Gingrich to Piers Morgan: Let’s hold gun-control hearings in Chicago

posted at 3:54 pm on January 25, 2013 by Allahpundit

Twelve minutes long but worth watching in full, partly because Gingrich is in fine form and partly because it’s a nice demonstration of how futile and bad-faith the “debate” over guns is. Morgan’s point is straightforward: If gun-rights fans think it’s okay to ban machine guns because rapid-fire weapons are too dangerous for the public to own, why not ban assault rifles? Granted, automatics fire much more rapidly than semiautomatics, but you can still get off an awful lot of shots quickly with an AR-15 if you’re pulling the trigger fast enough. Gingrich comes at that logic from the other direction: If semiautomatic rifles are banworthy because you can fire rapidly in volume with them, why aren’t semiautomatic pistols also banworthy?

The answer, if you talk to an honest gun-control advocate, is that they are. They’d love to ban all semiautomatics. It’s wildly illogical to focus only on one type if you’re worried about rapid-fire weapons, to the point where Morgan is left arguing here that we need to get rid of rifles but not pistols because, um, well, that’s the sort of weapon that lunatics like James Holmes and Adam Lanza seem to prefer — as if they wouldn’t resort to pistols if rifles were off the market. (Holmes and Lanza both had semiautomatic pistols on them during the shootings, in fact. My hunch is that the reason spree killers prefer “assault rifles” to pistols has little to do with lethality and everything to do with image. They’re on an insane power trip, and a bigger gun that resembles a machine gun adds to the thrill.) But Morgan knows that banning all semiautomatics won’t fly politically, at least right now, because most Americans believe in the right to own a gun and semiautomatic pistols are by far the most common type of gun that they own. So he’s forced to push this phony distinction between rifles and pistols to keep up the “reasonable regulations” facade and reassure fencesitters that he only wants to eliminate a few really dangerous guns, not the sort of guns found in many American homes that are … almost precisely as dangerous as the “really dangerous” ones he wants to ban.

Hence Gingrich’s point about the gun-control slippery slope. You can’t trust Morgan et al. to ban one class of weapons but no other; the logic of their position ultimately won’t allow it. And the failure of their polices will only be used as an argument that they haven’t gone far enough. That’s why he’s emphasizing Chicago. But never mind all that. Per WaPo, it sounds like Obama might have some of the Sandy Hook families in attendance at the SOTU, so unless you want to be a hateful bastard who doesn’t care that children were murdered, it’s time to stand aside.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

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

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

There are lots of guns in private hands in Switzerland. And Israel.

You still won’t address the fact that the proposed gun laws wont do anything to stop mass shootings. Lanza was also armed with hand guns. He could have easily used them to kill the same number of people.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Newt can do a fun job in these things, and he does here, but he never should have let himself get dragged by Piers down the ‘we both agree that fully automatic guns should be illegal, therefore…’ route. Newt should have said that fully automatic firearms should also not be illegal, and that the banning of them was a reactionary mistake. Once you go down the slippery slope of ‘some are too dangerous, some aren’t,’ the libs win, because it then becomes a ‘where do we all agree that libs get to draw the line’ debate. The reality is that they don’t get to draw the line anywhere. Unless they amend the Constitution.

WhatSlushfund on January 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM

allah, stop being a republican and be an american for a second. not every movement’s so goal is to garner a political victory. The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

The Senate will not have enough votes to support DiFi.
Yes it is political. Very Political.

Jabberwock on January 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

There have been a number of mass shootings in the UK since their 1996 gun ban.

F-

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Buried in the bottom of the story, one of the gang leaders said that they stole many of their weapons from railroad freight cars parked in Chicago railroad yards.

H

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:24 PM

…and they bought the rest in gun stores outside chicago, often using the notorious straw men.

fail, next.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Did they use straw men to steal the weapons from the parked freight cars too?

BTW, as I recall, those gun stores “outside Chicago” were still inside Illinois.

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UKUS? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Jabberwock on January 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM

I love how Morgan drops at 8:38 the Founding Fathers thought automatics weapons should be banned because they’re dangerous so then then should semi auto’s that fire 100 RPM.

I don’t know about anyone else but I could do a lot more than 100RPM with my CHOSEN self defense arm. Of course that would a lot of wasted ammo.

Personally I think the FF would want me and my fellow citizens to have one or more. If I can afford one I should be able to have one.

I appreciate Newt latching onto some of the words like “permit” coming out of that Brit’s hagous hole. People are permited to have etc.

VikingGoneWild on January 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

So that you don’t sound so uninformed, do a little research. You can start with mass murder at school (china) man wielding a knife.

DDay on January 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM

how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK?

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Are there daily mass shootings in the US? I missed that.

H-

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

There aren’t daily mass shootings in the US.

Maybe “knives don’t do mass murder,” but I don’t think that matters as much as you think it does when you consider that the UK leads the US in every violent and property crime category other than murder.

Perhaps, you would like to tell women, who are MUCH MORE LIKELY TO GET VIOLENTLY RAPED IN THE UK THAN IN THE US, that they should just lay back and take one for the gun control team.

Reported rape rate in the US: 30.88 per 100,000 residents

Reported rate rate in the UK: 140.71 per 100,000 residents

Can you say “war on women” for me?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

I suppose Piers is unaware of DiFi’s statement in 1994 that if she could “ban them all, pick them up” she would.
Piers has exceeded his sell date.

Another Drew on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

I’m all for it. The idea that we need to ban guns comprehensively across the country to really make a dent on gun violence in high-crime areas is a fine campaign plank for Democrats in 2014.

Allahpundit on January 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM

I think you are on to something here. And now that women can be on the front lines, I think it is only fair to include bringing back a military draft so that women can have the same “opportunity” to serve on the front lines that men enjoyed throughout the years of patriarchal oppression.

Lily on January 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Lets not forgot too that Holmes rifle jammed and the nutter couldn’t clear it so he turned to his pistols and shotgun.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM

is the woman defending herself from a herd of bulletproof zombies?!

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

So you agree with the notion that you should be making her choices for her and her family?

If there are several assailants then she’ll need every advantage she can get. Not every shot hits the intended target, not every hit stops a criminal.

Also, such rifles are useful during riots and other break downs of civilization (after storms etc). Shop owners used rifles to protect their livelihoods during the LA riots.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Are there daily mass shootings in the US? I missed that.

H-

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Oh, but there are! Millions of innocent paper targets are slaughtered each and every day on ranges across the country! Something must be done!! Have you no shame???

CurtZHP on January 25, 2013 at 4:40 PM

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:21 PM

I’m trying to make him one? If I am determining the subject and guests for his show I am being sadly under payed. I don’t even watch it but I am sure CNN is thrilled with any little uptick they can get. Still waiting for your scenario on confiscating all the guns here in the U.S., except of course for the exceptions that Sen. Feinstein has put into place. Isn’t it odd that they get to keep them and we don’t?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2013 at 4:41 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

A guy in China knifed over 20 kids.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:41 PM

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Are there daily mass shootings here?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Allah, if you’re still here. Your gun control posts insinuate Democrats are benefiting. I think Obama is burning political capital on popular stuff

Flapjackmaka on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

the democrats are the culture of death… they have killed millions of children with abortion… most of the crimes and violence are committed by democrat voters in the totally controlled liberal cities… now I agree that democrats are going to be crushed in 2014 not because of their fake stance on saving the children but because of their attack on our freedom and the Constitution… now go and f*** yourself low IQ communist scum and slave if the State…

mnjg on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Wrong answer fool. Osaka school massacre China School Attack: Video Footage Of Knife Stabbing Released By Government

SWalker on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

So you support a federally mandated nation wide ban on firearms of any sort?

nice straw man you’re building there. nobody seriously proposed that.

Do you believe this can only be done via a Constitutional amendment?

How do plan on confiscating 300 million weapons from 60+ million Americans you’ve turned into felons?

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:33 PM

nobody’s confiscating anything.

jesus, people, you’re like morrissey when he was convinced that mccain and feingold will arrive in a black helicopter in the middle of the night to shut down his blog.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

If semiautomatic rifles are banworthy because you can fire rapidly in volume with them, why aren’t semiautomatic pistols also banworthy?

Or revolvers?

Or pump-action rifles or shotguns?

Or lever-action rifles or shotguns?

For that matter, a good man with a bolt-action rifle can do more than enough damage. (Think Charles Whitman.) In World War II, most of the armies in the conflict were armed that way, so these would definitely fit the description of “weapon of war”. They even had bayonet mounts and (wood) coverings over the barrel, just like the infamous “barrel shroud” in Feinstein’s bill, so they’re definitely evil.

Socratease on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

There aren’t daily mass shootings in the US.

Maybe “knives don’t do mass murder,” but I don’t think that matters as much as you think it does when you consider that the UK leads the US in every violent and property crime category other than murder.

Perhaps, you would like to tell women, who are MUCH MORE LIKELY TO GET VIOLENTLY RAPED IN THE UK THAN IN THE US, that they should just lay back and take one for the gun control team.

Reported rape rate in the US: 30.88 per 100,000 residents

Reported rate rate in the UK: 140.71 per 100,000 residents

Can you say “war on women” for me?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

+1

Libs have a hard time admitting the negative consequences of their policies.

Gun laws will to little to nothing to stop criminals but they go a long way in turning the law abiding into helpless victims.

There is no better equalizer for a woman than a firearm.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

…and they bought the rest in gun stores outside chicago, often using the notorious straw men.

fail, next.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Fail.

According to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, 93% of all firearms used in criminal acts are obtained illegally, ie, on the street, through theft, etc. Thus, even if we had universal background checks, it would only affect 7% of the guns used in the commission of criminal acts.

According to the Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from:

* a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%

* a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%

* family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%

In other words, criminals don’t get their guns from gun shows and shops.

Per the FBI:

“Offenders armed with handguns committed one in every eight violent crimes–rape, robbery and assault–measured by BJS’s National Crime Victimization Survey. The other violent crime victims were attacked or threatened by offenders who were either unarmed or were armed with such weapons as rocks, sticks, knives or other types of firearms. The most common violent crime, simple assault, by definition does not involve the use of a weapon.”

Since 1996, less than 10% of nonfatal violent crimes involved firearms.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, incidents involving a firearm represented 7% of the 5.1 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault in 2008.

Only 2% of prison inmates used a military-style semiautomatic gun.

“According to the latest available data, those who use guns in violent crimes rarely purchase them directly from licensed dealers; most guns used in crime have been stolen or transferred between individuals after the original purchase.”

Care to explain why the homicide rate is the lowest in decades even though there are more guns in the US per capita now than ever before?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:43 PM

The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Bwahahahahahahahaha.

That’s rich, coming from the party that has Chicago as its headquarters. Don’t hear many Dems going to Chicago to try and figure out why the gun free city has so many innocent deaths from guns. And no democrat is willing to lose his seat for anything.

search4truth on January 25, 2013 at 4:43 PM

I’m all for it. The idea that we need to ban guns comprehensively across the country to really make a dent on gun violence in high-crime areas is a fine campaign plank for Democrats in 2014.

Allahpundit on January 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM

I think you are on to something here. And now that women can be on the front lines, I think it is only fair to include bringing back a military draft so that women can have the same “opportunity” to serve on the front lines that men enjoyed throughout the years of patriarchal oppression.

Lily on January 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM

I could support this, send out the marching orders.

DDay on January 25, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Just a random thought:

What if abortions were committed with a gun?

Heck, if I have to shoot someone to stop them from killing or harming me or mine and they die, isn’t that just a “post birth abortion?” Perhaps in the 50th trimester?

What’s the problem with aborting an SOB that is trying to abort my life? Not a darn thing.

And just because I use a firearm instead of some medical tool, the result is the same.

ProfShadow on January 25, 2013 at 4:34 PM

I’ve been using this to push back against

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Lanza was also armed with hand guns. He could have easily used them to kill the same number of people.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:35 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Just a random thought:

What if abortions were committed with a gun?

Heck, if I have to shoot someone to stop them from killing or harming me or mine and they die, isn’t that just a “post birth abortion?” Perhaps in the 50th trimester?

What’s the problem with aborting an SOB that is trying to abort my life? Not a darn thing.

And just because I use a firearm instead of some medical tool, the result is the same.

ProfShadow on January 25, 2013 at 4:34 PM

I’ve been using this to push back against the baby killing anti gunners on twitter since Newtown. It’s gotten me suspended more than dozen times since.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 4:45 PM

Get in there Newt!!!!

29Victor on January 25, 2013 at 4:45 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Are you saying he wouldn’t have used his pistols or shotgun if he didn’t have the AR15? Is that what you are saying?

Moron.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Care to explain why the homicide rate is the lowest in decades even though there are more guns in the US per capita now than ever before?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:43 PM

i’m sure it has to do with obama’s greatness somehow.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

nice straw man you’re building there. nobody seriously proposed that.

nobody’s confiscating anything.

jesus, people, you’re like morrissey when he was convinced that mccain and feingold will arrive in a black helicopter in the middle of the night to shut down his blog.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

Go back and read your posts.

You’re agreeing that gun laws don’t stop criminals because they’ll just steal them or go to other states and use straw purchasers.

Reading all your comments one can only conclude that either you’re opposed to gun control because it doesn’t work or you think that the only thing that will work is a nationwide ban. Even allahpundit interpreted your comments this way. As have many others here. I’ts not a strawman when YOU are the one clearly insinuating a nationwide ban.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Lanza did not use the AR-15 in Sandy Hook…

Kaptain Amerika on January 25, 2013 at 3:59 PM

alas.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:03 PM

About that…

Deep Thought on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:25 PM

And:

UK is violent crime capital of Europe
The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital of Europe and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world, worse even than America, according to new research.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences in the UK since Labour came to power.

The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa.

Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

It is unfortunate that Newt failed to explain that NFA-34 is not a prohibition (Congress’ of that day knew that to override provisions of the Constitution required a Constitutional Amendment), but a regulation via taxation.
Anyone with the means to pay the tax (and $200/firearm was a substantial sum at the time) plus pass the background check of the FBI, and was willing to comply with the rules regarding possession and use, could buy and possess machine-guns – and they still can. They just can’t have any machine-gun manufactured since 1986, which has made the pre-existing models very, very pricey; but they are available at any Class-3 FFL in the country.

Another Drew on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

That is right. HE used it. It did not shoot itself.

Go take away the guns from criminals first.

kingsjester on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

jesus, people, you’re like morrissey when he was convinced that mccain and feingold will arrive in a black helicopter in the middle of the night to shut down his blog.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

From your link, Ed says this at the very end:

McCain and Feingold have managed to foster real bipartisanship — they’ve gotten liberal and conservative bloggers alike to detest them. Jerome Armstrong at MyDD, Atrios, and DailyKos all agree — this legislation has become a serious threat to political speech

So, Toots, was Kos a part of that black helicopter brigade with Ed as well? You make it too easy.

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:49 PM

…and they bought the rest in gun stores outside chicago, often using the notorious straw men.

fail, next.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:27 PM

So low IQ communist scum you are saying that the democrat voters in the super liberal city in Chicago are buying guns from outside Chicago and they are committing all these crimes but the areas where they bought the guns from have much lower crime rate… in other word the democrat culture is the root cause of violence and it is not the guns or those who sell the guns…. you are a very stupid person slave of the State…

mnjg on January 25, 2013 at 4:49 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

So? The point is more gun laws wouldn’t have changed the outcome.
If you take the AR-15 out of the equation (e.g., he wasn’t able to steal one or the background check that stopped him from buying his own guns hadn’t stopped him) he’d still have been able to steal handguns and the same number of people would have died. And you’d be here saying we need to ban handguns.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Keep an eye on Eric Holder:
http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/pending-regs/279345-holder-begins-gun-control-push

onlineanalyst on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Why do the same people who think that we can get rid or “assault weapons” by banning new ones and “drying up the supply” until they all go away think that it’s impossible to do the same thing with illegal aliens?

29Victor on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

sesquipedalian

do you disagree with this:

Sheriff David Clarke: Residents should arm themselves, 911 not best option
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/sheriff-clarke-urges-residents-to-arm-themselves-with-guns-o38h47h-188375091.html
In his latest radio spot, Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. tells residents personal safety isn’t a spectator sport anymore, and “I need you in the game.”

“With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option,” Clarke intones.

“You could beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back.”

Clarke urges listeners to take a firearm safety course and handle a firearm “so you can defend yourself until we get there.”

“You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We’re partners now. Can I count on you?”

Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Can somebody please remind me of what type of weapon was used to shoot Giffords.

Then remind Piers.

LoganSix on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

You’re agreeing that gun laws don’t stop criminals because they’ll just steal them or go to other states and use straw purchasers.

i’m for consistent gun laws. anything else is a product of your fevered imagination.

Reading all your comments one can only conclude that either you’re opposed to gun control because it doesn’t work or you think that the only thing that will work is a nationwide ban. Even allahpundit interpreted your comments this way. As have many others here. I’ts not a strawman when YOU are the one clearly insinuating a nationwide ban.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

They’re on an insane power trip, and a bigger gun that resembles a machine gun adds to the thrill.)

Good point, if American’s in general hadn’t been indoctrinated to fear firearms and mean looking ones the most, by liberals, evil people wouldn’t be nearly so inclined to abuse them.

Speakup on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

How the FLUKE does he know an AR-15 can shoot 100 rounds in 1 minute. Is he using more than one trigger finger or something?

Nutstuyu on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Another Person Shot Near Obama’s Chicago Home

What was that again, Piers, I couldn’t hear you the first time? There were some loud noises in the background.

Christien on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Lanza was also armed with hand guns. He could have easily used them to kill the same number of people.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:35 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Why did he have the other 2 guns with him, then?

Take your time.

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Out With The Old & Busted And In With The New Hotness

Old & Busted:

“It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death.”

New Hotness:

“It is far better and satisfactory that 100+ million law-abiding citizens lose their Second Amendment rights than for one criminal to get his hands on a gun.”

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Something I’d really like to see along the roadside.

Oldnuke on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

So? The point is more gun laws wouldn’t have changed the outcome.
If you take the AR-15 out of the equation (e.g., he wasn’t able to steal one or the background check that stopped him from buying his own guns hadn’t stopped him) he’d still have been able to steal handguns and the same number of people would have died.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:49 PM

that assertion is not supported by any evidence, let alone common sense.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

My hunch is that the reason spree killers prefer “assault rifles” to pistols has little to do with lethality and everything to do with image.

One slight problem with your hunch: It’s based on a false premise. Spree killers don’t prefer “assault rifles”. At worst(or best), there’s no trend one way or another.

in the UK they work like a charm, and they’d work in Chicago as well but for the lax gun laws in neighboring areas.

sesquipedalian

Two lies in one sentence. Kudos.

xblade on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

What about banning pools, boats, cars, bikes, bats, knives, hammers or anything else that could hurt anyone if it means less innocent deaths?

Bottom line gun control is all about CONTROL of people. Take a look at history of the last 100 years. Politicans with guns have killed 100 million people who did not have guns. You and yours can join the 100 million plus…..I CHOOSE to OPT out!

VikingGoneWild on January 25, 2013 at 4:52 PM

allah, stop being a republican and be an american for a second. not every movement’s so goal is to garner a political victory. The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

How many bullets does a woman get to stop herself from being gang raped?

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Why do the same people who think that we can get rid or “assault weapons” by banning new ones and “drying up the supply” until they all go away think that it’s impossible to do the same thing with illegal aliens?

29Victor on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Why don’t people realize that “drying up the supply” has to mean taking guns from the innocent?

Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 4:52 PM

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

That’s a floater that isn’t going to flush. If you think you can make the unconstitutional interference with the Second Amendment a patriotic issue or gun ownership something to be ashamed of you are sadly mistaken.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Why did he have the other 2 guns with him, then?

Take your time.

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

because he was a fookin lunatic?

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

He was also dressed in black tactical gear. That didn’t make him more deadly. He could have killed just as many people if he had been wearing Dockers and a polo shirt. Maybe more because it would have taken longer to identify him as a threat.

If you are going to go into a defenseless area and shoot unarmed children and adults the kind of gun you use makes no difference. They can’t fight back.

Lily on January 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM

i’m for consistent gun laws.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Please give us your definition of “consistent”, and then tell us how such a “perfect” law could have prevented Newtown.

Are you advocating for the loss of States’ Rights?

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM

that assertion is not supported by any evidence, let alone common sense.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Common sense tell us that your head hasn’t come out of your ass in years.

SWalker on January 25, 2013 at 4:54 PM

Let’s all talk about Diane Feinstein and point out who she really is:

http://dcclothesline.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/why-america-can-not-trust-the-motives-of-dianne-feinstein/

mountainaires on January 25, 2013 at 4:54 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK?

sesquipedalian

For the same reason they weren’t having daily mass shootings before their gun ban.

xblade on January 25, 2013 at 4:54 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

That is right. HE used it. It did not shoot itself.

Go take away the guns from criminals first.

kingsjester on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

There may be some question on this issue. Check Deep Thought 4:47.

DDay on January 25, 2013 at 4:54 PM

that assertion is not supported by any evidence, let alone common sense.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Oh, so there haven’t been any mass shootings with handguns? Lanza couldn’t have repeated his massacre with just handguns?

You do realize that hands and fists kill more people every year than rifles, right?

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:54 PM

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

States’ crime rates show scant linkage to gun laws
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/24/states-crime-rates-show-scant-linkage-to-gun-laws/

President Obama has called for stricter federal gun laws to combat recent shooting rampages, but a review of recent state laws by The Washington Times shows no discernible correlation between stricter rules and lower gun-crime rates in the states.

Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Why did he have the other 2 guns with him, then?

Take your time.

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:51 PM

because he was a fookin lunatic?

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM

Translated: “I can’t answer Del’s simple question!”

D+

Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM

but he used the ar15.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Number of people murdered in America in 2011 with ALL types of rifles:

323

Number of people murdered in America in 2011 with hammers and other blunt objects:

496

Source: FBI 2011 crime statistics

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Piers: 100 bullets per minute.

Does Piers even know the cyclic-rate of a full-auto M16/M4 (w/o 3-rd burst)?
I doubt it.

Another Drew on January 25, 2013 at 4:56 PM

The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

If I’m to take your word on this then how about you pick a different approach than to disarm myself and other individuals from saving our (and ours as the case may be) own life?

‘Let’s save lives by not allowing individuals to save their own life.’—is counterproductive to that cause in the most crystal clear way a being with any sentience can imagine. Given this clarity, you’ll pardon us if we don’t exactly trust the motives of otherwise adults (seemingly so, anyway).

anuts on January 25, 2013 at 4:56 PM

The gun control battle is a politically costly battle to save lives. I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

What about banning pools, boats, cars, bikes, bats, knives, hammers or anything else that could hurt anyone if it means less innocent deaths?

Bottom line gun control is all about CONTROL of people. Take a look at history of the last 100 years. Politicans with guns have killed 100 million people who did not have guns. You and yours can join the 100 million plus…..I CHOOSE to OPT out!

VikingGoneWild on January 25, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Ever notice that every time these statists want to do something to “protect the innocent,” it always involves going after someone else who is innocent?

I’ve broken no law, endangered no one, and threatened no one. Yet, in the name of “protecting the innocent,” I am to be treated as a threat.

It’s not because I’m a threat to other innocent people. It’s simply because I’m a threat to the statists’ idea of control.

CurtZHP on January 25, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Can you say “war on women” for me?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM

1 in 700 ladies raped in the UK compared to 1 in 3,200 in the US. The UK ladies need to watch their 9.

Wonder how low the rape rate would be if the law abiding women were packing?

If women in the US were 4 1/2 more likely to get raped they all would be carrying.

plutorocks on January 25, 2013 at 4:57 PM

the at was in the fking trunk you fkstick liar.

tom daschle concerned on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Perhaps you could also explain why police in Canada are having to swap out their bullet-proof vests for knife-proof vests?

Nutstuyu on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Morgan had a fool on (Rich from the NYT) who equated defending the 2nd amendment with clinging to slavery.

workingclass artist on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

If gun-rights fans think it’s okay to ban machine guns because rapid-fire weapons are too dangerous for the public to own, why not ban assault rifles?

I don’t want to ban machine guns. I want to own them. And, the second amendment says that my right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That said, if I’m in the substantial minority in this position, that is fine. You know the proper mechanism for changing the constitution? Amending it. And if I’m in such a minority, that shouldn’t be a problem.

besser tot als rot on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

docflash on January 25, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Under ATF Rules/Regulations, the M4 w/3-rd burst is a Machine-Gun.
To be a semi-auto, there can be no more than one round expended with each pull of the trigger.

Another Drew on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

So your for consistent gun laws which do what exactly?

You’re arguments make even less sense now.

Most gun deaths are caused by handguns so it sounds like you’re calling for a ban on handguns. You’ve already claimed that guns in Chicago being acquired illegally is partially due to inconsistent laws across state lines. How do consistent laws – which allow for handgun ownership – prevent these criminals from using straw purchasers? Or stealing them like they do currently? Your argument makes absolutely no sense. You’re arguing for something your argument says wont work.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Dems: “The good thing about Newtown is it was so horrific”

Christien on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Can somebody please remind me of what type of weapon was used to shoot Giffords.

Then remind Piers.

LoganSix on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people injuring 23 with two hand guns. One of which was a 22. Leftists need to just come out and admit they wish to completely ban guns. Go on record.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Morgan had a fool on (Rich from the NYT) who equated defending the 2nd amendment with clinging to slavery.

workingclass artist on January 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM

And we can respond with those theatrics: Hitler banned all guns.

sentinelrules on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Allah, if you’re still here. Your gun control posts insinuate Democrats are benefiting. I think Obama is burning political capital on popular stuff

Flapjackmaka on January 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

You can sarcasm dripping in AP’s replies, correct? This is a losing issue of Democrats in the Midwest. The Wisconsin border is about forty minutes away from Chicago, so “tightening up the supply of guns” would be asking the people in Kenosha to give up their guns. Considering that Ryan finds it good local politics to release photos of himself with lots of guns and dead animals, I think hell will freeze over before that happens.

Illinidiva on January 25, 2013 at 5:01 PM

Care to explain why the homicide rate is the lowest in decades even though there are more guns in the US per capita now than ever before?

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 4:43 PM

i’m sure it has to do with obama’s greatness somehow.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Spew alert next time, please!

The homicide rate with guns has fallen as gun ownership and CCW laws have increased.

The AWB or CCW Laws: Which Has Had More Of An Impact On The Murder Rate?

Pssst, Proggies! If They Obeyed The Law, They Wouldn’t Be Criminals

Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 5:01 PM

All this gun grabbing could lead to someone getting shot. Tread lightly government man.

Bmore on January 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

the question should be, how come there are no daily mass shootings in the UK? and the answer is that knives don’t do mass murder.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

3000+ people on 9/11 say otherwise.

besser tot als rot on January 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people injuring 23 with two hand guns. One of which was a 22. Leftists need to just come out and admit they wish to completely ban guns. Go on record.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Man up and admit it you fraud.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

he doesn’t speak for anyone else, and you know it. y’all are focusing on him because he’s such an easy, loathsome target.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Not so, leftoid drone.

Morgan speaks for all of you on the left. Morgan articulates your hatred for freedom and your desire to destroy the United States.

Morgan is not only the face of the leftists…he IS the left.

You may be embarrassed by him – but you can’t escape him. He’s yours…ALL yours.

Solaratov on January 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

What the Republicans need to do after the SOTU is surround themselves with women and children who saved themselves by using firearms in self defense and explaining how they would have been maimed or killed had they not had access to a firearm. Then add a wall of names of those women and children killed by a stalker or ex husbands or boyfriends because of waiting periods for them to get firearms to protect themselves or being unable to get one due to local gun regulations.

AZfederalist on January 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM

All I have to say is, if someone breaks into my home I want something to spray them with.

In a moment of extreme pressure, don’t want to have to depend on being able to aim straight.

Barred on January 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM

All that’s left for our trolls is to post their photos of their fugly selves for the rest of us to laugh at. They’ve got nothing else left.

Christien on January 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Are you advocating infringing the right to keep and bear arms? Because if you are, you should be out there trying to amend the constitution.

besser tot als rot on January 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people injuring 23 with two hand guns. One of which was a 22. Leftists need to just come out and admit they wish to completely ban guns. Go on record.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

I agree, as stated in an earlier comment, this should become part of their election plank for 2014.

DDay on January 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

I think democrats are willing to lose seats if it means less innocent deaths from guns.

nonpartisan on January 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM

What a load of tripe. You certainly have a high opinion of democrats. Is that kind of like the “If it saves just one life” mentality , that justifies almost any ridiculous proposal or power grab some government nutjob can think of. No thanks

Oh, and you can bet that any calculation about losing seats doesn’t involve less innocent deaths, more like less 401K contributions and other bennies.

Please don’t use the words Democrat and Innocent death in the same breath. It is worse than playing civility card.

can_con on January 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

i’m for consistent gun laws. anything else is a product of your fevered imagination.

Reading all your comments one can only conclude that either you’re opposed to gun control because it doesn’t work or you think that the only thing that will work is a nationwide ban. Even allahpundit interpreted your comments this way. As have many others here. I’ts not a strawman when YOU are the one clearly insinuating a nationwide ban.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 4:47 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

What exactly does “consistent” mean in your world, sesqui?

You claim to want to ban rifles to save lives. Many more lives are lost due to murders committed by handguns. Why won’t you propose a handgun ban? Do you hate children?

Good Solid B-Plus on January 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

in the UK they work like a charm
sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Then, WHY does the UK have the highest violent crime rate in the world?

Hmmm?

Solaratov on January 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Total nationwide ban for the win!

Allahpundit on January 25, 2013 at 4:08 PM

; )

Bmore on January 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Perhaps someone at the SOTU address should provide each of the Sandy Hook children in attendance with their own Glock .40 so they can defend themselves in the future. They might not hit anything other than the ceiling but it would take a true maniac to enter a school filled with armed elementary school students.

[Exaggeration Intentional]

IndieDogg on January 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM

All that’s left for our trolls is to post their photos of their fugly selves for the rest of us to laugh at. They’ve got nothing else left.

Christien on January 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM

No, next come the penis pics.

sentinelrules on January 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM

you can draw any conclusion you want, but if you cited any comment of mine that advocates for a total ban on all firearms, you’d be more convincing.

sesquipedalian on January 25, 2013 at 4:50 PM

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people injuring 23 with two hand guns. One of which was a 22. Leftists need to just come out and admit they wish to completely ban guns. Go on record.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Man up and admit it you fraud.

jawkneemusic on January 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

This is the part of the “conversation” were sesq starts evading.

gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5