you have any examples of those?

The Sandy Hill killer was using a less efficient firearm. A shot gun would have been more efficient. What he did use was more concealable — iow, weapons with the highest degree of success for passing through security measures) and what was most easily available to him, ie, weapons his mother bought.

Dusty on December 15, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Hold on now, B-52′s are also illegal in private hands…so obviously bans work.

Bishop on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Bishop, you’re pretty good with guns. Maybe you can explain to me why a gun left on a table by an assailent is safer than one he’s holding. Additionally. Would it be easier to subdue the armed assailant if he was … unarmed?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Bayam, I’m waiting for your superior intellect to explain how putting a weapon down and walking away from it is equal to revolvers being safer for the public at large.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM

The shooter obviously realized his mistake in bringing a double action revolver to a semi-automatic fight and surrendered before he could be disarmed by the average faster than a bullet (or double action) citizen.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

I think violent games are probably a serious contributor. But what to do about it, consistent with the Bill of Rights?

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM

I do think it’s these violent games that are the issue, because they’re newly on the scene. Up until recently, these sort of games weren’t available to males and young males especially, and there weren’t any of these gun-spree-murders, either, despite there being a lot of guns available and used by many people.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Agreed. The AR15 hit the market in 1964. In the late 20′s and early 30′s you could buy a Thompson submachine gun at a hardware store. The guns used today were semi-automatic pistols. The first semi automatic pistol was developed at the turn of the century. The most popular pistol used is a 1911 .45 Automatic. It was first sold in 1912. Bottom line is that society has changed, for the worse. You take away God, the family and every ounce of morality from a country and voila, this is what you get.

TxAnn56 on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Other factors are generally more important.

Bingo. Like 270 million firearms among 315 million people spread over 3 million square miles. I have heard no practical way for that to be regulated to produce a good result. Those guns aren’t going to go away. If you make gun ownership a crime, then only criminals will own guns.

You need to understand that local law enforcement often favors such bans in order to give it more options for arresting and prosecuting gang members, not because cops believe that gun violence will just go away.

Of course. And searching people’s houses and cars without a warrant would give them even more options, as would detaining “likely criminals”. They would be in favor of that, too. It’s not as though I don’t “understand” that — on the contrary, I understand it all too well.

The only irrational argument is to claim that societies with higher rates of gun ownership are safer.

Well, that’s not exactly the claim, but for the sake of argument, let’s take the converse: that societies with higher gun ownership are more dangerous. Switzerland? This counter-example demonstrates the converse to be false.

Yet if you focus on what is claimed, then the evidence supports the claim: In the U.S., localities in which law-abiding citizens are permitted to carry guns have lower gun violence. Logically, then, if your aim was to reduce gun violence, then you would be a proponent of permitting citizens to carry guns. That you seem to be arguing the contrary seems to me to demonstrate that either a) you don’t care if gun violence goes down or up — you have some other aim; or b) you are not capable of inductive reasoning: you argue for stricter gun control despite the evidence.

Despite the evidence. That’s the kicker right there, and the hallmark of a prog: evidence be damned, it’s irrational to believe what we don’t want you to believe. Don’t trust your lying eyes!

mr.blacksheep on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

I think violent games are probably a serious contributor. But what to do about it, consistent with the Bill of Rights?

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM

The games aren’t the problem. Parents who don’t expect more from their children are the problem. When they leave their game consoles and enter the real world the harshness of their loserdom often leads to rejecting society. Combine that with mental instability and we have a problem.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM

The shooter obviously realized his mistake in bringing a double action revolver to a semi-automatic fight and surrendered before he could be disarmed by the average faster than a bullet (or double action) citizen.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Actually coach, that weapon was an auto anyway. The kid also had a hatchet. (Ban all eadged tools next?)

Still scratching my head with the superior intellect in action trying to make that point.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Why have most of these tragedies only occurred recently?

Repeating firearms have existed for over 160 years – the Colt revolver for example.

Why didn’t those kinds of massacres didn’t occur 150… 120.. 100 years ago?

Why these tragedies didn’t occur back when select fire – fully automatic weaponry were easily available?

Why do these most of tragedies take place in “Gun-Free” zones where people are denied the right of self-defense?

Galt2009 on December 15, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Exactly.

Politicians and activists ARE exploiting these tragedies, whether they will admit it or even are aware of it or not, by trying to “ban guns” and ARE NOT addressing the real causes of these crimes.

I was raised in a gun-intensive area — entire state, for that matter — everyone had guns, EVERYone, even most of us kids got a gun (.22 rifle) when we turned 13 (and we got BB Guns at 12 to learn how to use a rifle). Most of the boys where I grew up ALL hunted in their early teens with their fathers and shot big game in the area (alligators, panthers, hogs). IN fact, a recurring Spring weekend thing for many a family was the week-end hog hunt: fathers and sons only.

No one took up guns to go harm any other human beings, no gun crime that I ever heard of anywhere in the entire area, lots of guns, lots of guns readily available, yet no gun crimes.

So what’s changed from my youth years with “lots of guns” in a “gun intensive locale” to the present day circumstances of our civilization?

SOMETHING is affecting certain males (so far limited to males in these mass-shootings) to act-out like they are. They’ve all been identified as “troubled” people psychologically BUT THAT DOESN’T CHANGE THE DAMAGES THEY’VE DONE, so we should be looking at what is setting these “troubled” types off.

It’s not the guns. The guns aren’t THE CAUSE. It’s whatever is setting the minds of these troubled people off that is the cause.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:33 AM

The first semi automatic pistol was developed at the turn of the century.

TxAnn56 on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Depends on how we define semi-automatic. I would argue a double action revolver is also a semi-automatic weapon, and they have existed since before the C1v1l War. This fascination with the term semi-automatic by people like bayam, and the left in general, is just more ignorant spouting by ignorant fools attempting to hide their real intentions.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I find myself increasingly sickened by the politicians looking for face time, media vampires trying to get interviews with the surviving children, and the trolls coming here seeking to ‘have meaningful discussions’ in guise of playing a game of Gotcha!

Plain disgusting, all around. Of course they all give the obligatory, “Sorry for your loss, but…,” before getting right to their real point of intent.

Sure, let’s have a ‘meaningful discussion’–like about the heroes who saved and protected God knows how many other young lives. Let’s have a ‘meaningful discussion’ about why the ghouls on the left have constant need for self-aggrandizement on a soapbox. Let’s have a ‘meaningful discussion’ of how any reporter in his right mind could possibly think it’s perfectly okay to try interviewing little kids whose lives are forever changed by a maniac. Let’s have a ‘meaningful discussion’ of how much influence the past sixty years of amok liberalism creates maniacs that go on rampages, and what libs would say if the murderer used gasoline and a Bic lighter instead. Would they feel better about it all, or disappointed they couldn’t make such a horrific tragedy something political?

And liberals wonder why half the country wants nothing to do with their half of America.

Liam on December 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM

I can only fit my AR in the banjo case with a collapsing stock. And I like my bayonet lug. I might run out of bullets.

Seriously,, what is an “assault weapon”? We owned a gunshop during clintons AWB, and Ruger mini-14′s flew off the shelves.

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM

It’s not the guns. The guns aren’t THE CAUSE. It’s whatever is setting the minds of these troubled people off that is the cause.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Exactly.

So what legislation has Obama proposed between Gifford’s shooting and this one that could have helped these people that are clearly mentally disturbed?

Big Pharma has way too much invested to allow things to go back to the way they were years ago. They have a pill for everything now and even the most insane can pop a pill and live among us. So they think.

We don’t have a gun problem, we have a people problem.

ButterflyDragon on December 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Actually coach, that weapon was an auto anyway. The kid also had a hatchet. (Ban all eadged tools next?)

Still scratching my head with the superior intellect in action trying to make that point.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM

I was just playing along with bayam’s stupidity. :P

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I think violent games are probably a serious contributor. But what to do about it, consistent with the Bill of Rights?

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM

The games aren’t the problem. Parents who don’t expect more from their children are the problem. When they leave their game consoles and enter the real world the harshness of their loserdom often leads to rejecting society. Combine that with mental instability and we have a problem.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

You’re wrong, NotCoach. Gaming IS the problem.

Not the games per se for people in general, BUT…I’ll elaborate:

“Troubled” types, or individuals who are by way of their state of mind isolated and somewhat if not utterly anti-social are then reinforced in their isolation and by violent terms with and by violent gaming.

They have poor to no social skills if not a real dislike or fear of social interactions. Violent gaming is introduced, their “need” to isolate is reinforced BUT REINFORCED WITH EXTREME VIOLENCE =– they receive a REWARD for isolation (which is not good if it becomes habitual) BY WAY OF VIOLENCE ON OTHERS.

They spend all their “socialization” time destroying human beings with guns, exploding their bodies, etc., in the gaming environments and worse, receive additional reward for doing so: become known among other gamers as better-best and it further reinforces them in a very destructive way: they’re THE BEST AT DESTROYING OTHERS.

I think this sets off troubled minds to go out in the ‘real world’ and further display what they believe are their talents: to show others how “best” they are at destroying others with guns, etc.

GAMING WORKS for a lot of people and doesn’t urge them to go run amok in society but for these borderline types who are already at-risk of development and socialization, the violent gaming involvement seems to be their ‘go switch’ to destroy others.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Where are our GOP Reps. who’ll defend our rights and declare:

“We’re sick and tired of democrat ghouls who’ll stand on the bodies of children to push their anti-Constitutional agenda on American citizens who had nothing to do with the horrible acts perpetrated by other ghouls.”

I will not forfeit my right to defend the lives of my two boys against sickos like this kid in CT. If we’re going to look for faux-causes in all this, then how about we point to the fact that all this violence happens at the hands of people who went through the Public Education System. Hmmmm.? That makes about as much sense as blaming guns. We need to have a serious discussion on why our system of public education is producing murderers. Maybe we should ban public education in favor of private school. After all, we’re looking to blame inanimate things, right? Like guns? Well, why not “systems”?

Weight of Glory on December 15, 2012 at 10:01 AM

This!

Be prepared for what is coming!

Again.. this was an absolutely horrific evil crime! And the last thing I will support is a fix that creates more absolutely horrific crimes!

I cannot imagine the pain and grief of these parents! It rips our hearts out! It’s horrible to watch! But their grief stops at my doorstep when and if they demand that I must disarm and become as defenseless as they were! That because their children died helplessly at the hands of a murderous madman.. I must accept a fix that creates a society which would allow my children to also die helplessly at the hands of a murderous madman!

Because their children were ravaged by wolves!! I must also disarm to allow my children to be ravaged by wolves!

Again… common sens here.. this is not that hard to understand! Anybody can grasp this!

Why did they call 911? Why? Why? Why? Yeah… to call the cops! But why call the cops? Because the cops had guns! So why not just have the guns on the school grounds to begin with? “Oh.. but guns cause violence and our school is a gun free zone! but when the madman shows up… you call the cops to save you because they have the guns!

It is way past time to put an end to these insane “gun free zones!” Too many children have died because of “gun free zones! They should be called “slaughter at will” zones!
The post-office shootings! the movie theater shootings! the school shootings and they are all at “gun free zones!” And who then do the victims call to rescue them from their gun free zones? People with guns!

If they want to continue to create and live in communities and states where the innocent are banned from defending themselves… let them! Let them rely on 911! Let them rely on locks and cameras and metal detectors! Don’t push that on me in my community and in my state!

JellyToast on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

In related news, 22 children were slashed in China by a knife wielding assailant yesterday. Must have been one of those ‘assault’ or ‘semi automatic’ knives. Can we now have a serious discussion on cutlery regulation?

ghostwalker1 on December 15, 2012 at 11:41 AM

“Troubled” types, or individuals who are by way of their state of mind isolated and somewhat if not utterly anti-social are then reinforced in their isolation and by violent terms with and by violent gaming.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Yes, but why are they in that state to begin with? I contend they are being allowed to withdraw from reality by people who should know better.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:43 AM

For the record, the post filter was getting a little carried away this morning. Been trying to keep up with it and approve comments in limbo as they appear, but our apologies for any delay.

Jazz Shaw on December 15, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Hickenlooper flip flopped because he now has both houses loaded with libs here in Colorado. His previous comments were made when the election was in doubt, but now that it’s over his true belief come out. Filthy libs.

Garym on December 15, 2012 at 11:45 AM

For the record, the post filter was getting a little carried away this morning. Been trying to keep up with it and approve comments in limbo as they appear, but our apologies for any delay.

Jazz Shaw on December 15, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Nope. It’s doing a good job keeping me from posting stupidly worded comments in an angry manner.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM

…for the sake of argument, let’s take the converse: that societies with higher gun ownership are more dangerous. Switzerland? This counter-example demonstrates the converse to be false…

mr.blacksheep on December 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Like I wrote earlier above, I grew up and lived for years in areas that were and still are quite “gun intensive” — meaning, all households had guns and left them readily on display (not locked up, not hidden, just out in the open, usually on the wall by the front door or across from it, a shotgun leaned up behind the front door, handguns in the desk or on it).

No one among those areas ever grabbed one of those weapons and started shooting their family or anyone else, no one “stole” a weapon from their parents and ran into town or school and started shooting…

And on top of that, nearly everyone’s father drove around with a gun rack—filled with a few rifles— on display in their truck.

THAT WAS A NORMAL WAY OF LIFE for me and countless others for decades, for generations. No one WENT GINGER on anyone else, no one dressed up in clown costumes or Black Goth outfits and ran rampant against society…

SO SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH OUR CIVILIZATION. It’s not the guns that are causing this current problem of imbalanced young males shooting others, it’s whatever is causing them to be imbalanced.

Notice that almost all these violent escapades happen in areas where victims are not protected, have no means to protect themselves. These troubled people who commit these crimes are seeking out the most vulnerable to harm, which is part of this problem, as to why they are doing so.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:48 AM

What the liberals/progressives like Hickenhooper will not blame for these incidents is their own social engineering and policies of the mentally disturbed that are the root of the problem. They emptied the mental hospitals and put the problem out in the streets and onto the backs of our society, then blame weapons for that lack of or bad judgement.

savage24 on December 15, 2012 at 11:49 AM

1911. That’s a long time ago.

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Sure lets succumb to the knee jerk reaction and go after the tool (the gun). No, let’s not consider the other elements involved. Let’s just go after that tool. It’s easy and of course avails an opportune platform on which our politicians can take the big stage.

Let’s not point out that the lousy economic conditions and the associated stress that goes with it could be a consideration.

Let’s not point out that the country’s moral decline might have something to do with it.

Let’s not point out that the election was nothing less than an explosion of perpetual vitriolic rhetoric designed to destroy the opposition and just might have something to do with it.

Let’s not point out the fact that what should be most respectable office in our country as devolved into a race baiting, gender baiting, class baiting triangulation source where stress is intentionally built and used to build favor.

The stress that has been intentionally generated by the President has been clearly palpable everywhere……… Can you tell me that anxiety doesn’t rub off on an impressionable young mind??

Hornet on December 15, 2012 at 11:50 AM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM

I was just playing along with bayam’s stupidity. :P

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I know Coach. Just using your comment to poke him a little more on his stupid link that he clearly knew nothing about. (We don’t need no stinking sarc tags)

What do you think though? As a courtesy to bayam, before responding to any link he offers, should we ask him if he’s had a chance to read it himself?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I blame the rap/hip hop music culture.

Mr. Arrogant on December 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Hickenlooper flip flopped because he now has both houses loaded with libs here in Colorado. His previous comments were made when the election was in doubt, but now that it’s over his true belief come out. Filthy libs.

Garym on December 15, 2012 at 11:45 AM

One of those areas I’ve been describing in earlier comments WAS COLORADO. I CRINGE at the state of the state today: Leftwing or going there.

Years ago, the Leftwingers from California and Chicago and Mexico began infiltrating CO for activist purposes and they’ve had a dreadful effect on the place, beginning with Boulder and Denver.

Boulder in my youth was actually a very nice and conservative place. Really. Denver, a bigger place but also conservative. Then there was the state itself other than Boulder and Denver and the word, “conservative” doesn’t even begin to describe it.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM

But why call the cops? Because the cops had guns! So why not just have the guns on the school grounds to begin with? “Oh.. but guns cause violence and our school is a gun free zone! but when the madman shows up… you call the cops to save you because they have the guns!

It is way past time to put an end to these insane “gun free zones!”

JellyToast on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Yes, either put an end to them, or require them to have a trained professional, armed marshal(s) on duty at all times.

Creating a gun-free zone is creating a hazard to the life and health of everyone in it. Our lawyers should be working to establish liability for creating a gun-free zone without providing appropriate security measures for persons within it.

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Nope, I disagree. Anyone that drove a Blackhawk should never be filtered. :>).

wolly4321 on December 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM

In related news, 22 children were slashed in China by a knife wielding assailant yesterday. Must have been one of those ‘assault’ or ‘semi automatic’ knives. Can we now have a serious discussion on cutlery regulation?

ghostwalker1 on December 15, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Second look at the “Prohibition of Cosmetic Changes That Make Cutlery Look Skeery Act”?

Resist We Much on December 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM

What do you think though? As a courtesy to bayam, before responding to any link he offers, should we ask him if he’s had a chance to read it himself?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I don’t know how much courtesy a person like bayam deserves. Being dishonest and ignorant about the subject doesn’t endear much sympathy.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Not many people want to take away your little toys and sense of power, only the far left dreams of a gun free America. Bob Costas and others are proposing sensible regulation on the types of weapons with easy reach of your suburban nut job.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:06 AM

HEY IDIOT! The Brady Campaign lists Connecticut as the state with the 4th strictest gun control laws behind California, New York and Illinois (those with the highest gun violence).

This shooting proves that strict gun laws do not protect innocents from violent criminals.

But then, only an idiot would think that you can legislate away evil!

dominigan on December 15, 2012 at 11:56 AM

It is way past time to put an end to these insane “gun free zones!” Too many children have died because of “gun free zones! They should be called “slaughter at will” zones!
The post-office shootings! the movie theater shootings! the school shootings and they are all at “gun free zones!” And who then do the victims call to rescue them from their gun free zones? People with guns!

JellyToast on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Something else that occurred up until somewhat recently was Scouting, and if not Scouting, it was ROTC or a very involved parent in raising, especially, boys.

PROPER INSTRUCTION and FAMILIARITY with guns is what works best for boys. Learn what they’re for and what they aren’t for, learn how to own and use one responsibly and how not to be a jerk and “need to prove you’re big” with a gun, that that’s not what a gun is for.

I’m a firm believer in proper instruction for everyone in how to own, use and care for guns properly. It removes the fear of guns as it also establishes the responsibility of owning them (and using and not using them).

Every boy, especially – but also girls if they want – need to be shown proper gun use and ownership especially in their early teens. It’s the lack of this instruction that I think, too, encourages the “freak out with guns” later on.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Human nature hasn’t changed and there have always been child murderers. A close reading of an accurate historical record would probably show such mass killings of children have existed since the dawn of humanity. People can do some really bad things and they don’t need guns to wreak evil on others. Read the original versions of the Grimm brothers’ “fairy” tales. The worst school massacre in US history, the Bath, Michigan school disaster, was perpetrated with explosives. Just this week there was a report out of China about a series of school stabbings, 22 kids and adults were stabbed in the most recent attack, and if the state controlled Chinese media acknowledges a problem, you can be sure that it’s worse than they say it is.

Some people are just plain evil, some others are criminally insane. More gun laws won’t keep any of them from doing harm to others.

rokemronnie on December 15, 2012 at 11:59 AM

But why call the cops? Because the cops had guns! So why not just have the guns on the school grounds to begin with? “Oh.. but guns cause violence and our school is a gun free zone! but when the madman shows up… you call the cops to save you because they have the guns!

It is way past time to put an end to these insane “gun free zones!”

JellyToast on December 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM

If we trust teachers enough to educate our kids, then we should be able to trust them to protect our kids! Teachers should be able to conceal carry, and districts should encourage them.

dominigan on December 15, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Not many people want to take away your little toys and sense of power…

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:06 AM

See that? THAT ^^ is the result of someone who never had proper instruction, if any instruction, in the responsible ownership and use of guns.

That’s the “freak out with guns” state of mind I mentioned in 11:58 AM comments.

When you have no familiarity with guns, no one’s ever shown you how to use and own them properly, you later approach or even grab them with the idea that they’re “tools…for a sense of power” and other immature idiocy.

Guns DO provide “power” when you need to defend yourself or others. But not in the sense that “bayam” refers.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:02 PM

SO SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH OUR CIVILIZATION. It’s not the guns that are causing this current problem of imbalanced young males shooting others, it’s whatever is causing them to be imbalanced.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Precisely. And it’s not getting better any time soon, from what I can see. When our president unabashedly flouts the laws of the land, we are headed into a period of unprecedented lawlessness and anarchy — just as the president himself, on his quest to initiate the “socialist revolution” desires.

And that’s exactly the reason decent citizens should arm themselves, and resist any efforts whatsoever to confiscate their weapons.

It’s going to get ugly, and self-sufficiency will be the order of the day. Just wait until the time in the not-too-distant future when the $US is nearly worthless. The people who have never had to make their own way will have to eat somehow, and I’m willing to bet that a considerable proportion of them won’t hesitate to resort to crime, and probably violent crime.

mr.blacksheep on December 15, 2012 at 12:05 PM

If we trust teachers enough to educate our kids, then …
dominigan on December 15, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Tilt!

Seriously, in some areas I doubt you’d be able to find even one teacher per building that would be trustworthy with a gun to protect children.

But let’s say that’s not an issue. School boards could partner with police departments for gun training and qualification programs, and police trained and police qualified teachers could do marshal duty just as he/she does other incremental work for incremental pay.

petefrt on December 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Boulder in my youth was actually a very nice and conservative place. Really. Denver, a bigger place but also conservative. Then there was the state itself other than Boulder and Denver and the word, “conservative” doesn’t even begin to describe it.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM

The Western Slope still has a large conservative population, however we are also being overrun by libs fleeing California. Places like Telluride and Crested Butte are lost forever. Aspen might as well be a part of California. We still have the town of Rifle though, until at least some libs decide that Rifle is too violent of a name …….

Garym on December 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Not many people want to take away your little toys and sense of power, only the far left dreams of a gun free America. Bob Costas and others are proposing sensible regulation on the types of weapons with easy reach of your suburban nut job.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:06 AM

What do the Columbine shooters, Cho, Loughner, Holmes, Lanza, and almost all of these rampage killers have in common?

They are psychotic and exhibited signs of the serious and dangerous nature of their mental break long before they picked up a gun. When Bob Costas and others start proposing fundamental reforms to how we deal with the mentally ill, who are clear and present dangers to society, then I’ll pay attention to them. When Bob Costas and others put the rights of 20 innocent children to live over the “rights” of a “nut job,” then I’ll believe that they honestly want to prevent these types of shootings and aren’t seeking to collectively punish the law-abiding for the actions of those that they, themselves, have enabled.

Common sense is quite nearly illegal nowadays and it’s certainly unfashionable in the Obama Age. So the usual liberal dingbats — including the ACLU types who assured us it was “a fearless, independent life style” for a crazy woman to defecate in public on the streets of Manahattan — are telling us we need more gun control.

“Chris Rock was right: ‘Whatever happened to ‘crazy’? . . . What? You can’t be crazy no more? Did we eliminate ‘crazy’ from the dictionary?’”

Resist We Much on December 15, 2012 at 12:10 PM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I don’t know how much courtesy a person like bayam deserves. Being dishonest and ignorant about the subject doesn’t endear much sympathy.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:56 AM

But we’re talking about “special” commenters here who might need “special” consideration.

A simple and couteous reminder to go back and read the article might save a fellow commenter the embarrassment of just Googling article titles and not knowing what they post actually prove the other person’s point. And look what happens, embarrassment to the point of not being able to comment.

See, here’s what happened. Bayam who knows nothing about guns or our gun laws tried to assert that he’s concerned for us in the US and just wants to enact smart gun laws. Of those, he wants one banning semi-automatic pistols and just leave us with revolvers. He asserted a gun weilding assailant could be easily subdued if only we restricted ownership to said revolvers. Then he posted this as proof to me, it happens, “and” how it’s done. (In this exchange)

How many were disarmed by unarmed citizens while firing?

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 10:55 AM

It happens. Not only that, but when a less efficient weapon is involved people have time to run away.

Keep it up, at least your’e trying to rationalize.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hero-teacher-reportedly-tackles-gunman-at-illinois-high-school/

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM

He seemed irritated and impatient with me here and I am sorry for that. But the problem was, not having actually read the article he missed this important fact.

The shooter told at least one student he wouldn’t hurt them, Kennedy said, and after lining the remaining students up against a wall complained that no one was willing to listen to him about unspecified problems. The shooter then set the gun down and turned away from it.

So, see. He needs our help. Just admonish him to go back and read what he links to before you make your comment and we’ll save him some embarrassment.

And it’ll help him, “Keep up.”

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM

If you have someone in your household whom you think may be mentally unstable, the correct answer is to have your firearms in a gun safe.

rbj on December 15, 2012 at 9:04 AM

My thoughts, too. It’s a big question as to why this kid (the perpetrator) (though at 20, not a kid, really) had access to those weapons in that home.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

“Our investigators at the crime scene … did produce some very good evidence in this investigation that our investigators will be able to use in, hopefully, painting the complete picture as to how – and more importantly why – this occurred,” Connecticut State Police Lieutenant Paul Vance told a news conference.

Vance did not describe the evidence but did say the shooter forced his way into the school, as opposed to being let in…
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/15/us-connecticut-towns-idUSBRE8BD0U120121215

Hmmmm.

Mr. Arrogant on December 15, 2012 at 12:13 PM

The problem with this thinking is that in our cities the same number as usual of black children will still be dead on each Monday morning. This is because the instruments of their deaths, guns, will arrive in our borders around the clock with the unabated flow of illegal narcotics.

I think I’ll keep my weapons.

M240H on December 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Well the goal is really the elimination of all firearms from the world. If we could only accomplish that one small thing there would never be another firearm death ever. People could live in peace knowing they and their loved ones would never be shot. Of course they could still get stabbed, clubbed or beaten to death but we will just have to cross that bridge when we come to it.

Frank Enstine on December 15, 2012 at 12:13 PM

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I think bayam has left the building. At least, this part.:)

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 12:14 PM

So according to the latest and greatest article in the headlines (taking the statistical chance that it is correct) this kid’s mom has spent the last few years dedicating herself to his care. So what’s with the guns? Interesting choices for self protection.

Cindy Munford on December 15, 2012 at 12:14 PM

And it’ll help him, “Keep up.”

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM

You are kinder than I am. I hold out little hope he will learn anything.

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I have watched the left attempt to take away (control is to take away)gun since the 1960s (CBS “White Paper” documentary/propaganda)and I believe we are fools to argue the deflection issues of safety, etc. History proves the most dangerous enemy is a government that holds all the power–as our forefathers clearly understood. The right to bear arms is forever wedded to freedom from oppression from government. That is why there is but one question to ask:

What is it the (leftist) government intends to do to us that they so badly want to take away our defense?

Keep your eye on the ball–in this case freedom. Emotions that don’t include,fear of an oppresive government can destroy a nation. We are already commiting national suicide with our moral decadence and angry divisions, instituted with purpose by the left. Let’s not give away the last defense so easily.

Don L on December 15, 2012 at 12:16 PM

So according to the latest and greatest article in the headlines (taking the statistical chance that it is correct) this kid’s mom has spent the last few years dedicating herself to his care. So what’s with the guns? Interesting choices for self protection.

Cindy Munford on December 15, 2012 at 12:14 PM

She might have purchased them for him rather than for herself?

sharrukin on December 15, 2012 at 12:16 PM

My thoughts, too. It’s a big question as to why this kid (the perpetrator) (though at 20, not a kid, really) had access to those weapons in that home.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

That mother didn’t buy an AR-15 for her own use. Why would she have? Does it fit the big picture of her lifestyle?

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Well, seems the soapbox-craving liberals got it wrong again. According to a report, Lanza tried buying a rifle the other day but he was denied. Looks like Connecticut’s gun restrictions worked. Except for the part where Lanza killed his mom and stole hers.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

Liam on December 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Boulder in my youth was actually a very nice and conservative place. Really. Denver, a bigger place but also conservative. Then there was the state itself other than Boulder and Denver and the word, “conservative” doesn’t even begin to describe it.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM

The Western Slope still has a large conservative population, however we are also being overrun by libs fleeing California. Places like Telluride and Crested Butte are lost forever. Aspen might as well be a part of California. We still have the town of Rifle though, until at least some libs decide that Rifle is too violent of a name …….

Garym on December 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I well agree with what you write, being quite familiar with all of those locations (and more).

I like Rifle, by the way, especially since the Democrats in Aspen look down their noses at it. ;)

My feeling about Aspen (or, the Roaring Fork Valley altogether) and Telluride is that it’s best not to let the Left have them altogether. They’re still beautiful places despite the Democrats now being thicker than fleas there. I like Snowmass versus Aspen, it still has Republicans.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Jazz, these comments were made before yesterday’s shooting. They start from 12/13. I don’t know if he would say to hold off again given what happened yesterday, but you seem to make it suggest that yesterday was in his mind when he said what he said.

I do believe CT has some of the toughest laws in the country, making tougher laws fairly questionable.

amazingmets on December 15, 2012 at 12:19 PM

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM

You are an a** and when I am dead and buried you will still be an a**. I live in one of the poorest counties in the US. Pretty much every household has one or more guns. The last gun murder was in 2008. Can’t say that for all the big cities and I bet you can’t say that for the area you live in.

chemman on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Only a semi-automatic weapon would have prevented someone from tackling him between shots.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM

If you don’t even know the definitions (every weapon he had was semi-automatic or a revolver, I believe), then don’t get into the argument.

GWB on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

My thoughts, too. It’s a big question as to why this kid (the perpetrator) (though at 20, not a kid, really) had access to those weapons in that home.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

We don’t know everything yet. How these weapons were stored, and how this miserable puck got access to them, is certainly an unknown at this point in time. For all we know they were kept locked up, but isn’t it conceivable a person willing to kill their own mother will also force from their mother the information they need to gain access to the weapons?

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

This turd feels embolden by the 2012 election now that the Dems in Colorado took control of all chambers. I’m getting the hell out of this state as soon as I can. I’m don’t with democrats. Freedom killing money grubbing bastards.

jawkneemusic on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

My thoughts, too. It’s a big question as to why this kid (the perpetrator) (though at 20, not a kid, really) had access to those weapons in that home.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

That mother didn’t buy an AR-15 for her own use. Why would she have? Does it fit the big picture of her lifestyle?

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 12:17 PM

And yet she didn’t store it behind a locked access. Perhaps the 20 year old shooter got the AR-15; just speculation.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

We don’t know everything yet. How these weapons were stored, and how this miserable puck got access to them, is certainly an unknown at this point in time. For all we know they were kept locked up, but isn’t it conceivable a person willing to kill their own mother will also force from their mother the information they need to gain access to the weapons?

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Yes, agreed. I was merely, earlier, responding to the ISSUE of NEED OF keeping guns today secured, especially when one lives with others and especially with children or anti-social “goth” males at 20 still living at home.

It could very well be that the mother was threatened to gain access, or, the son gained access by brute force otherwise (like he did to the school later) or that the mother…it’s all speculation.

The guns could very well have been secured, yes, the shooter is said to have been very intelligent so there’s no way of knowing yet how he got his hands on the family-stores.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Liam on December 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM

if you watch the next video after the one you posted though, the reporter makes a statement that is event is a “tipping point” in the renewed discussion of gun control.

They’re still going after it.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 12:28 PM

sharrukin on December 15, 2012 at 12:16 PM

That thought crossed a capella mind also. I can’t b!tch about bad media information and speculation while adding to it but it is one of those things that makes you say, mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Cindy Munford on December 15, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM

We don’t know everything yet. How these weapons were stored, and how this miserable puck got access to them, is certainly an unknown at this point in time. For all we know they were kept locked up, but isn’t it conceivable a person willing to kill their own mother will also force from their mother the information they need to gain access to the weapons?

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Here’s what Reuters is reporting this morning:

…POLICE INVESTIGATE THE GUNS

Nancy Lanza legally owned a Sig Sauer and a Glock, both handguns of models commonly used by police, and a military-style Bushmaster .223 M4 carbine, according to law enforcement officials who also believe Adam Lanza used at least some of those weapons.

“We’re investigating the history of each and every weapon and we will know every single thing about those weapons,” Vance said.

Nancy Lanza was an avid gun collector who once showed him a “really nice, high-end rifle” that she had purchased, said Dan Holmes, owner of a landscaping business who recently decorated her yard with Christmas garlands and lights. “She said she would often go target shooting with her kids…”

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:29 PM

It happens. Not only that, but when a less efficient weapon is involved people have time to run away.

Keep it up, at least your’e trying to rationalize.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hero-teacher-reportedly-tackles-gunman-at-illinois-high-school/

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM

FTA: “The shooter then set the gun down and turned away from it.”

Keep it up, at least you’re trying to rationalize. /eyeroll/

GWB on December 15, 2012 at 12:31 PM

if you watch the next video after the one you posted though, the reporter makes a statement that is event is a “tipping point” in the renewed discussion of gun control.

They’re still going after it.

hawkdriver on December 15, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Of course they will! The ‘sensible’ gun restrictions in CT must not have been sensible enough, I guess.

Liam on December 15, 2012 at 12:33 PM

My feeling about Aspen (or, the Roaring Fork Valley altogether) and Telluride is that it’s best not to let the Left have them altogether. They’re still beautiful places despite the Democrats now being thicker than fleas there. I like Snowmass versus Aspen, it still has Republicans.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Snowmass…. it is kind of surprising that PETA hasn’t tried to close down Krabloonik, but definitely a beautiful town in the summer and winter.

Garym on December 15, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Nancy Lanza was an avid gun collector who once showed him a “really nice, high-end rifle” that she had purchased, said Dan Holmes, owner of a landscaping business who recently decorated her yard with Christmas garlands and lights. “She said she would often go target shooting with her kids…”
Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:29 PM

O.K., that shoots my theory out the window.

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Hold on now, B-52′s are also illegal in private hands…so obviously bans work.

Bishop on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Man…. /dreamy, far-away look in my eye/ I would love to have my own B-52. Yeah, parking would be a royal pita, and I’d need to have my street straightened a bit (and maybe a bigger easement for everyone, too)… but MAN that would be cool!

GWB on December 15, 2012 at 12:38 PM

MAKE MENTAL ILLNESS ILLEGAL – NOT HAND GUNS

Think about that.

BigAlSouth on December 15, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Lanza reportedly tried to buy rifle, was denied

NBC’s Pete Williams reports that Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza attempted to purchase a rifle earlier this week at a sporting goods store in Danbury, Conn.

So, he stole them. Obviously, more gun control would have prevented him from stealing guns from legal gun owners – his mum or someone else – because, you know, burglary laws prevent burglary.

/

Resist We Much on December 15, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I would argue a double action revolver is also a semi-automatic weapon,….

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Well, not really, NotCoach. Since the revolver doesn’t *load* the next round until you pull the trigger. A semi-automatic loads the next round into firing position based on the firing of the previous round. (“Firing position” generally considered to be where nothing more than the strike of the firing pin is needed to fire the round.)

Your point, though, against bayam’s braying, is accurate – the double-action revolver is just as fast in semi-competent hands as a semi-automatic pistol, with the only difference being number of rounds before reload (based on the capacity of the semi-auto magazine).

GWB on December 15, 2012 at 12:47 PM

A well regulated Militia…

Shall not be infringed means exactly that.

trs on December 15, 2012 at 9:31 AM

The founders could not have been more explicit in recognizing the government’s right to regulate while guaranteeing either the right to gun ownership or the right of armed militias to exist, depending upon how the amendment is interpreted.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

In that time, and in that usage,”well regulated” meant “well-armed and well-trained in martial skills”.
It also meant that the people should possess at least one weapon of military caliber and quality. Applying that to today, it would mean that every free male over 18 should own at least one fully automatic capable firearm; and be well-trained in its use.

“Regulated” in the Second Amendment has nothing to do with anti-gun laws.
Of course, that won’t stop you totalitarian gun-grabbers.

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Would it be nice to wait until the bodies were laid to rest and the tears of the mourning were dry? No doubt.

.

But that’s exactly why they want to have that debate right now: so that any push-back against gun control can be painted as completely insensitive to the victims of the latest assault.

Just another version of identity politics. In the Democrat world, you have to strike while the identity is hot, before the victims’ families fade back to being just ordinary white people again.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM

The founders could not have been more explicit in recognizing the government’s right to regulate while guaranteeing either the right to gun ownership or the right of armed militias to exist, depending upon how the amendment is interpreted.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

- George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”

- Richard Henry Lee, writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”

- Zachariah Johnson, Elliot’s Debates, vol. 3 “The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.”

“… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”

- Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2 Article on the Bill of Rights

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …”

- Samuel Adams, Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, “Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State”

“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”

- George Washington, First President of the United States

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

- Richard Henry Lee, American Statesman, 1788

“The great object is that every man be armed.” and “Everyone who is able may have a gun.”

- Patrick Henry, American Patriot

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?

- Patrick Henry, American Patriot

“Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not.”

- Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States

“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … “

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

“The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”

- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8

“One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.”

- Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson

“We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”

- Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824

“No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

- Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

Gun control advocates always point to the word “militia” in the Second Amendment as proof that the Founders would support gun control laws. That contention is not supported by the historical documents. As the Founders continually acknowledged, A MILITIA IS THE WHOLE OF THE PEOPLE. In fact, in the Second MILITIA Act of 1792, ALL able-bodied, white men over the age of 18 were required to possess a gun.

Resist We Much on December 15, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Why does violent crime drop in states that introduce concealed carry? Why is it lower, per capita, in places that permit carrying guns in public places than it is in places that don’t?

And it’s by far the lowest in countries where gun ownership is heavily regulated. The US doesn’t need to become a mirror of the Middle East and its culture of a heavily armed population in order to ensure public safety.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Now you’re just lying – or you haven’t even bothered to look at the statistics and are just repeating lies told by totalitarian gun-grabbers.
Even you should be intelligent enough to look up the facts and learn when you’re being lied to and played for a fool.

In both England and Australia, crime – especially gun crime – ballooned after their gun bans went into effect. Per capita violent crime is higher in both places than in the U.S.

btw; You aren’t actually accusing your islamic friends of being violent, are you? Are you saying that they have a “violent culture”?

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 12:59 PM

MAKE MENTAL ILLNESS ILLEGAL – NOT HAND GUNS

Think about that.

BigAlSouth on December 15, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Kind of a broad brush. All mental illness?

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 1:02 PM

In both England and Australia, crime – especially gun crime – ballooned after their gun bans went into effect. Per capita violent crime is higher in both places than in the U.S.

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Like this?

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Nancy Lanza was an avid gun collector who once showed him a “really nice, high-end rifle” that she had purchased, said Dan Holmes, owner of a landscaping business who recently decorated her yard with Christmas garlands and lights. “She said she would often go target shooting with her kids…”
Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 12:29 PM

O.K., that shoots my theory out the window.

a capella on December 15, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Which does not explain where Nancy Lanza acquired an AR-15 rifle…which is strictly banned in Conn. If you even bring an AR in to Conn., you have 90 days to disable it permenantly or sell it to a gun shop or give it to the police. No exceptions. They cannot be bought, sold, licensed or registered to civilians (citizens) in Conn.

Where did Nancy Lanza acquire this illegal weapon? What was she doing with it? Why did a “suburban mother” have an illegal “assault weapon”?

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Once again, the shooter wasn’t a gang member or past criminal with easy access to exotic weapons. Only a semi-automatic weapon would have prevented someone from tackling him between shots. And this is the type of weapon usually identified as a target of better regulation.

A revolver also allows multiple shots without reloading. Clearly, you don’t understand what a semi-automatic handgun is. You still have to pull the trigger for each shot, just like a revolver.

A general ban gun in a single city (such as Chicago) will not quickly or consistently reduce the rate of gun violence. Other factors are generally more important. You need to understand that local law enforcement often favors such bans in order to give it more options for arresting and prosecuting gang members, not because cops believe that gun violence will just go away.

Dodging by saying, “it would be different if the ban were nationwide.” Of course it would be different. Then you would be saying, “A general gun ban in a single nation (such as the U.S.) will not reduce the rate of gun violence, because guns will come from outside.”

The only irrational argument is to claim that societies with higher rates of gun ownership are safer.

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Since the crime rate has in fact gone down as gun ownership has increased, except for cities where gun ownership is banned, you don’t seem to understand the meaning of an “irrational argument,” either.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 15, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Did Nancy Lanza just ignore – and violate Conn. gun laws?

I thought everybody always obeyed anti-gun laws. Isn’t that the reason anti-gun laws are so successful at stopping crime?

//

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 1:14 PM

bayam on December 15, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Relevance to anything?

NotCoach on December 15, 2012 at 10:13 AM

None whatsoever.

But that never stopped a leftist from yammering.

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 1:23 PM

‘We’ll Be At Your Daughter’s Soccer Game!’
Union protest speaker tells governor that union members will ‘visit you’ everywhere over right-to-work bill

If people are looking for signs of potentially violent behavioral traits, shouldn’t these people be at the head of the list?

They, and liberal activists and leftists, have a well established history of striking out. Shouldn’t they have psychological evaluations to get to the root of their antisocial behavior?
Are we going to ignore them until they strike out again??

Mimzey on December 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Nah. It’s all good.

They vote democRAT.

But those TEA Partiers, now…….

Solaratov on December 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

I do think it’s these violent games that are the issue, because they’re newly on the scene. Up until recently, these sort of games weren’t available to males and young males especially, and there weren’t any of these gun-spree-murders, either, despite there being a lot of guns available and used by many people.

Lourdes on December 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Like last night, Another post where you demonstrate your ignorance on things related to firearms. ‘First person shooter’ (FPS) computer games have been around for nearly 20yrs. ‘Cowboys and Indians’ has been around for hundreds. Likewise I’m sure there’s some kids running around with a couple sticks and string playing Mongols and Uighurs.
So Uighur, please, SHUT UP about firearms.

Same goes to bayam, that ignorant gainsaying ass doesn’t know what it is talking about.

rayra on December 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3