Milloy: Gun control push aiming at the wrong problems

posted at 8:01 am on February 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

And, for that matter, at the wrong weapons, too.  Washington Post columnist Courtland Milloy has already weighed in once on the necessity of the Second Amendment in recent American history in defense of civil rights.  Yesterday, Milloy related an epiphany he had at a gun range after firing a few rounds through the much-maligned AR-15 when he compared the output to the shotgun Obama used last August in a picture released by the White House over the weekend:

The more I fired the AR-15, the harder it was to pretend that any gun was somehow more dangerous than the person holding it. …

I don’t particularly like the AR-15, although it is one of the most popular rifles in the country. Three million have been sold, according to an NRA researcher. But to define it as an assault rifle because of how it looks — with a pistol grip, adjustable stock, flash suppressor and “high capacity” magazine — is silly.

You want to see a dangerous-looking gun, look at the one President Obama was photographed skeet shooting with at Camp David last summer. That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out. Maybe I hit something; maybe I didn’t. Obama can’t miss. He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

Why ban one and not the other? And once you start banning semiautomatics, where do you stop?

Good question.  Here’s a better one: Does anyone really think that gun-control advocates plan to stop?  The previous “assault weapon” ban didn’t do anything to reduce mass shootings or crime.  The number of gun victims have actually dropped in each of the past five years for which we have data (2007-2011 inclusive), and the number of homicide victims from all rifles is about 3% of all homicide victims.  If one wanted to pursue a useless gun policy, the ban of selected semiautomatic rifles is right in that vacuous wheelhouse.

Milloy argues that we should be addressing the real causes of violence — not the weapons, but the perpetrators.  Unfortunately, that’s where he goes a bit off the rails:

If gun control advocates were truly serious and not just well meaning, they’d be focusing a lot more on education and mental health. For instance, everybody knows that our children are being adversely affected by violent video games. So why aren’t schools deconstructing video games as part of the curriculum, explaining to students how the military uses these same war games to condition troops to kill without remorse?

Show students, frame by frame, how they are being gamed by the gamers and how profits are made by making them mentally ill.

That’s an absurd statement.  Millions of people play these games without making themselves “mentally ill.”  Does it help contribute to a culture where life is devalued?  I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

The kind of deconstructive education Milloy suggests is a very good idea, and it applies to all cultural pressures, especially entertainment.  But that’s not the job of schools, which should be focused on teaching reading, science, history, and language.  That’s the job of parents and faith organizations, and it takes families that are intact, strong, and clear-minded about those influences to do the job.  It would help if government built up that family structure and parental authority rather than undermined it.  If that happened, we might not have as much of an issue with gun crime at all.


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

But we must do something…..

Electrongod on February 6, 2013 at 8:04 AM

Who needs to hunt when you have Walmart…

Electrongod on February 6, 2013 at 8:06 AM

Break out the Air Wick. Trolls are sure to pop in with the same things they said the last twenty gun threads.

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 8:06 AM

I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

I have seen a few games where one probably had some mental issues just playing it.
Hideous

Electrongod on February 6, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Does it help contribute to a culture where life is devalued? I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

Eating a bag of Cheetos won’t make you fat. But it does contribute to it.

itsnotaboutme on February 6, 2013 at 8:08 AM

Another vacuous argument is the “number of gun crimes”, yadda yadda yadda. The problem with that statement is that the overall numbers are skewed. They do NOT, for example, differentiate between various crimes such as murder, robbery and assault, or illegal possession of a firearm by a felon.

If you can dig deep enough into the actual FBI crime statistics, you’ll find that the majority of “gun crimes” are felons in possession of a firearm, and NOT actual crimes of violence.

But then, the leftists have never been known to let the facts get in the way of their agenda.

TKindred on February 6, 2013 at 8:10 AM

Milloy argues that we should be addressing the real causes of violence — not the weapons, but the perpetrators. Unfortunately, that’s where he goes a bit off the rails:
=========================================

Lets talk about Mental Health issues,and speaking of the Chris Kyle episode,Routh was put into a Mental Health Hospital twice,in a few months!

Maybe,if Routh was still committed,this Gawd-Awful event wouldn’t have taken place!

Heads should roll on that one!

Secure the Crazies/NutJobs first!

Le Ugh!

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM

I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

I have seen a few games where one probably had some mental issues just playing it.
Hideous

Electrongod on February 6, 2013 at 8:07 AM

As a special-needs school bus driver, I have one small group of boys I take to a “bad boy” school.
They often brag to each other about their adversarial encounters with the police.
Grand Theft Auto & the like are very popular with the group.
Did the game make them bad?
No.
But it makes it easier for them to be bad.

itsnotaboutme on February 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM

If you can dig deep enough into the actual FBI crime statistics, you’ll find that the majority of “gun crimes” are felons in possession of a firearm, and NOT actual crimes of violence.

But then, the leftists have never been known to let the facts get in the way of their agenda.

TKindred on February 6, 2013 at 8:10 AM

I also wonder how they’re counting those ‘crimes’ where a grade-schooler gets arrested for bringing a toy gun to school. It pointing his finger and saying, Pow!”

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Couldn’t care less about ” gun control”. I care more about the Shamnesty plan to create 11 million new Democrat voters.

celticdefender on February 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM

It=Or

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM

That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out. Maybe I hit something; maybe I didn’t. Obama can’t miss. He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

Even my dogs laughed at this hyperbole; so much fail in so few words.

Bishop on February 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM

MeanWhile…………….

Wall Street Journal ‏@WSJ

Chicago police will no longer physically respond to some non-life-threatening 911 calls. http://on.wsj.com/Y8Tjra
===============================================

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324761004578286413095565762.html?mod=e2tw

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:14 AM

I think it makes total sense to turn over control of our constitutional right to bear arms to an unlected bureaucrat that answers to no one and is immune from legal or ethical review.

It’s worked out so well with the financial industry, the war on poverty, education, housing, energy, transportation and of healtcare. They’ve also done a wonderful job of doing complicated tasks such as the bugget and monitoring the currency.

acyl72 on February 6, 2013 at 8:15 AM

That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out. Maybe I hit something; maybe I didn’t. Obama can’t miss. He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

His heart is in the right place so I won’t say the obvious.

sharrukin on February 6, 2013 at 8:15 AM

******Alert *******

Report: Obama to nominate CEO of REI Sally Jewell to become interior secretary, official says – @washingtonpost

3 mins ago from http://www.washingtonpost.com by editor
====================================================

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-to-nominate-ceo-of-outdoor-equipment-giant-rei-to-become-interior-secretary/2013/02/06/da9d2dcc-7007-11e2-ac36-3d8d9dcaa2e2_story.html

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:16 AM

But Eric Holder says we have to “brainwash” the kids to be against guns, although I think Eric has been brainwashed into thinking he tells the truth.

tim c on February 6, 2013 at 8:20 AM

D’oh

cmsinaz on February 6, 2013 at 8:21 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324761004578286413095565762.html?mod=e2tw

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:14 AM

Hearing this reminds me of the “Springfield emergency hotline” from the Simpsons.

“You have selected, regicide, if you know the name of the king or queen that’s been murdered, press 1 now!

Gatsu on February 6, 2013 at 8:21 AM

I hope and pray that too much time has passed now, and any bill introduced will just look as shameful as we saw it on day one.

Something will get through, no doubt. But I would prefer it to be nothing more than window dressing.

MD however… Who knows what horror they will unleash on us.

Gatsu on February 6, 2013 at 8:23 AM

SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

TX-96 on February 6, 2013 at 8:26 AM

Gun bills introduced during 2013 Legislature
3:50 PM, Feb 5, 2013
********************

ST. PAUL, Minn. – One of the hot button topics at the Minnesota legislature this year is gun control. Many bills have been introduced that address the issues surrounding gun ownership. Here is a list of what will be discussed during the 2013 session as of February 5, 2013.

The following have links to the full bill and include the short description of the bill.
=======================

House:
******

HF 307: Permit to carry application required to be made to a chief of police of a municipality, and if no chief of police, to a county sheriff. Introduced by Simonson.

HF 298: Firearms regulation by local units of government allowed in certain circumstances. Introduced by Dehn, R.

HF 294: Firearms restoration eligibility for persons who have become ineligible and persons who have been denied a permit to carry a handgun judicial challenge processes modified. Introduced by Rosenthal.

HF 285: Firearm lawful possession modified. Introduced by Lesch.

HF 244: Firearm loss or theft false report crime established, crime of transferring firearms to an ineligible person expanded, and a person convicted of these crimes made ineligible to possess a firearm. Introduced by Johnson.

HF 243: Large-capacity magazine crime established for the manufacture, transfer, or possession of ammunition feeding devices with the capacity to accept more than seven rounds or any conversion kit, part, or combination of parts; terms defined; and criminal penalties provided. Introduced by Hausman.

HF 242: Large-capacity magazine crime established for the manufacture, transfer, or possession of ammunition feeding devices with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds or any conversion kit, part, or combination of parts; terms defined; and criminal penalties provided. Introduced by Hausman.

HF 241: Assault weapons; crime established for manufacturing, transferring, or possessing assault weapons; existing assault weapon disposal or registration provided for; terms defined; data classified; language clarified; and penalties provided. Introduced by Hausman.

HF240: Mental health screening improved for persons applying for firearm permits. Introduced by Schoen.

HF 239: Persons who possess guns on private property after being ordered to leave the premises equal penalties established. Introduced by Davnie.

HF 238: Offenders who unlawfully possess firearms on school properties equal penalties established. Introduced by Davnie.

HF237: Pistols and semiautomatic military-style assault weapon transfer and firearm possession eligibility provisions modified, and criminal penalties provided. Introduced by Paymar.

HF 184: Centralized register of individuals who voluntarily wish to be ineligible to purchase firearms for a self-determined period of time maintenance and creation required; acceptance of voluntary surrender of firearms and ammunition from persons on the voluntary register and establishment of procedures for return of the firearms and ammunition upon request by chiefs of police and sheriffs mandated. Introduced by Winkler.

HF 178: Retired peace officers authorized to carry a pistol without a permit, and law enforcement agencies required to issue identification to former officers who qualify to carry without a permit. Introduced by Cornish.

HF 169: Muzzleloader scope use allowed. Introduced by Fabian.

Senate:
*******

SF 236: Firearms safety certificate course of instruction wildlife identification portion online completion authorization. Introduced by Gazelka.

SF 235: Lawful firearms possession and crime of violence modifications. Introduced by Latz.

SF 205: Pistols and semiautomatic military-style assault weapons transfers and possession eligibility; criminal penalty provisions. Introduced by Champion.

SF 109: Laser sights permits use by visually impaired persons authorization. Introduced by Westrom.

SF 083: Scopes on muzzleloaders authorization. Introduced by Ingebritsen.

SF 069: Retired peace officers firearm carry without permit authorization. Introduced by Ingebritsen.

SF 064: Convicted violent felons gun ownership rights restoration authorization. Introduced by Goodwin.

SF 046: Firearms possession restoration for violent felons repeal. Introduced by Goodwin.
======================

http://www.kare11.com/dontmiss/1009573/387/Gun-bills-introduced-during-2013-Legislature

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:27 AM

Good question. Here’s a better one: Does anyone really think that gun-control advocates plan to stop?

Does the Left ever stop?

No, of course not. Every step they take on every issue is just one more on the infinitely long road to Utopia.

That’s one primary reason I’d like to just split the country in half and let the Left have their own country to tinker with continuously. I don’t want to spend my entire life fighting to retain my liberties. I just want the government and all the busybodies of the Left to leave me alone.

Charlemagne on February 6, 2013 at 8:28 AM

That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth.

Haven’t seen too many woolly mammoths around lately. Coincidence? I don’t think so!

2L8 on February 6, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Start immediately executing individuals convicted of first degree murder. Then you will be saying something about the value of innocent life.

bluesdoc70 on February 6, 2013 at 8:31 AM

I find it interesting he wanted schools to teach kids about the bad side of video games.

frode on February 6, 2013 at 8:33 AM

WE the people are the problem to Progressives.

We’re farm animals in their Darwin worshiping worldview. THAT is why they hail anything that debases morality or goodness. They see the drawdown of humanity to animal like behavior as “natural” and mankind rejecting a false view of themselves (foisted on them by that hideous Judeo-Christian religion).

And they believe THEY are the farmers with the electric cattle prod nudging the ignorant into a better pasture. And since we are animals, we can be ultimately treated as such……in re-education camps or even places with names like Bergen-Belsen or Auschwitz.

THAT is what they believe and what they seek with a religious fervor that would make their god proud.

PappyD61 on February 6, 2013 at 8:34 AM

Dems blew this whole issue.

The GOP should slowly and carefully pass some legislation with which all but the kooks will argue. And then point the finger at Dems and O for holding up measures that have a good chance of having a positive effect.

And for good measure, get as many women as possible in front of cameras talking about self-defense.

BuckeyeSam on February 6, 2013 at 8:35 AM

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:14 AM

Hearing this reminds me of the “Springfield emergency hotline” from the Simpsons.

“You have selected, regicide, if you know the name of the king or queen that’s been murdered, press 1 now!

Gatsu on February 6, 2013 at 8:21 AM

Gatsu:Lol:)

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:37 AM

That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth.
Haven’t seen too many woolly mammoths around lately. Coincidence? I don’t think so!

2L8 on February 6, 2013 at 8:28 AM

With the way he was aiming that gun ( and he was aimimg it ) the best he could hope for was to kneecap a mammoth.

Jabberwock on February 6, 2013 at 8:38 AM

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:27 AM

Yah, Alice Hausman is a real piece of work, she represents a St. Paul district so liberal the people who live there actually have blue skin.

Ol’ Alice has been serving since the 80′s and is a lock for reelection every time; it figures she would foist massive and stupid gun control on the rest of Minnesota. I doubt she could properly identify a lone handgun if it were surrounded by knives.

Bishop on February 6, 2013 at 8:39 AM

Milloy argues that we should be addressing the real causes of violence — not the weapons, but the perpetrators. Unfortunately, that’s where he goes a bit off the rails:
=========================================

Lets talk about Mental Health issues,and speaking of the Chris Kyle episode,Routh was put into a Mental Health Hospital twice,in a few months!

Maybe,if Routh was still committed,this Gawd-Awful event wouldn’t have taken place!

Heads should roll on that one!

Secure the Crazies/NutJobs first!

Le Ugh!

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM

And it was a government run V.A. Hospital that turned him loose, against desperate pleas from his family to keep him hospitalized.

The same government that will be running healthcare and want to seize guns. Yay.

tru2tx on February 6, 2013 at 8:45 AM

That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out. Maybe I hit something; maybe I didn’t. Obama can’t miss. He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

His heart is in the right place so I won’t say the obvious.

sharrukin on February 6, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Ok, I will, for the benefit of any HotAirians who aren’t experts.

1. That shotgun of his was big enough to take down a woolly mammoth

Wrong. A woolly mammoth was basically a bigger, shaggier version of an African elephant. Yes, you can kill an elephant with an AK-47; poachers in Kenya do it all the time, by emptying their magazines into the animal, at point-blank, on full-automatic. But to bring an elephant down with one well-placed shot, you need something along the lines of a .458 Winchester, .375 Holland & Holland, or the old.600 Nitro Express. All of which have about three times the muzzle energy of the most powerful loads for a 12-gauge shotgun. And even with them, shot placement (in the heart and lungs, or if you’ve got a good angle, a brain shot) is critical. Less for a “humane kill” than to avoid being made a permanent part of the veldt when the irritated beast decides to stomp you into snail snot before (hopefully) expiring.

2. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out

As Kirk would say, “Wrong again, Oxmyx”. Military assault rifles and their civilian counterparts fire intermediate carttridges, with much less power (foot-pounds of energy) than regular full-powered rifle rounds. The .223 round has about 1,100 FPE at the muzzle; the 7.62 x 39 round of the AK-47, about 1,200 foot-pounds. By comparison, the .308 Winchester aka 7.62 x 51mm NATO has about 2,600 FPE (150-grain bullet at about 2,800 feet-per-second).

The reason for the lower-powered rounds, originally, was to come up with a weapon that could be fired fully-automatic, like a submachine gun, in close-quarters battle, while still having enough power to wound a man badly enough to take him out of the fight at ranges up to 300 to 400 yards. As a bonus (the theory went), the lower recoil forces would make training easier.

The only drawback to this theory is the assumption that wounding an enemy is better than killing him. The idea being that such a wounded man requires stretcher bearers, medical care, etc., and thus is a logistics problem for the enemy. Hand him a lot of dead bodies, he needs body bags; hand him a lot of wounded, and he has a supply problem.

This works very well, on enemies who have organized armies and a “European-American” mindset, which holds that every life is valuable. It doesn’t work very well against enemies who either don’t care if their wounded die, or who have martyrdom complexes.

Which, by the way, accounts for most of the people in the “Arab Crescent” who we’ve been fighting for the last few decades, off and on.

Legally speaking, in most states the .223 round of the AR-15 and the 7.62 round of the AK-type rifles aren’t legal for hunting anything much bigger than a rabbit. Due to insufficient foot-pounds of energy.

The moral is that, once more, a journalist has shown his total ignorance of firearms by trying to write about them. At some point, the profession must learn that knowing nothing of a subject, even one they hate the existence of, is not a point of pride however morally superior it makes them feel.

And PS; if you think reporters are pig-ignorant about guns, compare their writings on “climate change” and nuclear power to any good scientific text on either subject. It’s enough to make you weep.

clear ether

eon

eon on February 6, 2013 at 8:47 AM

He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

Even my dogs laughed at this hyperbole; so much fail in so few words.

Bishop on February 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Bishop:So it appears Hopey has up-graded from a baseball bat!:)

canopfor on February 6, 2013 at 8:51 AM

Obama can’t miss. He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

Well, maybe a blunderbuss…but a $5000 shotgun with a choke? Unlikely.

Unless you are saying the room is the size of a half-bath.

ProfShadow on February 6, 2013 at 8:55 AM

By the way, Don’t know if Obama wears his watch on the left or right wrist. But that watch is a new one for him. Has anybody noticed in any pictures before a watch like the one the ‘subject’ of the photo is wearing?

And isn’t it convenient that the stock of the shotgun is pushed up against the subject’s face (most skeet shooters don’t aim a shotgun like a rifle)and dark sunglasses (which no experienced “all the time” shooter would wear) hide the rest of the face?

I don’t know. I couldn’t swear this was even Obama. Those who would probably still leave cookies and milk out for Santa every Christmas.

kens on February 6, 2013 at 8:55 AM

Aiming? Only a terribly naive soul could ever miss that they’re aiming at disarming the citizenry–their main impediment to absolute control.

Don L on February 6, 2013 at 9:03 AM

As a special-needs school bus driver, I have one small group of boys I take to a “bad boy” school.
They often brag to each other about their adversarial encounters with the police.
Grand Theft Auto & the like are very popular with the group.
Did the game make them bad?
No.
But it makes it easier for them to be bad.

itsnotaboutme on February 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Maybe we’re confusing cause and effect here. Boys who are already bad like those games. It’s the old argument–does skimpy clothes on a girl cause rape? The left would say no to that but they reverse the illogic when they seek to target games–the very same idiots that claimed that Murphy Brown was “just a TV show.” Go figure.

Don L on February 6, 2013 at 9:11 AM

the job of schools, which should be focused on teaching reading, science, history, and language. That’s the job of parents and faith organizations, and it takes families that are intact, strong, and clear-minded about those influences to do the job. It would help if government built up that family structure and parental authority rather than undermined it

…but I’m an Obama voter…and the government IS my family!

KOOLAID2 on February 6, 2013 at 9:12 AM

Eating a bag of Cheetos won’t make you fat. But it does contribute to it.

itsnotaboutme on February 6, 2013 at 8:08 AM

Your RIGHT!!! Only diet soda. 3 meals a day of only diet soda.

WryTrvllr on February 6, 2013 at 9:23 AM

Let’s ask a more fundamental question. What gives the government the right to interfere with legal trade? If I want to buy a T-shirt with a political slogan on it, the 1st Amendment protects my right to wear it. How does the government then have a say in the purchase of items I might use to exercise the 2nd Amendment?

And don’t argue that guns, magazines, and ammunition could potentially harm people and property. Libel and slander are “harmful” and prosecutable. If I commit one of them I suffer the consequence. Exercise of the 2nd Amendment is the only civil right that is enforced preemptively. I MIGHT violate the law, and therefore am limited in my behavior. There are countless other tools available to harm others that are not regulated and registered: marbles, knives, pencils, string, cleaning products….the list is endless.

So gun control must not be about public safety. It is about freedom and the encroachment of tyranny.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on February 6, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Gun control is never about guns.

You learn “gun control” from your grandpa out chuckin’ or at a range or in the service.

Now, for controlling civilians, you make them defenseless.

ProfShadow on February 6, 2013 at 9:31 AM

It is all about the Government (Democrats) controlling every person and every household.
Once the people are afraid and dependent on the government the current government (Democrats) always get re-elected. Fear (of governement) is the campaign theme.

albill on February 6, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Why ban one and not the other? And once you start banning semiautomatics, where do you stop?

You don’t. That’s the whole point. It’s the WHOLE point.

This is a fascinating essay, with its insights into how liberals used to support the 2nd Aendment, and its glimpses into how “gun control” (in California, mainly) has bit-by-bit winnowed down our freedoms around guns.

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2013/02/05/when-did-the-left-fall-out-of-love-with-guns/

rrpjr on February 6, 2013 at 9:46 AM

I’ll grant that the photo shows him “aiming” a shotgun; perhaps he is checking its patterning on some paper. I’d like to see how one gets a gun in Chicago (or Hawaii) after being an admitted drug-user. I hope someone is keeping that nuke football away from him.

trl on February 6, 2013 at 9:48 AM

But that’s not the job of schools, which should be focused on teaching reading, science, history, and language. That’s the job of parents and faith organizations, and it takes families that are intact, strong, and clear-minded about those influences to do the job.

Sort of explains Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis…

Hill60 on February 6, 2013 at 9:56 AM

All of which have about three times the muzzle energy of the most powerful loads for a 12-gauge shotgun.

What about using a slug?

He could clear a room with one double-barreled blast.

Maybe if you had one of those sawed off shotguns with a shorter than legal barrel.

Just sayin’

LoganSix on February 6, 2013 at 10:04 AM

BTW, I could clear the room with a shotgun.

With an AA-12 shotgun. Sure, that might be cheating, but it will do the job.

It could take down a mammoth as well, but it would be a big mess.

LoganSix on February 6, 2013 at 10:06 AM

When people here in Texas ask why I left Minnesota, I’m not at all subtle when explaining my reasons. I loved my home state but not enough to deal with tyrants like this.

Hat Trick on February 6, 2013 at 10:09 AM

House Republicans signal openness to some gun-control measures
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-republicans-signal-openness-to-some-gun-measures/2013/02/05/e56166e8-6fd4-11e2-ac36-3d8d9dcaa2e2_story.html

Why exactly do we need to anything?

Does each massacre mean we have to lose more freedom?

Why do 120 Million innocent people have to be punished each time one of the massacres takes place?

Step 1: A criminal goes nuts in a gun-free zone.
Step 2: Politicians jump in to “Do something!” and chip away at our rights and punish the innocent.
Step 3: Since step 2 did Nothing to actually solve the problem, we go back up to Step 1.

Lather rinse & repeat until all of our rights are gone..

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Again, reviewing POTUS shooting position will cause a Workers Comp Claim for a life long injury to his left shoulder. OH!! My God, that
is the arm he uses to sign spending bills which will be severely slowed to a trickle. Therefore, we must purchase a surplus of auto pens to sign those spending bills far faster ever before.

MSGTAS on February 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM

When will the regime release a picture of the big bruise that the petulant little prince gave himself after firing that rifle with his face jammed into the side of the stock?
Is he shooting some new kind of skeet that is realeased at eye level?

maryo on February 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Ok, I will, for the benefit of any HotAirians who aren’t experts.

[...]

2. When I pulled the trigger on the AR-15, one high-powered round came out

Thanks, eon. An excellent point that I went to make before I saw that you had already done this.

Folks, THERE IS NOTHING “HIGH-POWERED” ABOUT THE AR-15. If only the right people would read this, understand it, and care, and act accordingly….

Ed points out correctly that gun controllers really DON’T care, of course, and they will not stop.

CommonMan on February 6, 2013 at 10:14 AM

As someone who’s been in the gun control fight for a quarter of a century, I’ve got to tell you one thing: This has never been about solving problems. Many variations of gun control have already been tried, and none of the current flock are new. Only about 2% of gun control proposals have any chance of reducing violence, and more than half have a history of contributing to it.

It’s all about scaring people to vote Democrat, consolidating power in the government and dependency in the citizenry, and pandering to the liberal base. Actually solving the problem of violence is so far down the list it’s almost invisible.

And that’s typical of how Democrats work on any issue.

Socratease on February 6, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Own a gun? Time to buy violence liability insurance, California Democrats say
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/05/own-gun-time-to-buy-violence-insurance-california-democrats-say/

Isn’t this just a Tax on gun ownership?

Didn’t Wayne LaPierre tell us that there are only two reason to register guns – to tax or to take them?

Here’s a better idea – why not a tax or liability requirement on politicians that perpetrates all kinds of these bad ideas?

We could start with the ‘safe-schools’ act that made them into gun free zones – yeah that worked real well didn’t it?

Every pol in Illinois should be liable for the carnage from their stupid idea on civilian disarmament – they pass their laws and get away with not having to face the consequences of their dumb ideas.

This needs to stop – instead of just ‘doing something –anything’ without thinking, politicians should have to pay the price of their stupidly.

They would far more deliberative and thoughtful in their actions if 5 – 10 Years down the road they get sued for some of their laws they rush thought without thinking.

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

eon on February 6, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Bravo Zulu

Cricket624 on February 6, 2013 at 10:34 AM

eon on February 6, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Excellent post. That’s why I’ve argued (for years) the military leave the assault rifle behind and go for battle rifles, instead.

Turtle317 on February 6, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Logic is not the only thing in a knot with this one.

Bmore on February 6, 2013 at 10:38 AM

What evidence is there that violence in media and video games desensitizes us? World War 1 and 2 and the Civil War happened before all that. What Rome did to its enemies and in the Games (animals would even rape people then eat them) was all before that. Its an allegation without any logic behind it. The world has become way less violent since WW2 as violent media has arose. At the same time, the #1 reason for non-organized crime is BOREDOM amongst men 16-25. Guess who plays the most video games? Men 16-25 – giving them something to do rather than out on the street bored thinking up crimes they should commit.

hayekorbust on February 6, 2013 at 10:43 AM

That’s an absurd statement. Millions of people play these games without making themselves “mentally ill.” Does it help contribute to a culture where life is devalued? I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

With all “due” respect Ed, you are such a Pollyanna. Hyperbole is good when fighting the left’s hyperbole.

Vince on February 6, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Liability insurance for gun ownership? Why–so a criminal or his family can sue the homeowner’s carrier and make money when he gets blasted for committing a crime?

Well, I always said that liberals coddle criminals. Now they want them to be paid, too, if they suffer the consequences. Typical…

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Liability insurance for gun ownership? Why–so a criminal or his family can sue the homeowner’s carrier and make money when he gets blasted for committing a crime?

Well, I always said that liberals coddle criminals. Now they want them to be paid, too, if they suffer the consequences. Typical…

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Yes, they want to do that, but it’s even worse – they will use this as cudgel against the innocent from defending themselves.

And when they make that Tax so high that no one has gun and the criminals run rampant, shouldn’t the politician who foisted this on the people be held liable for the carnage?

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:54 AM

If you can dig deep enough into the actual FBI crime statistics, you’ll find that the majority of “gun crimes” are felons in possession of a firearm, and NOT actual crimes of violence.

But then, the leftists have never been known to let the facts get in the way of their agenda.

TKindred on February 6, 2013 at 8:10 AM

The other thing I found by digging deep into the stats by metropolitan area was that the worst areas (Chicago, DC, etc) actually have poor reliability concerning reporting of violent crime. When there is a note by the Chicago rape stats saying that not all precincts report rapes, I think you have an even bigger problem. How can you fix a problem when those charged with that cover up the depth of the problem?

dominigan on February 6, 2013 at 10:56 AM

And when they make that Tax so high that no one has gun and the criminals run rampant, shouldn’t the politician who foisted this on the people be held liable for the carnage?

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:54 AM

I would think so, though it’ll never happen. The politicians will never vote for it. And, certainly, some judge or panel will declare it unconstitutional.

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Why exactly do we need to anything?

Does each massacre mean we have to lose more freedom?

Why do 120 Million innocent people have to be punished each time one of the massacres takes place?

Step 1: A criminal goes nuts in a gun-free zone.
Step 2: Politicians jump in to “Do something!” and chip away at our rights and punish the innocent.
Step 3: Since step 2 did Nothing to actually solve the problem, we go back up to Step 1.

Lather rinse & repeat until all of our rights are gone..

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Actually we DO need to do something… abolish “gun-free zones” as an obvious un-Constitutional infringement on our right to bear arms. Start by allowing concealed carry by teachers/staff as the first step.

dominigan on February 6, 2013 at 11:00 AM

My wife got a GroupOn to go shooting a couple of weeks back. The range had a variety of weapons to shoot, so you could try a lot of different guns to see what you liked best.

We shot a Ruger Single Six single action revolver, a Ruger GP100 double action revolver, a Sig Sauer P250 Compact, a Winchester 12-guage pump action shotgun, a Baretta Cx4 Storm carbine and a AR-15 variant. All except the Baretta carbine and the Shotgun were chambered in 22LR.

I had a great time with all of them. They were easy to handle and I was on target with everything.

My wife, on the other hand, had a hard time with the revolvers and she did not even take all of her shots with the shotgun. The revolvers were too heavy for her to hold steady on target. The shotgun beat her up so bad she still has a bruise on her arm two weeks later. She liked the Sig compact, but had a hard time racking the slide.

She did pretty well with the Baretta Cx4 storm, which was chambered in .40 caliber. The recoil was managable but the length of pull was a little long for her to get comfortable.

What really worked well for her was the AR-15. It had a telescoping stock and pistol grip and foregrip, so she could get a real good hold of the weapon and hold it steady. She had a bit of a time figuring out the ghost ring sights, but once she did, she was putting them right through the center of the target. The recoil from the 22LR was non-existant, but the instructor told me that the recoil from a larger round is also very easy to manage.

Of all the guns there, if I were to pick out a gun for home defense for my wife to use, I would pick the AR-15 chambered in .223 with the 30 round magazine, pistol grip, foregrip, telescoping stock and open sights. She could pick up that gun and be very effective.

But if you look at the gun they want to ban, it is the AR-15 chambered in .223 with the 30 round magazine, pistol grip, foregrip and telescoping stock. The very features that make a rifle an “Assault Weapon” are the features that make it easy for a woman to handle.

This should be a feminist issue. I can use just about any gun in the safe, because they were all designed for me. But a woman has a much more limited selection, and now the gun banners want to take one of the best choices away.

Haiku Guy on February 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM

eon on February 6, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Agree with another poster… excellent analysis!

dominigan on February 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Why do 120 Million innocent people have to be punished each time one of the massacres takes place?

Step 1: A criminal goes nuts in a gun-free zone.
Step 2: Politicians jump in to “Do something!” and chip away at our rights and punish the innocent.
Step 3: Since step 2 did Nothing to actually solve the problem, we go back up to Step 1.

Lather rinse & repeat until all of our rights are gone..

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Actually we DO need to do something… abolish “gun-free zones” as an obvious un-Constitutional infringement on our right to bear arms. Start by allowing concealed carry by teachers/staff as the first step.

dominigan on February 6, 2013 at 11:00 AM

YES! Your are so correct:

Bill Introduced To Repeal ‘Gun-Free School Zones Act’ Because Deadly Mass Shootings Up Five-Fold Under It
http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/bill-introduced-repeal-gun-free-school-zones-act-because-deadly-mass-shootings

H.R.35 — Safe Schools Act of 2013 (Introduced in House – IH)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.R.35:

To restore safety to America’s schools.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Safe Schools Act of 2013′.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings- Congress finds–
(1) that the Supreme Court has found language nearly identical to the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ to be unconstitutional;
(2) that the enactment of the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ has been met with an almost uninterrupted series of horrific and tragic shootings at Columbine, Newtown and in other American schools;
(3) that the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ has been a deadly failure. According to research by GeorgiaCarry.org, in the 22 years prior to enactment of the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ there were two school shootings in which four or more people were intentionally murdered in a short period of time, and in the 22 years after the enactment of the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ there have been 10 such school shootings;
(4) that American schools had not been plagued with this succession of horrific shootings prior to the enactment of the `Gun Free School Zones Act’;
(5) that horrific massacres on school campuses in Pearl, Mississippi, and southwestern Virginia, were averted by armed staff and students;
(6) that none of the murderers in any of these horrific school shootings were deterred by the fact that, in addition to murder, gun possession was also illegal in those locations; and
(7) that the reason that the `Gun Free School Zones Act’ has made American schools unsafe is that shooters now know that they can victimize American school campuses with no fear that victims will be armed.
(b) Purpose- It is the purpose of this Act to restore safety to America’s schools by allowing staff, teachers, and administrators to defend the children and themselves.

SEC. 3. SAFE SCHOOLS.
Subsection (q) of section 922 of Title 18, United States Code, is repealed.

Colbyjack on February 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Not only a Pollyanna, but almost as ungrounded in the issue as Jazz Shaw. Morrissey utters reporter-like pablums instead of the fact-filled damnations the blogosphere audience looks for – which is after all why people are here, instead of seeking bland regurgitations of beltway / msm groupthink. Reaching at most for tepid exit lines in a weak bid to be edgy.

Look, Feinstein said herself – on camera and now on YouTube – in 1995 that if she could have mustered 51 votes for it in the senate, her 94 bill would have taken EVERYTHING. The disarmament leaders in all their incestuous organizations / brandings have said the same. And we all damn well OUGHT to know that registration invariably leads to confiscation and then genocide. So enough with the weak sauce, mr Morrissey.

rayra on February 6, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Mass shootings occurred more frequently after we magnanimously opened the mental institutions in the 1980′s.

But don’t look for any politicians to go there.

GarandFan on February 6, 2013 at 11:25 AM

and dark sunglasses (which no experienced “all the time” shooter would wear)
kens on February 6, 2013 at 8:55 AM

I beg to differ……………….

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc85/Mamba1-0/Stet/SOCOMAfghanistan.jpg

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc85/Mamba1-0/Stet/gum.jpg

Solaratov on February 6, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Lather rinse & repeat until all of our rights are gone..

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Only the rights of the law-abiding.

Solaratov on February 6, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Liability insurance for gun ownership? Why–so a criminal or his family can sue the homeowner’s carrier and make money when he gets blasted for committing a crime?

Well, I always said that liberals coddle criminals. Now they want them to be paid, too, if they suffer the consequences. Typical…

Liam on February 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

They want to make sure that the gun owners are held responsible for injuries from their guns. This will make lots of gun owners think twice about keeping a firearm. Many, many years ago I use to have big cookouts with lots of drinking. Then MA passed some sort of law that made me libel for any actions or accidents committed by one of my guests. This put an end to any drinking at my cookouts which pretty much stopped me having them. I wasn’t the only one that stopped having parties and cookout because of this law. They are hoping for the same thing with this insurance mandate which is being pushed in MA also. They know very well it will not stop crime in any way but, they know full well that lots of people will disarm in fear of having their lives ruined with lawsuits because somebody was hurt with one of their firearms.

Dr. Frank Enstine on February 6, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Lather rinse & repeat until all of our rights are gone..

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Only the rights of the law-abiding.

Solaratov on February 6, 2013 at 11:34 AM

You’ve got that right.

Why do you think gun control is real popular with Criminals and Communists?

Private and public thieves love it when their victims are disarmed.

Galt2009 on February 6, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Colbyjack on February 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM

What we need is a law that says any property with public access that establishes a “gun-free zone” — school, office, church, shopping mall, theater, etc. — has to also provide: 1) secure firearm storage for concealed carry permit holders, and 2) armed security.

Socratease on February 6, 2013 at 12:07 PM

That’s an absurd statement. Millions of people play these games without making themselves “mentally ill.” Does it help contribute to a culture where life is devalued? I’d say yes, but let’s not make the bogus argument that playing these games produces mental illness.

Do you say yes because of studies and evidence or because you have a gut feeling that it’s the case.

I have spent extensive time playing most of the games that get brought up in these discussions (including the Grand Theft Auto series).

I also feed stray cats, take care of birds with broken wings until they can be released, advocate for orphans with special needs and so on. Would I be a ‘less violent’ person if I hadn’t played these games?

Now, I realize I’m an experiment of one (which is not a great sample size), but, my point is that my ‘gut’ would tell me something different than your gut (which is why guts aren’t that great for science and policy making).

That aside, there have been some studies done that have shown a correlation between playing violent video games and increased aggression, some that show play aggression is increased (e.g. more likely to wrestle with a friend) while violent aggression is decreased (hypothesis is that boys that used to work out aggression playing team sports now work it out playing video games) and some that show an increase in cooperation (after violent video games played as a squad instead of played as every man for himself).

Not really sure what conclusion to draw except that more study should be done before people start pointing fingers at video games and violence.

JadeNYU on February 6, 2013 at 12:27 PM

For instance, everybody knows that our children are being adversely affected by violent video games. So why aren’t schools deconstructing video games as part of the curriculum, explaining to students how the military uses these same war games to condition troops to kill without remorse?

Show students, frame by frame, how they are being gamed by the gamers and how profits are made by making them mentally ill.

Is he serious, or is this a clumsy reductio?

Baerwulf on February 6, 2013 at 12:31 PM


What we need is a law that says any property with public access that establishes a “gun-free zone” — school, office, church, shopping mall, theater, etc. — has to also provide: 1) secure firearm storage for concealed carry permit holders, and 2) armed security.

Socratease on February 6, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Yes, they need to have to pay the price for disarming the law-abiding on their premises.

Colbyjack on February 6, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Gun control push aiming at the wrong problems

That’s assuming you think you know which problem they’re aiming at.
If the Dems want to disarm the US population so they can take total dictatorial control of the country, then gun control is aiming at exactly the right problem as they see it.

dentarthurdent on February 6, 2013 at 2:07 PM

Doesn’t look like a 4″ chambered coach gun full of 00. If you try to clear my room with birdshot, better aim straight for my face, and pray to God I’m not wearing polymer eye-wear. Deafness and a stinging bloody rash wouldn’t keep me from breaking the stock off over your skull. A flash grenade and a bat would work better.

(Please don’t flash and club me, just take my word for it.)/

S. D. on February 6, 2013 at 7:01 PM

I just want to point out that the video games he was talking about wasn’t ‘Mario Kart’ or ‘WoW’, but what LtColn. Dave Grossman calls ‘murder simulators’. Games where you use modern weapons to kill realistic avatars of human beings using military/para-military tactics. Games which not only mimic, but are actually superior to, official Military and Police simulators used to train soldiers and cops to take lives. There has been quite a bit of scientific research that backs up the assertion that those types of games can make it much easier for a person to be able to take a life. Hence the term ‘murder simulators’. Research such as measuring brain waves of gamers, and even mapping their brains with MRIs while playing and at rest.

wolfva on February 7, 2013 at 5:59 AM