Gun buybacks don’t reduce gun violence, either

posted at 9:51 pm on January 14, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham

While we’re “vigorously” pursuing “meaningful” gun legislation that can’t possibly make it through Congress if it’s anything near “meaningful” enough for this president, let’s also remind everyone that those flashy gun buyback programs local politicians love to tout do about as much to reduce gun violence as, well, gun control does in Chicago.

USA Today covers the latest outbreak of gun buybacks, popping up across the nation in the wake of Newtown. They come with flashy local news reports, B-roll rich with antique rifles and other castoff weapons whose confiscation would have been great for preventing stagecoach hold-ups but not modern crime waves.

Researchers who have evaluated gun control strategies say buybacks – despite their popularity – are among the least effective ways to reduce gun violence. They say targeted police patrols, intervention efforts with known criminals and, to a lesser extent, tougher gun laws all work better than buybacks.

The biggest weakness of buybacks, which offer cash or gift cards for guns, is that the firearms they usually collect are insignificant when measured against the arsenal now in the hands of American citizens.

Notice the ranking of solutions worth a damn when it comes to gun violence— police patrols, intervention, then tougher gun laws. That Wayne LaPierre is so out there with his suggestion of increased police presence in schools. Buybacks are even less effective than more gun control. Why? For the same reason gun control doesn’t work— buybacks deal mostly with law-abiding citizens, not criminals:

The relatively small number of guns recovered isn’t the only problem, Scott said. Buyback programs tend to attract people who are least likely to commit crimes and to retrieve guns that are least likely to be used in crimes.

Scott and others say violent criminals – the people who do most of the shooting and killing – steer clear of buyback programs unless they’re trying to make some quick cash by selling a weapon they don’t want anymore.

That means buyback campaigns more often end up with hunting rifles or old revolvers from someone’s attic than with automatic weapons from the trunk of a criminal’s car.

“They don’t get a lot of crime guns off the street,” said Matt Makarios, a criminal justice professor who studied buyback programs while at the University of Cincinnati in 2008. “You’re only going to reduce the likelihood of gun crimes if you reduce the number of guns used in crimes.”

A buyback in Tucson, Ariz., last week collected about 200 firearms, many of them old or inoperable, in exchange for about $10,000 worth of grocery gift cards. A few hundred feet away, gun dealers set up tables and offered cash for any guns in good enough condition to resell.

“Every gun that came in was an old gun, no assault weapons,” Tom Ditsch, who watched the event, told The Associated Press. “They didn’t even take any weapons off the streets.”

Supporters of buybacks are reduced to arguing they “raise awareness,” just to give you an idea of how big a failure they are in their actual objective. The upside of a buyback program is that at least citizens aren’t being coerced out of their guns, but are instead parting with them voluntarily. Unfortunately, someone was coerced out of the tax money to pay for them. But hey, it’s showy, ineffective, expensive, and gives organizers a deep sense of moral superiority. When you’ve got all that, who needs to actually reduce gun violence?

But don’t look now, the editorial-page team at one of New Jersey’s biggest newspapers is pro-gun buyback because it makes them feel good, so there, and anyone who thinks different probably just wants a “paramilitary weapon manufactured with the express purpose of shredding humans to death.” Uh huh. Who thinks the writer could actually point out a gun with that “express purpose” in a line-up and explain why it’s different than any other semi-automatic handgun of a similar caliber?

Australia is often mentioned by liberals as a gun-control model the U.S. could follow, despite the fact that it still faces mass shootings post-draconian gun control. I appreciate the relative honesty of these liberals who are actually saying they’d like to ban most, if not all, guns. That is entirely unconstitutional, but at least could plausibly reduce gun violence, unlike an “assault weapons ban.” But there’s a rather important part of Australia’s gun control that would be logistically impossible in America.

Australia implemented very restrictive gun control “banning all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns and imposing a more restrictive licensing system on other firearms,” but it didn’t just stop there. The government then bought back and destroyed hundreds of thousands of existing guns to the tune of $500 million. This is perhaps the only instance where one might argue a buyback was helpful in reducing gun violence, though studies of Australia’s gun crime rates show “relatively small” improvement thanks to the law. There are an estimated 300 million guns in this country. The feds have neither the competence nor the money to pull off the biggest buyback in world history, and I like to believe the American people they’d be targeting aren’t yet quite docile enough to help them.

None of this, however, should be construed to mean they’ll never try. Lord knows I’ve stopped assuming much is beyond this administration.

Photo credit for front-page photo to gregpc on Flickr.


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

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:37 PM

The lessons of all this are: More gun laws wouldn’t have stopped Adam Lanza. and two: If one of those Newtown teachers had been armed-they MIGHT HAVE stopped him.
Gun-Free zones=Criminal-safe zones. Gun-free zone cost LIVES!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM

unless they have ulterior motives.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:10 PM

…hey jackazz!…where did your stupid comment go from this morning (the little handgun picture!)… where you were accusing Ed of ‘lying’…it was SO STUPID they deleted the whole thread already as an embarrassment to Hot Air!

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Why is that sad? urban

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:33 PM

Urban , thanks. Why is it sad? Its sad because there is a whole world you are not experiencing. Do you have any interests Any curiosity? One more thing if you don’t mind. Male or female?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM

I do think bullet tracing would be effective in saving lives without infringin gun owners rights.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:32 PM

I’m assuming you a referring to tracing after a crime has been committed. That’s already done by forensics.

But I think I know what you are trying to say so let me put it in analogous terms. If a bank robber robs a bank, does he use his own car as the getaway vehicle? The answer is no, typically not (unless they are really stupid). Unfortunately, it’s not different with gun crimes. The murderer will use an illegal gun, a stolen gun; a gun that is not traceable back to him.

I understand that we say this over and over all the time, but it’s true – criminals don’t follow the law, they circumvent it.

More to the point, “bullet tracing” would not have stopped any of the mass shootings.

dugan on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

You should have a word with all those agencies in the Obama administration that have bought millions upon millions of rounds … … mostly hollow points.

VorDaj on January 14, 2013 at 10:42 PM

“Urban , thanks. Why is it sad? Its sad because there is a whole world you are not experiencing. Do you have any interests Any curiosity? One more thing if you don’t mind. Male or female?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM”

Male. Of course I have curiosity, I’m male, I’m born to desire holding a gun and shooting. I never denied those base desires. I just get my jollies killing ppl in video games that present no risk to anyone.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM

We will never submit to ANY sort of ‘gun-registration’-because it’s unconstitutional.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

MeanWhile….Part Deux!

Harry Announces…………BOINKING DOOMED(sarc).

@thomaskaplan tweeted:
thomaskaplan
Action on gun control in the @NYSenate expected shortly – @JohnDeFrancisco estimated Rules Committee would meet in 10 min.

53 mins ago from twitter.com by editor
https://twitter.com/thomaskaplan

==========================================

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he doubts assault weapons ban could pass the House – Vegas PBS interview via @TPM

3 hours ago from tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com by editor
===========================================================

TPMDC
Harry Reid: The Assault Weapons Ban Is Probably Doomed
January 14, 2013, 6:35 PM
**************************

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-assault-weapons-ban.php

canopfor on January 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

“Your expensive bullets, nonpartisan…when do they get traced?

James on January 14, 2013 at 10:27 PM”

.
After they get fired…the point is that alone will deter perps from firing guns. Again, Im not saying tracing bullets will magically eliminate all gun killings, or the sandy tragedy, but I do think it will drastically reduce gun violence with no harm to law abiding owners (the only argument so far is that bullets will be more costly….well boo hoo)

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:30 PM

.
Let’s hope criminals don’t think of STEALING SOMEONE ELSE’S AMMO.

It’s NOT the responsibility of the government to make dangerous implements “more fail-safe”.

It is the responsibility of all sober-minded adult citizens to make themselves capable of functioning as their own FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE against a tyranical government, and common criminals. Even if the common criminals are ARMED.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Missed that.
Damn.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM

How does a national database keep an already-fired bullet from entering the body of a victim?

James on January 14, 2013 at 10:45 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:37 PM

.
The lessons of all this are: More gun laws wouldn’t have stopped Adam Lanza. and two: If one of those Newtown teachers had been armed-they MIGHT HAVE stopped him.
Gun-Free zones=Criminal-safe zones. Gun-free zone cost LIVES!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM

.
You’re on a roll, girl.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:46 PM

“We will never submit to ANY sort of ‘gun-registration’-because it’s unconstitutional.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM”

lol…where does it say in the constitution that gun registration is illegal. What are YOU afraid of?

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

Video games huh? So you are a young man content to settle on video games. Do you get out much there in the city?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

Yeah, put in a microchip on a gun, one that can’t be disabled by a simple pair of wire snips, and has a transmitter that’s powered by, I guess, unicorn farts or something. And it’s going to work all the time, of course, because cellular technology is oh so reliable. AT&T proved that with the iPhone 4.

Hahahahaha

Seriously, you need to put down the video games and learn how guns actually work.

JohnTant on January 14, 2013 at 10:48 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM

How does a national database keep an already-fired bullet from entering the body of a victim?

James on January 14, 2013 at 10:45 PM

The Magical-Thinking Unicornikevlar Bullet-Shield© of course, dummy…

:-)

Resist We Much on January 14, 2013 at 10:49 PM

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:41 PM”

.
Male. Of course I have curiosity, I’m male, I’m born to desire holding a gun and shooting. I never denied those base desires. I just get my jollies killing ppl in video games that present no risk to anyone.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

.
Well, if an “animated video-game criminal” ever confronts you with hostile intent, you’ll be all set!

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:50 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

I’m a petite woman who is LEGALLY armed.
What am I afraid of?
Not a damn thing!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:51 PM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

Wow, just wow. Such incredible ignorance on display. You sir, are moronic beyond belief.

climbnjump on January 14, 2013 at 10:52 PM

nonpartisan, I’ll leave you with this to mull over. I have never known anyone who referred to killing as jollies. Do you feel the video games desensitize you to killing?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:53 PM

If you miss the first time, fire 249,999 more rounds.

The Independent September 25, 2005
US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed

US forces have fired so many bullets in Iraq and Afghanistan – an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed – that American ammunition-makers cannot keep up with demand. As a result the US is having to import supplies from Israel.

VorDaj on January 14, 2013 at 10:53 PM

Oh…..if anyone sees rogerb, point him this direction. Could be the next masterpiece. ; )

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:54 PM

I still fail to see why any gun laws are required at all…if they will only pass a law stating that murder is illegal then murder will stop…no?

Oh, and about the whole traceable ammo thing? How is that going to work? I have close to a ton of lead and enough powder to manufacture all the rounds I will need for decades…pretty sure other folks are in the same situation…and I’d be willing to bet at least a few criminals have thought of the same thing.

BadMojo on January 14, 2013 at 10:55 PM

“We will never submit to ANY sort of ‘gun-registration’-because it’s unconstitutional.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM”

.
lol…where does it say in the constitution that gun registration is illegal. What are YOU afraid of?

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

.
What some of us know (and that’s not “fear”) is that there is a global push to abolish sovreign national governments (which means their Constitutions) in favor of the WCPA.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:55 PM

100 “bullets” in a lifetime, nonpartisan? That won’t last me all morning.

SPQR on January 14, 2013 at 10:56 PM

If you miss the first time, fire 249,999 more rounds.

The Independent September 25, 2005
US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed

US forces have fired so many bullets in Iraq and Afghanistan – an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed – that American ammunition-makers cannot keep up with demand. As a result the US is having to import supplies from Israel.

VorDaj on January 14, 2013 at 10:53 PM

Sure hope they don’t have condors in afghanistan

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 10:57 PM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

And how many abortions does a woman need to protect herself from unwanted pregnancy? I would wager 2 is enough to last anyone woman a lifetime or, at least, teach her to be more personally responsible about birth control. And one would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on the need for unfettered abortion up until the full-term baby’s head leaves the birth canal.

And, we’ll have phun, phun, phun playing “nonpartisan’s” verbal volleyball games until daddy takes the keyboards away….

Resist We Much on January 14, 2013 at 10:58 PM

There is no such thing as traceable ammo, and the whole idea is the exact kind of silly nonsense invented by the ignorant.

SPQR on January 14, 2013 at 10:58 PM

Oh…..if anyone sees rogerb, point him this direction. Could be the next masterpiece. ; )

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:54 PM

.
If roger’ logs in, is there any chance he wouldn’t come here? … : )

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:59 PM

Resist We Much on January 14, 2013 at 10:49 PM

Now now…I want a serious, ‘nonpartisan’ answer to how any identification of bullets, casings, firearms, fingerprints, or any other ex post facto method of identification will prevent a crime that’s already occurred by the time the identification happens.

James on January 14, 2013 at 10:59 PM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

.
I’m a petite woman who is LEGALLY armed.
What am I afraid of?
Not a damn thing!

annoyinglittletwerp
on January 14, 2013 at 10:51 PM

.
You are sooo inspiring !: )

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:01 PM

Now now…I want a serious, ‘nonpartisan’ answer …

James on January 14, 2013 at 10:59 PM

Well, good luck with that.

To add to your mental list of things never to be mentioned in the same sentence:

“serious” and “nonpartisan”

Resist We Much on January 14, 2013 at 11:02 PM

James, the answer is that they won’t. Several states mandated that a sample fired bullet and shell be sent to a database for every firearm sold. Crimes solved? Zipola. Many millions of dollars wasted.

SPQR on January 14, 2013 at 11:03 PM

If roger’ logs in, is there any chance he wouldn’t come here? … : )

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:59 PM

Good point. I am very sad for nonpartisan. I wonder if he is from a single parent household and Mom just /isn’t able to share the wonders of hunting and such with him. My heart breaks a little when I see kids like him.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

I have a comment with more information in moderation, which I hope will be cleared soon, but in the meantime I strongly suggest 2nd amendment supporters watch this video about a standard 30 round magazine for an AR 15 that you can download right now and print on your 3D printer in the privacy of your own home. 3D printers may be a bit pricey now but prices will come down over time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q10Jz2qIog8

This just goes to show that it’s impossible to stop people who want one from obtaining as many of these magazines as they desire. If they are banned all it will do is disarm law abiding citizens, if not turn them into criminals, and give real criminals the advantage.

FloatingRock on January 14, 2013 at 11:05 PM

Good point. I am very sad for nonpartisan. I wonder if he is from a single parent household and Mom just /isn’t able to share the wonders of hunting and such with him. My heart breaks a little when I see kids like him.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

Don’t be. For every one of you, there are a thousand of him.

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 11:07 PM

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

Hunting?
I’m as pro-second amendment as they come…and vehemently ANTI-hunting.
Yeah-I’m a conundrum.LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:10 PM

and these barrels were found on shotguns that sold for $12.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 10:06 PM

Twelve dollars was a whole lot of money when shotgun barrels were Damascus.

Solaratov on January 14, 2013 at 11:11 PM

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 11:07 PM

I suppose you’re right. I truly would find satisfaction in helping to get through to him, all the world has to offer. Seems just such a waste.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:11 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:10 PM

I know alt, I’m just sad the young fellow seems to have no availability to broaden those horizons. How has your practice been going. Have you learned to properly clean your gun?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:12 PM

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

.
Hunting?
I’m as pro-second amendment as they come…and vehemently ANTI-hunting.
Yeah-I’m a conundrum.LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:10 PM

.
You’re also no vegan, either.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:15 PM

Solaratov on January 14, 2013 at 11:11 PM

Yep, suppose it was Solaratov, ; ) I was doing some reading night before or so and came across an article that mentioned how the Thompson was $400.00 a Ford was $200.00 win Thompson first came on line.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:15 PM

win=when, sorry Solaratov I’m a little tired.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:16 PM

You’re also no vegan, either.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:15 PM

Nah, but I make my living in a veggie morgue.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:17 PM

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:12 PM

Can’t clean it yet, but I’m becoming a decent shot.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:18 PM

SPQR on January 14, 2013 at 11:03 PM

Oh, I know that. But since nonpartisan still asserts the validity of traceable ammunition as a solution to gun crimes, though, I still want to see him either successfully defend his assertion that ammunition tracing will save the life of a victim of a gun crime, formally retract that assertion, or slink away like a little punk and bother us no more with his garbage posts.

If he does somehow prove that it will work, I will throw my full support behind his idea. I’m waiting for his defense.

James on January 14, 2013 at 11:20 PM

nonpartisan, your nom s/b nonbrain.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2013 at 11:22 PM

FloatingRock on January 14, 2013 at 11:05 PM

That’s all well and good for the box itself…but does not “print” the spring, follower or floorplate.
One cannot get a ‘finished’ magazine from a 3D printer.

Solaratov on January 14, 2013 at 11:26 PM

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 10:59 PM

.
Good point. I am very sad for nonpartisan. I wonder if he is from a single parent household and Mom just /isn’t able to share the wonders of hunting and such with him. My heart breaks a little when I see kids like him.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

.
I’ve thought about it often … through “luck-of-the-draw” I was born into a family that hunted (hard, I might add) and taught firearms safety. I’m sure there were some of my contemporaries when I was a kid, who wished they could trade places with me. I never noticed it at the time.
But looking back, I’m sure it was the case.
.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 11:04 PM

.
Don’t be. For every one of you, there are a thousand of him.

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 11:07 PM

.
Why shouldn’t we feel sorry for our contemporaries who were denied (by “modern parents”) all of the real world experiences that we got to experience?

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:27 PM

You’re also no vegan, either.

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:15 PM

.
Nah, but I make my living in a veggie morgue.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 14, 2013 at 11:17 PM

.
Another term for my ever-expanding vocabulary; VEGGIE MORGUE.

My wife’s gonna get a kick outta that: )

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Why shouldn’t we feel sorry for our contemporaries who were denied (by “modern parents”) all of the real world experiences that we got to experience?

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:27 PM

I am ALL for trying to expose urban dwellers to the “larger world”. I routinely tried to get acquaintances to hunt with me for deer on my farm, from a BIG metropolitan area.
They are TERRIFIED of leaving their comfortable surroundings.

Over the years, I have concluded, you cannot help these people. And they control your future.

I pity them. But I cannot feel sorry for them. It is their own fear that constrains them.

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 11:34 PM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need …

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

What does “need” have to do with any of this? I don’t NEED a little red Corvette, either.

Cleombrotus on January 14, 2013 at 11:52 PM

Thread Headline: Filed under “DUH!!!!”

Yakko77 on January 14, 2013 at 11:56 PM

That’s all well and good for the box itself…but does not “print” the spring, follower or floorplate.
One cannot get a ‘finished’ magazine from a 3D printer.

Solaratov on January 14, 2013 at 11:26 PM

The springs are very inexpensive and I suspect not that hard to make. If these springs become hard to come by in the future perhaps a few springs from 10 round mags could be crimped together on the ends, or perhaps the magazines can be redesigned to work with different springs. I’m not aware of the specific details of the magazine in the video and don’t have an AR 15 myself so can’t speak to the manufacture of the other parts you mention but suspect they are easier to make than the part that the 3D printer produces.

Still, the point is that it is impossible to prohibit anybody who wants one from obtaining these magazines regardless of the law, and the only thing a ban will do is give criminals a fire-power advantage over law abiding citizens.

FloatingRock on January 14, 2013 at 11:58 PM

listens2glenn on January 14, 2013 at 11:27 PM

.
I am ALL for trying to expose urban dwellers to the “larger world”. I routinely tried to get acquaintances to hunt with me for deer on my farm, from a BIG metropolitan area.
They are TERRIFIED of leaving their comfortable surroundings.

Over the years, I have concluded, you cannot help these people. And they control your future.

I pity them. But I cannot feel sorry for them. It is their own fear that constrains them.

WryTrvllr on January 14, 2013 at 11:34 PM

.
I learned a thing or two about Philly “inner city youth” many years ago at a somewhat remote summer camp.
When the sun was shining, the “bravado” wouldn’t quit.

But when it went down . . . . . WOW, what a difference.

I had never experienced such terrified people in my life, up to that time.

When ever a group moved in the dark, each person behind the leader (usually a Staffer) grabbed a hold of the shirt-tail, or belt, or something of the person in front of them, and they moved single-file. That’s the way it was at night.
Some of the “practical jokes” that were played on them were spectacular in the results.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 12:00 AM

So sad for a boy to miss out on.

Bmore on January 15, 2013 at 12:02 AM

I have a feeling Mary Katharine is interviewing.

Bmore on January 15, 2013 at 12:06 AM

FloatingRock on January 14, 2013 at 11:58 PM

Any halfway competent metalsmith can fabricate a functional magazine from sheet metal and spring wire. It ain’t rocket science.

novaculus on January 15, 2013 at 12:10 AM

It just never dawned on me that anyone could be so afraid of sitting in the forest while they had a bolt 30-06 across their lap.

I pity nonpartisan.

what a poorly chosen nom-de-plume.

WryTrvllr on January 15, 2013 at 12:10 AM

Solaratov on January 14, 2013 at 11:26 PM

Lets say the springs for the 30 rnd mags become hard to get for whatever reason, then two or three 10 rnd springs might be crimped or welded together—but perhaps doing so will increase the size of the spring, reducing the capacity of the magazines by a few rounds, but all somebody would have to do is increase the length of the magazine a bit and print a new one.

Pretty soon people will be able to download and 3D print magazines for any popular gun.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2013 at 12:13 AM

“rnd” = “round” above. I wouldn’t mention it but when I read my comment above it looks a lot like “md” instead of “rnd”.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2013 at 12:15 AM

Any halfway competent metalsmith can fabricate a functional magazine from sheet metal and spring wire. It ain’t rocket science.

novaculus on January 15, 2013 at 12:10 AM

Such skills are admirable but it’s still an important point that in the next few years even people with little if any skill will be able to print their own in a fraction of the time. It would be futile and harmful to law abiding citizens to try banning something that is unbannable.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2013 at 12:25 AM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

So as a video gamer, you are infinitely qualified to judge ammo quotas. I see.

Resist We Much on January 14, 2013 at 10:58 PM

You are killing me tonight, madame. That’s a figure of speech for you trolls. By the way, I want one of those Unicornkevlar Bullet Shields.

ghostwalker1 on January 15, 2013 at 12:45 AM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

The stupid! It hurts our brains, Precious!

Dunedainn on January 15, 2013 at 12:49 AM

No, you will not. You lost that freedom when 20+ innocent kids died.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:21 PM

Oh really? And who’s going to come and take that freedom from me? You? That’s rich.

Dunedainn on January 15, 2013 at 12:58 AM

Short of banning all guns, I think we should at the very least institute the following two measures (which I don’t think any reasonable gun owners would object to)

1) institute biometric controls on guns so that guns can only be operated by the registered owners

2) register ammo sales and institute bullet tracing (this imo would stop most gun crimes)

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 9:54 PM

Lame.

Just recently, a woman used her husbands .38 to defend herself and her twin sons against a robber who broke into her house, and a boy used his father’s AR-15 to defend himself and his brother against an attacker.

Both of them would have been out of luck if the guns had biometric controls. Your suggestion would cost innocent lives.

But you’re in luck. Even though both your suggestions would be absolutely useless, I do have a simple and common-sense fix that actually would reduce gun violence.

Eliminate gun-free zones. If a person has a concealed-carry license, let them use it. This would have saved lives in Newtown like it did in Pearl, Mississippi, where an armed principal held the shooter at bay until the police arrived. Instead of losing 20 lives, only 2 were lost.

And the shooter in Aurora, Colorado picked the only theater in town that advertised it was a gun-free zone, bypassing the other six that were not so posted.

Nothing makes a shooter question whether or not to shoot quite so much as knowing there may be someone else there who has a gun, just waiting for the opportunity to put a stop to his shooting spree.

There you go. Much cheaper than either of your suggestions, much more effective, and would save lives. Well, except possibly for the criminal who started shooting. But then, taking such a shooter down might very well save several other innocent lives.

Sounds like a good trade.

There Goes The Neighborhood on January 15, 2013 at 1:09 AM

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 9:54 PM

.
And the shooter in Aurora, Colorado picked the only theater in town that advertised it was a gun-free zone, bypassing the other six that were not so posted.

Nothing makes a shooter question whether or not to shoot quite so much as knowing there may be someone else there who has a gun, just waiting for the opportunity to put a stop to his shooting spree.

There Goes The Neighborhood on January 15, 2013 at 1:09 AM

.
Nothing says “criminals are safe, here” quite like a gun-free zone.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 1:30 AM

Democrat Assault Weapon Ban Proposal explained

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb239/G-Fury/ban_zps068f7205.jpg

The Notorious G.O.P on January 15, 2013 at 2:57 AM

Short of banning all guns, I think we should at the very least institute the following two measures (which I don’t think any reasonable gun owners would object to)

1) institute biometric controls on guns so that guns can only be operated by the registered owners

2) register ammo sales and institute bullet tracing (this imo would stop most gun crimes)

nonpartisan

3) Create bullets that only hurt bad guys, but bounce harmlessly off innocent people. They can be powered by leprechaun magic.

“No offense, Nonpartisan…but you’re an idiot.

catmman on January 14, 2013 at 10:00 PM”

you have a problem with my recommendations, I guess you must be looking to commit a crime.

nonpartisan

Like he said….you’re an idiot.If anyone is looking to commit crimes, it’s you. That’s why you want as few people armed as possible.

No, you will not. You lost that freedom when 20+ innocent kids died.

nonpartisan

Want to bet? And since when were folks like you concerned about innocent kids anyway?

xblade on January 15, 2013 at 3:42 AM

…I don’t think…

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 9:54 PM

FIFY.

Bruce MacMahon on January 15, 2013 at 6:40 AM

No, you will not. You lost that freedom when 20+ innocent kids died.

nonpartisan

Cerebral disconnect, aisle five!

I will defend your right to CHOOSE to surrender your freedom and liberty based on the deeds and desires of the criminally insane and the chronically stupid.

I will NEVER let the unlawful, amoral, and reckless actions of a small fraction of one percent of the population dictate and define the terms of my freedom.

Bruce MacMahon on January 15, 2013 at 6:43 AM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need …

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

If we are asking our government to ban unneeded objects, the properties of which, contribute to the death of young people, then I look forward to reading your endorsement of a proposal to ban swimming pools at private residences.

They cause more accidental children’s deaths than firearms, and they were designed expressly as recreational devices.

Bruce MacMahon on January 15, 2013 at 6:50 AM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime…

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

I just get my jollies killing ppl in video games that present no risk to anyone.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

 
Out of curiousity, think back to your years of experience killing ppl in video games. How many bullets* did it take before you became proficient with the weapons?

rogerb on January 15, 2013 at 7:04 AM

* This is the problem. Again.
 

That’s like me exclaiming that the sweater is just as good as the linen shirt for Jeffie’s dinner party
 
That one side refuses to understand the topic is why it’s so hard for the two sides to have an actual discussion on it.
 
rogerb on January 14, 2013 at 7:08 AM

rogerb on January 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM

I do get my shooting jollies off in video games (such as Far Cry 3).

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:27 PM

I just get my jollies killing ppl in video games that present no risk to anyone.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

That’s how Adam Lanza started out. Then he went and did it for real. Maybe someone should keep an eye on you, maybe take your video games, too. You might be a potential mass-murderer.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:21 AM

You lost that freedom when 20+ innocent kids died.

nonpartisan

Sorry, but no.

You lost the freedom to be self-righteous when you and your kind encouraged, advocated and funded the slaughter of millions of innocent kids.

Washington Nearsider on January 15, 2013 at 7:21 AM

You can tell nonpartisan is just a little boy.

CW on January 15, 2013 at 7:28 AM

And how many bullets does a law-abiding citizen need to protect himself? I would wager 100 bullets is enough to last anyone a lifetime. And 20 or 30 would be enough in reality. So gimme a break on ammo being unaffordable.

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:03 PM

Goddamned idiot. What about regular practice to hone and maintain skills? What about ammo to train new shooters? what about just plain old fun target practice? What about monthly competitions whose courses of fire require ~200rds. You simply don’t know shit about shooting or firearms.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:36 AM

ah nevermind. I just read some more of “nonpartisan” hack’s garbage.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:37 AM

btw everybody, mon night the NY State Senate passed a huge egregiously infringing anti-gun bill. The NY state assembly will pass it pronto for Cuomo to sign. THey’re losing pretty much everything Feinstein wants to ban. A century’s worth of firearms design and development.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:40 AM

lol…where does it say in the constitution that gun registration is illegal. What are YOU afraid of?

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:47 PM

Where does the Constitution say that abortion should be legal? Where does the Constitution mention separation of church and state? Where is the right to privacy in the Constitution? Where is the right to healthcare?

What does ‘shall not be infringed’ mean? Does registration lead to confiscation? (Ask the Jews in 1938 Germany)

fossten on January 15, 2013 at 7:41 AM

mark today on your calendars. It’s the beginning.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:41 AM

Could we end the lie that these are “buybacks?” What they are is government programs to confiscate guns through bribery.

Buyback suggests that the government sold the gun to the individual in the first place. That furthers the idea that the government that sells the gun has every right to force one to give up their gun. This runs counter to the Second Amendment.

Words have meaning in this debate. If the pro-Constitution forces are not careful, they will find themselves defending “firearm violence prevention” legislation when the proposed laws are nothing more than the left seeking ways to end private firearm ownership. Letting government make the claim that they are merely buying guns back from individuals is much the same word games and it needs to stop now!

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 7:43 AM

ah nevermind. I just read some more of “nonpartisan” hack’s garbage.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:37 AM

Know the trolls. But don’t feed them. ;0

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 7:45 AM

mark today on your calendars. It’s the beginning.

rayra on January 15, 2013 at 7:41 AM

A lot of things are grandfathered in, so the new laws are meaningless to the ‘urgency’ with which they passed the joke. Besides, it’s mostly a rehash of laws currently on the books that criminals are ignoring anyway.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:47 AM

Know the trolls. But don’t feed them. ;0

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 7:45 AM

Refusing to accept a liberal’s premise instead of debating it drives them crazy. And it’s a short drive, indeed.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:51 AM

Again, Im not saying tracing bullets will magically eliminate all gun killings, or the sandy tragedy, but I do think it will drastically reduce gun violence with no harm to law abiding owners (the only argument so far is that bullets will be more costly….well boo hoo)

nonpartisan on January 14, 2013 at 10:30 PM

So I suppose that jacking up the cost of your favorite video shooter game to $1000 should be A-OK with you too? After all, the Sandy Hook shooter liked violent video games, so I guess you just lost your rights to play them.

And besides, how many video games does a kill-for-thrill freak like you need, anyway? Big Brother wants to know doesn’t give a sh*t. One should last you for a lifetime. Boo-Hoo.

Wow, see how easy this is?

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 7:54 AM

Liberals will never be satisfied until we all become helpless victims and potential homicides. Killing children isn’t enough for them…their blood-lust grows.

trs on January 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 7:54 AM

And raise the age to be able to purchase such games to 21 and over like for alcohol, tobacco, guns, and ammunition. Maybe a background check, and the games are non-transferrable; they can’t be bought as a birthday gift for an underage person.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Right you are!

Also, make them smart games which can only be played when the gamer blows into a tube and provides a urine sample to prove that he’s not drunk or high!!!

This really IS easy!!! If lobotomies weren’t so danged expensive, I could almost see joining nonpartisan in his green skied liberal fantasy world!! Or not.

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 8:07 AM

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 8:07 AM

I would be more worried about nonpartisan as a next door neighbor than a guy who owns guns.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Also, make them smart games which can only be played when the gamer blows into a tube and provides a urine sample to prove that he’s not drunk or high!!!

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Make it so that Cheeto and Red Bull content is monitored. It would shut down the vast majority of these potential killers. In fact, why not make it so that one’s name has to be entered into a federal data base whenever you purchase one of the above items with a one-a-day limitation. After all, why does one need more than one Red Bull a day? Anything beyond that just puts others in danger.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 8:14 AM

It’s time for reasonable Game Control!!!!!®

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 8:17 AM

And raise the age to be able to purchase such games to 21 and over like for alcohol, tobacco, guns, and ammunition. Maybe a background check, and the games are non-transferrable; they can’t be bought as a birthday gift for an underage person.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM

We need to do this for the children! Isn’t that what the left does at this point? Throw out a scheme to curtail our civil rights and then hide behind the caskets of children as an excuse instead of having a real debate. They are cowards who don’t think we are smart enough to see what they are doing. This isn’t 1930s Germany or Stalinist Russia. We have historical knowledge of exactly what they are doing.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 8:18 AM

It’s time for reasonable Game Control!!!!!®

VelvetElvis on January 15, 2013 at 8:17 AM

That’s retro thinking. We need video game violence prevention legislation.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 8:18 AM

The debate is over far as I’m concerned, until the liberals stop coddling criminals and become pro-active against real street crimes. But, no! Liberals call NYC’s stop-and-frisk law racist, so they finally got it stopped.

I’m sure billionaire Bloomberg is totally thrilled that people are safer now.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 8:22 AM

I want to go to the Journal’s list of weapons owners and try to determine who’s a liberal. Then, we can steal this weapons and sell them back to the government. They voted not to have weapons anyways.

We cut out the middle man. Well, maybe we put a middle man in there. Not sure. But still, good idea, huh?

smoothsailing on January 15, 2013 at 8:30 AM

smoothsailing on January 15, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Outstanding.

It beats the heck out of 19 EOs and the tyranny of this president.

kingsjester on January 15, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3