As if any more proof was needed about how screwed up this nation is when it comes to guns, this will somehow be portrayed as controversial or hard-hitting:
Hell, handguns aren’t useful for anything other than killing people, let alone the damned clip. No one hunts deer with a Glock.
mclaren
Not true. You can pistol-whip people with a gun too.
See?
Guns are useful for all kinds of fun activities, and should be made available to young children as well as adults.
Martin
Yeah, well wait until 32 deer break into your house and starts raping your family. Then you’ll be sorry you didn’t have that extended mag.
dr. bloor
Of course not. That’s what RPG’s are for.
And you’ll pry mine from my cold, dead hands.
Just Some Fuckhead
I shoot beer bottles with my pistols, but yeah, that’s just funnin around while I’m waiting to kill someone.
Li
So, what are we going to do with all of the millions of clips that are already out there? They will be grandfathered in, just like fully automatic weapons were. If that episode is a nominal example, A) Criminals that want such clips will have them and B) Rich people will end up better armed than poor people, because those clips will become hot commodities.
But, I guess whether doing something like this will have any actual positive effect is not the real point. Let’s just fuel the rights paranoid fantasies about confiscations, while spending valuable political capital and scarce funds to accomplish nothing. Sounds like a typical Democratic strategy, actually. Winning!
Failure, Inc.
I am for a very liberal (in the classic sense of the term) interpretation of the second amendment, but if you can’t get the job done with ten bullets, you’ve got no business owning or firing a gun in the first place.
cleek
you can use a .22 pistol to shoot rattlesnakes, if you’re out fishing. that’s what my grandfather used as his excuse for carrying his whenever he took me out.
i’m glad i never got to see him shoot a pistol at a snake sitting on a rock. sounds ricocheterrifying.
Roger Moore
Some people do hunt game with pistols. Some of them are even crazy enough to hunt bears that way. They even keep different records for the largest game brought down with a pistol vs. a long gun. OTOH, I think they’re more likely to use a .44 Magnum or .454 Casul when hunting bear rather than a Glock.
Dave
Y’know…if the Right is all about “original intent”, why not point out that the well-regulated militias of the time only carried muskets or rifles, and not pistols. Pistols were for officers as a sign of rank.
So you get to keep your long guns. But you have to give the hand-cannon with the 35-shot clip full of armor-piercing bullets back.
Chris
People ask me how I do it and I say there’s nothing to it!
You just stand there looking cute, and when something moves, you shoot!
And there’s ten stuffed heads in my trophy room right now
Two game wardens, seven hunters, and a cow.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
handguns are like facebook, log in, or load one, and all those high school memories come flooding back.
Failure, Inc.
@Li: Not so much. During the 10 years or so that they were banned, there were so many of them floating around out there that they cost no more than a legal ten-shot clip did.
There are even more now.
eemom
no h/t to Lynyrd Skynyrd? Jeez, Cole. You never give ANYBODY a h/t.
cleek
IMO, clip bans are silly.
a standard clip holds more than enough rounds to cause huge tragedy, when used by a crazy person.
Villago Delenda Est
@eemom:
I was going to start reeling off “Saturday Night Special” lyrics, but now that seems a bit excessive.
Handguns are made for killin’
They ain’t no good for nothin’ else
I think that will do :)
superking
I think you have never heard of Monster Pig: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275524,00.html
(It appears to have been photoshopped. http://66.226.75.96/pig/ )
Corner Stone
@Failure, Inc.:
You’re wrong on this. The 10 shot clip for the HK USP .40 was about $20, and the 13 shot was about $50.
bemused
A small town newspaper here prints an insert with photos of area pets. I was checking out the latest insert for interesting pet names when I came upon a Lab named Glock. I wondered who would name their sweet faced dog Glock but then thought there are probably a lot of dogs named Glock owned by gun nuts out there.
greenergood
@Chris: A long time ago, I knew a guy who was a game warden at a nature reserve on Lake Ontario in W. NY State. You could get a permit in the fall for 6 deer. He swore blind that one day a hunter drove out of the reserve with 5 deer and an Old English sheepdog tied to the top of his pick-up.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
It’s funny but out here in red, rurl Misery, the bubbas all have shitloads of long barreled guns. And if they could easily purchase fully automatic things like an AK-47, they would.
But pistols? Weenies own pistols.
Now drive 2 hours east to the red STL burbs and all those bigoted Repups have a houseload of…pistols. Probably because they feel threatened by the hordes of brown people still stuck in the city proper getting ready to take the buses out to their neighborhoods to rob their houses and rape their wimmin’ folk. The only think keeping them at bay is the house full of guns…and the fact the buses don’t go out that far.
ant
incorrect. Target practice is a sport. And Glock pistols are very nice guns for it.
Gun control is a losing battle for dems, and Obama will have none of it.
He prolly love this ad, so he can ignore it, and shore up his “centrist” bullshit.
cyntax
@cleek:
Yeah, but reloading is when you have the chance to run away/jump the guy. That’s how they got Jared Loughner to the ground. So more reloads mean more chances.
Villago Delenda Est
The logistics of handgun confiscation make any notion that it would ever happen laughable.
But most gun nuts have no idea what “logistics” means, so they run with the meme anyways.
geg6
@Dave:
I have made this very argument to the gun nuts I know many times. At which point, they suddenly have no interest in “original intent.”
FTR, we have guns, I grew up with guns, and I used to hunt. I just don’t have and didn’t have (nor did any of the men who taught me to shoot and took me hunting) any desire to prove how badass I am by how many shots I could get off in 30 seconds nor did I ever hunt with a pistol. Pretty hard to get a deer or a turkey or a duck with a pistol, IMHO. That’s what long guns are for.
Failure, Inc.
@ant:
Damn straight, best one there is.
In what world? Glocks are shit. My Ruger 22/45 can hit a dime at 50 yards.
Both unbelievably true. And the Dems better stay wise about the subject.
trollhattan
The California DFHs are continuing their goal of zero NRA campaign donations.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/04/am-alert-new-push-for-open-car.html
Also, too, related to JC’s drone attack f*ckups (post, not personally committed) from yesterday, it’s not just for the locals now.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014751530_apususafghanistanfriendlyfire.html
Somebody needs to rein in these guys, pronto.
John Cole
@eemom: What are you talking about?
Paul in KY
@Corner Stone: Oooh, who’s the big ladeeda with his pricy HK. Whatsamatter, a good Taurus or Ruger not good enough for you ;-)
MikeJ
@cleek:
The guy who shot Giffords had a 33 round mag and fired until he had to reload. While reloading, he dropped the spare mag and a bystander grabbed it.
That day would have still been tragic, but probably less so if he had tried to reload after 10 shots instead of 33.
Just Some Fuckhead
FYI, best to use a long gun to hunt people. Handguns are mostly for self-defense.
Mike Nardozzi
I am the last person to argue on the side of the NRA, but there is an important aspect of original intent being missed here.
The Second Amendment is not about hunting or personal defense. It is about keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, against whatever foe is bringing the threat of violence to The People. Arguments can be made as to what a “well regulated militia” is, and whether that role properly sits with the citizenry today.
The fact remains, when you talk about clip size and hunting permits, you are talking right past the other side of this argument. Guns Rights people want to be able to fight off their own government, should it become necessary.
Crazy or not…we should at least be having the same argument. We say registration and training are sensible precautions…they see government lists of “agitators”.
There is a fundamental disagreement as to whether or not the government should hold an absolute monopoly on the threat of violence.
Corner Stone
@cyntax: He failed at situational awareness. He probably never practiced a tac reload in his life.
Omnes Omnibus
I know people in northern Wisconsin who carry a handgun (usually a large caliber revolver) because they spend a lot of time in the woods and may encounter bears. Most of them also carry pepper spray and know how not to piss off a bear in the first place. This is, of course, an exception to the general rule. Guns are made for killing and and handguns are made specifically for killing other people.
Norwonk
The Norwegian government won’t let me buy a flintlock musket unless I join a gun club, but you Americans can buy this shit at the mall?
Somewhere, there’s got to be a reasonable middle ground…
trollhattan
@Omnes Omnibus:
Ain’t no griz in Wisconsin, what are they a’skeert of?
Tsulagi
Oh, I dunno. At a range I use, sometimes with friends or an available mark we shoot at poker targets for best hand. Loser pays range fees.
@cleek: I’d go with that. Plus for more rounds in addition to extra standard magazines you could carry more than one handgun. However, if for some banning extended magazines would make them feel like they’ve really done something to make America safe, works for me. Don’t need them and high capacity magazines are more likely to jam.
Jim C.
@Failure, Inc.:
Quote of the day on your ten bullet theory. Well played sir.
Joe Beese
Congratulations, Mr. Cole. You just made the front page of the GOS.
Corner Stone
@Paul in KY: Didn’t say I owned one. I just spent a lot of time at gun shows cruising for chicks. Nothing better than a crazy woman.
Martin
@Corner Stone: Hypotheticals aside, what happened is what happened. The inventory of mass shootings with handguns is pretty small, and they consistently end during reload. We can pretend that everyone is Jason Bourne and that in theory clip size doesn’t matter at all, or we can extrapolate from what actually happens and what the police observe and say that there is significant evidence that small clips reduces the magnitude of these kinds of tragedies.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
How dare you impugn my fetish? I demand an apology right now. I’ll be
posing naked withcleaning my gun while I wait.Punchy
@cleek: Wait….rattlesnakes can swim?
cleek
@MikeJ:
sure.
but couldn’t the same argument (bigger clips = longer times between reloads = more dead) be used to justify a ban on all guns capable of holding more than a single shot ?
Tsulagi
Previous comment in moderation. Of course. One thing I would ban is lame spam/moderation filters.
cleek
@Punchy:
yes, they can swim.
but we were trout fishing – standing on the banks of shallow, rocky, streams or lakes. no boats for us.
trollhattan
@Corner Stone:
Uh, an unarmed crazy woman?
Rick
That was a full-bred Guernsey cow.
Paul in KY
@Mike Nardozzi: I think for that to really work nowadays, we would have to allowed to buy 120mm smoothbore cannons and anti-aircraft missiles, etc. etc.
kdaug
@Mike Nardozzi: Disband the standing army, then we’ll talk.
WereBear
I believe if we armed the wildlife, that would settle a lot of this.
Paul in KY
@Norwonk: If you join a WW I re-enactors club, you can get a permit for a nice modern bolt action rifle. Better to have than a flintlock musket.
If that first musket ball doesn’t bring down that charging moose or laplander, you’ll get to reload under pressure.
Moonbatman
High-capacity gun magazines are the weapons of choice for the deranged, weapons of mass destruction and only useful for murdering people.
Which is why Law Enforcement must have an exemption from the Ban.
The Ban must also have Grandfather clause because confiscating the magazines will stir up the evil Gun Lobby and their wingnut dupes.
Peace Out The Power is Yours.
cleek
@Mike Nardozzi:
i think you’ll get a lot of disagreement there. most importantly, the Supreme Court disagrees (Heller).
Corner Stone
@trollhattan: What is life without a little spice?
Are we mice to die in a rocking chair on our property, surrounded by lifelong friends and beloved family??
Or are we men, to chance the occasional lead poisoning from a batshit jealous lover? And the awesome makeup sex after you bail her out?
I know what I choose! Sexytime!
Paul in KY
@Corner Stone: I was just messin with you. I would own one, if they didn’t cost so damned much.
You are correct on the womens.
FormerSwingVoter
@Corner Stone:
Amen. Every guy should date a crazy woman at some point. The sex is worth it… until one day it’s not.
Paul in KY
@Punchy: I think that generally any non-bird creature less than a monkee or lemur can ‘swim’ (dog paddle enough to keep afloat) for at least a little ways across a body of water.
Could be wrong on that.
blahblahblah
Who would hunt deer with a Glock? Low stopping power. Give me a .44 caliber Magnum. It’ll blow that deer’s head clean off! So, you’ve got to ask yourself a question Bamby, DO YOU FEEL LUCKY! Well, punk – DO YOU!?!?!
Martin
@Corner Stone: Offer them a breast exam and pap smear at the show. It’ll help filter in the crazy ones, and give Fox something to talk about for a few days.
eemom
can someone else explain to John Cole what a h/t is?
And who Lynyrd Skynyrd are?
I’m getting too old for this stuff.
kthxbai
Corner Stone
@Punchy: They can swim like all hell’s breaking loose.
Catsy
First thing: it’s not a clip, it’s a magazine. They are different things. Just because it’s a common mistake doesn’t make it less erroneous.
Also, too: gun control is a losing issue for Dems. Period. Restricting high-capacity mags isn’t a bad idea, but I wouldn’t invest a lot of political capital in it right now–it just gives the Repubs more ammunition and alienates gun-friendly independents at a time when we need to focus on getting the insane teabaggers out of office.
We would be better off co-opting the issue from the Republicans. Change the narrative from “gun control” to “gun safety”, and focus on related initiatives that even the NRA will have trouble opposing such as firearms safety courses and improved background checks at gun shows. We’ll never win over the hardcore nuts whose gun fetishism is intertwined with their party loyalty, but we’ll drive a wedge into one of the GOP’s core voting blocs and accomplish some good in the process.
geg6
@cleek:
Again, I have made this argument with my gun nut friends, family, and acquaintances many times, ad nauseum.
And again, they brush it off with a “oh, that was just meant for colonial times, that militia stuff and it’s modern times and the n_____s and s____s will have us outgunned if we don’t all have the equivalent of a SWAT arsenal in our homes.”
So the Court was just verifying the wingnut not-so-very-original-intentish meme.
(Sorry, but I don’t use those words IRL and I simply can’t bring myself to even type them. Suffice it say that they are derogatory terms for African Americans and Hispanics).
brianb99c
@John Cole: Your original post paraphrased a lyric from the song “Saturday Night Special”.
“It’s the Saturday night special
got a barrel that’s blue and cold
ain’t good for nothin
but put a man six feet in a hole”
best verse in song….
“Hand guns are made for killin’,
they ain’t no good for nothin’ else.
And if you like to drink your whiskey
you might even shoot yourself.
So why don’t we dump ’em people
to the bottom of the sea
before some ol’ fool come around here,
wanna shoot either you or me.”
Nowadays Skynard would be to liberal to be considered Southern Rock. I cannot imagine our centrist prez ever suggesting dumping them gun nuts to the bottom of the sea. Maybe we need a burned out southern rocker to run against BO….what is Jim Dandy doing these days?
singfoom
I’m as socially liberal as they come, but I don’t get shit like this either. Has anyone here ever modified a clip?
Go ahead, ban high capacity clips. Those who really want them will take multiple normal clips, some tinkering, and voila, high capacity clips.
Not a battle I think we should even fight. It’s a losing culture war front and it only antagonizes people who care about guns a lot.
Moonbatman
@MikeJ:
Liar !!!1!!!
Lawrence O’Donnell tells the true story.
Peace Out. The Power is Yours.
Nemo_N
We all need guns because everybody else has a gun.
RosiesDad
@cleek: I am with you on this. The vast majority of people who buy/own guns–for sport, self defense or just because they like collecting guns–are not a problem. It’s the crazy, unstable people who need to be prevented from buying guns.
Further, banning high capacity clips is a window dressing issue because a skilled/trained person can change magazines in seconds. Loughner dropped his spare magazine because he is a deranged but unskilled person. Who should not have been able to buy a gun in the first place.
kdaug
@Joe Beese:
Oh, shit. Here comes the troll brigade.
First Sully, and now GOS? C’mon people, keep it down. Can’t we just have a nice quiet conversation amongst ourselves?
ottnott
@ 31. Mike Nardozzi
Not true.
The “Guns Rights people” play it all 3 ways:
–personal defense, when arguing for the right to carry concealed and to carry everywhere (schools, churches, political rallies, bars, etc)
–citizen militia, when arguing for assault rifles, large-capacity clips, cop-killer bullets, and so on
–hunting, when talking about guns and kids, or when talking to the gun-wary in general
The net result is that the US can brag that it has the best-armed paranoids on the planet.
D-Chance.
Never trust a man who can’t distinguish between snake species. Rattlesnakes =/= water moccasins.
BTW, I have no problem banning guns. Worthless pieces of phallic equipment.
cyntax
@Corner Stone:
Good point. Have you seen any of the Archer series on FX? Kind of send-up of both spy movies and office comedies. The main character (Sterling Archer) mentions situational awareness all the time:
Lana: Okay, that was a fluke.
Sterling: Yeah, a fluke of nature. Because I happen to have perfect situational awareness, Lana. Which cannot be taught, by the way. Like a poet’s … mind for … to make the perfect words.
stuckinred
they are magazines people, magazines
Paul in KY
@singfoom: I don’t think it’s quite that easy, unless you have a well stocked machine shop. I wouldn’t want anyone not a excellent gunsmith to mess with my magazines.
RosiesDad
@singfoom:
Agreed. The battles we should fight are to keep crazy people from having access to guns and to close the gun show loophole (that exempts sellers at gun shows from having to run buyers through the Fed. Instacheck system). These are battles that can be won and that would make a difference, IMO.
soonergrunt
@cyntax:
That’s about it.
singfoom
@stuckinred: Alright, magazine and clip was always interchangeable for me, but if you’re that upset about it…..
@Paul in KY:
Agreed. I never said it was simple. My only anecdote was of my grandfather, who was a gunsmith….and it looked relatively simple to me when he did it, but he did have a nice machine shop…..
All I’m saying is that it’s a stupid thing to ban because it’s just a feel good thing to those who don’t like guns, and an annoyance to those who do.
FlipYrWhig
@singfoom:
Right. There are some battles that are politically unwinnable even if they have merit. This kind of thing happens a lot. Politicians adapt and voters do as well.
cleek
@geg6:
with all due respect, and for better or for worse, your opinion does not carry quite the same weight as the SCOTUS.
right now, ferreals, no doubt about it, people in the USA have an individual right to bear arms (which is why i’ve started growing out my nails and soaking my arms in brand-name hair-growth solutions).
Mnemosyne
@Mike Nardozzi:
I’m not quite sure how you think we’re supposed to build a persuasive argument with people that you freely admit are irrational and can’t be reasoned with.
Interesting how this keeps cropping up over and over again when dealing with conservatives. We can’t have a rational discussion about health care because they think the government is going to set up death panels, and nothing can persuade them otherwise. We can’t have a rational discussion about global warming because they think there’s a conspiracy to fake all of the evidence. We can’t have a rational discussion about financial reform or the increasing power of corporations because they think it’s the first step to communist collectivization. We can’t increase taxes during the worst recession since the 1930s because taxation is theft.
This country is going to collapse because there are too many urgent issues that need adult discussion, but the other side is completely incapable of it.
Jager
Is the shooter in the video a liberal? If he is, the wingers certainly have something to think about.
MikeJ
@Moonbatman: How is what I said a lie? My source said he dropped it[1], you source said he didn’t. So what? Either way, he was stopped when he had to reload. With a smaller magazine, there would be fewer dead people.
[1]
You want me to believe MSNBC instead of the person who picked up the magazine?
kdaug
@soonergrunt: Especially if they’re too dumb to count rounds, and left the chamber empty after the mag.
That’s prime jumpin’ time.
Hermione Granger-Weasley
I’m torn.
I have a ruger semi with a 16 shot clip.
its mad fun at the range.
But I grew up in a family with 2 skeet launchers, and we had a pretty strict gun control protocol.
I dunno.
jibeaux
by this logic, if I wanted to build my own nuclear bomb, I could. My government has nukes, last I checked.
cleek
@D-Chance.:
not sure what that has to do with anything. rattlesnakes swim just fine.
jibeaux
@jibeaux:
And, frankly, if you wanted to actually fight off your own government, that’s about what it would take. Unless you can recreate Iraq or Afghanistan over there in North Dakota.
kdaug
@jibeaux: Don’t have to go that far – how about a constitutional right to own a SAM?
Mnemosyne
@Catsy:
And yet the NRA does oppose those things. They’ve fought for years to prevent background checks at gun shows and only grudgingly accepted the inadequate ones we have now. They don’t want gun locks sold with handguns. And I’ve seen their “safety” program for kids. It pretty much consists of, “Don’t touch and tell an adult.” (Which sounds oddly like an abstinence only sex education program, but anyway …)
Again, if we were dealing with a rational opponent with whom we could have a rational discussion, that would be great. We don’t. We have to deal with completely fucking insane people who think that a background check before they buy a gun is an infringement on their civil liberties.
ItAintEazy
But if you take away mah guns, how am I supposed to protect myself against the
coloredcriminals?Ken J.
I think the answer is that, after decades, Democrats are tired of dying on the hill of gun control. Yes, gun control would be a great idea. But it motivates the wingnuts to an insane degree and then Dems lose on everything.
You have to campaign with the America you have, not the America you wish you had.
cleek
@Ken J.:
ding ding. winner.
sukabi
you know what amazes me? with all the gun nuts out there demanding their 2nd amendment rights… the ratio of people who own guns that have actually taken a safety course is probably 1 out of every 15…
I had jury duty last month, during voir dire the defense attny asked how many gun owners were in the jury pool (out of 45 people there were about 35) then he asked how many people had actually had any kind of gun safety class — the number was about 3 or 4… I was pretty shocked… it used to be that fathers took their kids, who were going to start using guns down to the local shooting range and had a gun safety class with them… now it would seem that the yahoos don’t think they need classes for anything.
Hermione Granger-Weasley
@cleek: ekspecially in Michigan.
HyperIon
@trollhattan:
yeah, i saw the same article yesterday but neglected the link. I didn’t realize you were a seattle person.
Hermione Granger-Weasley
@Ken J.:
WIN!
That is like my german dressage trainer says.
You ride the horse you got.
FlipYrWhig
@jibeaux: The way I read the 2nd Amendment, it has to do with the ability to mobilize an army at a moment’s notice — because there isn’t supposed to be a “standing army” for the government to command, for the reason that 18th-century English-speakers thought a “standing army” would be an instrument of tyranny and an incentive to overcommit to foreign wars. [Cough.]
So no ruler can prevent you from keeping guns at home _because_ having that gun at home enables you to become a member of the well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state. The “militia” is kind of like the armed body of the people. It’s supposed to be, in the truest sense, the people’s army. And then it melts away again.
BD of MN
@trollhattan:
yeah, but there’s black bears all over the damn place. nothing like waking up in the middle of the night in a tent hearing the black bears close by trying to find a snack… (former Boy Scout leader here…)
Ken
Forget gun control but implement absolute liability on gun ownership.
Guns have to be registered and if they are ever used in any crime the owner is financialy and criminialy responsible for the crime.
Even if, espiacially if, the gun is stolen or lost the liability remains intact. If a gun owner cannot keep track of his toys he should be held responsible for his irresponsibility.
So if a gun is stolen and used in a murder the registered owner is equally liable for the murder charge as the individual who pulled the trigger. Ballistics can be used as prima facie evidence of the criminial liability by the owner.
This way anyone can own a gun if they are willing to pay the insurance and do the time.
cathyx
If there is one issue that is at the heart of every republican I know, it is gun control. Every one of them is a republican because democrats want to take away their guns. Dems need to drop this like a hot potato. If the dems push this, there will be record republican turnout in the next election.
trollhattan
@Corner Stone:
I’m all for spicy.
I once knew a girl from Chile
Who couldn’t keep her hands off my…
Aaaaanyway, gotta go.
cleek
@sukabi:
i only took a class when i had to take one for my hunting license. NY didn’t require one, otherwise.
stepfather bought me the gun; father was terrified of it. nobody ever taught me anything until that class. not that i needed to be taught not to do truly stupid things with it – seemed kindof obvious.
jibeaux
@FlipYrWhig:
That’s also the way I read it. I was just addressing the odd argument made that interpreted militia as something to fight off the government with.
I don’t know what a SAM is, except I do know some people with Sams. I wouldn’t say they own them, more just that they live in their house and watch their TV and eat their cheerios and stuff, but they don’t seem too dangerous.
FlipYrWhig
@Ken J.: No, instead what needs to happen is that everyone who doesn’t like what the Democrats are doing on gun control should threaten not to support Democrats any longer. And to declare as loudly as possible that the only way to get a sensible gun control policy is to propose total gun confiscation. That’s just Negotiation 101, you know, that class in the Overton building, which is, unsurprisingly, rather drafty.
Corner Stone
@cyntax: Love that show. Love it.
Omnes Omnibus
@trollhattan: I dunno.
trollhattan
@HyperIon:
Former Seattle person. Grew up there and visited frequently while my folks were still alive. Now, I’m a lowly Seahawks fan in Raiderville & soon-to-be a former Kings fan in–nobody cares about the Warriors and Lakers fans should just shut the hell up. Best to not mention the Sonics.
But I still read the Times.
Corner Stone
@FlipYrWhig: Is Obama out there talking up gun ownership?
stuckinred
@jibeaux:
surface to air missile
Fuck U6: A More Accurate Measure of the Total Amount of Duck-Fuckery in the Economy
Mnemosyne: Nope, this country will collapse because too many nutless ‘centrists’ will not have been able to even make the argument for fear of being mistaken for that lowliest of creatures, the liberal.
FlipYrWhig
@jibeaux:
The founders/framers are kind of inconsistent in that respect. They’re clearly concerned about the conditions by which governments turn tyrannical, thereby authorizing resistance and even overthrow.
Sometimes, to my mind, the 2nd Amendment seems to be envisioning something like the Qaddafi situation, where a ruler has one army, and the citizenry has to form another to oppose its own government; but then at other points it seems to be anticipating an argument that without a professional army the nation will be vulnerable, so the militia _replaces_ the professional army in order to respond in self-defense to an act of provocation by _another_ nation.
Corner Stone
@Ken J.:
This is the absolute antithesis of Obama’s Presidential Campaign.
trollhattan
@BD of MN:
Heh, having hiked much of Yosemite I’ve encountered more than a few black bears. It’s a good thing they don’t have the Intertubes because they could offer other bears grad-level lessons on acquiring tasty human food.
But they don’t actually eat us, they leave that to the mountain lions.
FlipYrWhig
@Corner Stone: I don’t remember him doing so, although I do remember his statements that he supports the 2nd Amendment. But that’s a valid analogy. If he went around saying that people should buy guns before some future government confiscated them, that _would_ be “validating conservative narratives” and all that.
kdaug
@FlipYrWhig: Yup.
PeakVT
@Mike Nardozzi: There is a fundamental disagreement as to whether or not the government should hold an absolute monopoly on the threat of violence.
The “government” has SWAT teams, jet planes, night vision goggles, helicopter gunships, tanks, armored personnel vehicles, and more. Anyone who thinks that they individually or even with a couple of thousand of their best friends can present a meaningful threat of violence to the government is just nucking futz.
The only thing that can be done to stay free is to head off the development of a police state before it develops. Most gun nuts suddenly become quite fond of a police state as soon as a Republican is in charge, so they’re really their own worst enemies in that regard.
Litlebritdifrnt
My opinion is that idiots should not be allowed to own guns. Perhaps then a three year-old little boy would still be alive.
http://www.jdnews.com/news/jury-89166-charges-three.html
I do not like guns, I had to use them in the Navy and I hated every damn minute of it (the plastic explosive was fun though). I have no problem with people wanting guns for hunting, so long as they eat what they hunt.
Like Cole said at the top, the only reason that hand guns exist is to kill people. There are far more people killed in this country in incidents like the above than there are in actions of “self defense”. I just don’t get the obsession.
kdaug
@jibeaux:
OK, you have a constitutional right to have those kind of Sams, as long as you don’t go launching them and their Cheerios at passenger planes.
Martin
@PeakVT:
Fixed. Our military owns the planet. The GOP wanted the military to take on all comers, two at a time, and if it can take China and Russia, it can sure as hell take on a population that is too lazy and dependent to be able to change their own oil or vote consistently.
eemom
OT, but schadenfreudelicious: Lady Huffington and AOL have been sued in a putative class action by a former blogger who describes the plaintiff class as “slaves on Arianna’s plantation.”
He sounds a mite disgruntled.
Tee hee.
Moonbatman
@MikeJ:
The alternative would be Lawrence O’Donnell lied about the Tucson shooting to advance a Political Narrative.
Or maybe it was a “editing” error.
Peace Out. The Power is Yours.
Omnes Omnibus
@Martin: My car is foreign and complicated.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
This country is going to collapse because there are too many urgent issues that need adult discussion, but the other side is completely incapable of it.
Ain’t that the truth.
Cris
guess you can’t blame it on lag now bitch
Martin
@Omnes Omnibus: You should have said you have a Leaf. No oil to change.
MattR
@Moonbatman: Ya know, not everything has to be a lie, right? There could actually be some honest confusion about what happened during a chaotic event.
Omnes Omnibus
@Martin: But that would be a lie. I have a car wit a turbocharged 4 and a lot of pipes, tubes, and wires. It takes Mobil 1 synthetic oil.
HyperIon
@MikeJ:
remember, you are addressing someone called Moonbatman.
MikeJ
@Moonbatman: Again, what’s with the insistence that somebody is lying? How fucking stupid are you? The two stories are barely different at all. One says he dropped the clip, one says the hand holding the clip was grabbed. Either way, whatever happened didn’t happen until he tried to reload. A smaller clip would have saved lives.
cleek
@HyperIon:
who, at least according to his linked blog, is a straight-up parody troll.
Mandramas
@Hermione Granger-Weasley: I prefer to work to change my country to a better place, thank you.
Tsulagi
@cathyx:
Dumbasses should cheer there’s a Dem in the WH. While the past few years my home has slid in value, what’s in my two gun cabinets has gone way up. Shit, elect Barney Frank to the top job and I probably could sell them to buy another house.
HyperIon
@cleek:
ya know, i visited his site and i STILL don’t understand what “a straight-up parody troll is”. he reads like the old DougJ on a really bad acid trip.
it’s very hard to keep up these days.
i’m gonna quit trying soon.
Dennis SGMM
Hell all ya gotta do is stick a carrot in the muzzle of your shotgun and you can take all the deer you want.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
@Mike Nardozzi:
The Second Amendment is not about hunting or personal defense. It is about keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, against whatever foe is bringing the threat of violence to The People.
Historically, this would mainly be the Blacks, who, understandably, occasionally expressed their disapproval of the slavery system.
cleek
@HyperIon:
:)
he’s a troll whose shtick is to act like an over-the-top parody of a liberal. like Jesus’ General, but in reverse.
Gus
@trollhattan: My thought exactly. The incidence of black bear attacks is likely less than the incidence of some Sconnies accidentally shooting themselves.
Dennis SGMM
@Tsulagi:
Heh, I still own some of the firearms that I bought back in the Eighties. Among them is a three screw, long barrel Ruger .44 Magnum. I could buy a new car with what that gun would sell for.
Gus
@Litlebritdifrnt: Small penises.
pseudonymous in nc
I think it’s a sunk cost. The people whose vote rests on gun control aren’t going to vote Dem anyway, because they’ve been told by the NRA that Obama is going to hoard all the bullets and give them to Those People so that they can take light rail to the exurbs and steal your lawn tractor. So you might as well do something with that paranoia.
@FlipYrWhig:
But they’re also comfortable with the idea that militias could be controlled in a top-down way by the state, as well as bottom-up in an ad hoc fashion by civilians. That’s why they fudged the language of the second amendment, to accommodate a pretty wide spectrum of state and local attitudes towards the militia.
shecky
If you truly care about keeping Republicans out of office, forget about gun control. Just forget about it. Don’t even snark about it. Just don’t.
kerFuFFler
@Chris:
“The law was very firm it
Took away my permit
The worst punishment I ever endured
It turned out there was a reason
Cows were out of season
And one of the hunters wasn’t insured!”
(Don’t forget to credit Tom Lehrer!)
Calouste
If a militia would fight a government that is legal under the constitution, wouldn’t that militia cease to be well-regulated under that same constitution?
Dennis SGMM
@pseudonymous in nc:
An old (I’m old too) Navy buddy has turned into a hard core, hippy hating, Obama-deriding winger. You talk guns and he talks Democrats = take. After four or five decades of the same messages from the other side our party faces an uphill fight.
The plain fact is that the Dems are a pile of shit as far as messaging and controlling the narrative. They are my party and I’ll continue to support them even though they have brought a a knife to a gun fight.
nancydarling
@Gus: @Gus: This is true Gus. My son spends as many days as he can in the High Sierras every year, and the only bears he is afraid of are the ones who hang out close to camp grounds. In the high country, they run away from you and he sees at least one every time he goes, usually from a distance of quarter to half a mile.
Here’s a joke I heard in Alaska. Why do Alaskans file the sights off their rifles? Answer: So when a bear takes it away from you and shoves it up your ass, it doesn’t hurt as much.
It seems like every yahoo in Arkansas is carrying. I don’t know what they are afraid of. Several weeks ago I read that one of Nancy Reagen Secret Service agents shot himself in the hip while re-holstering his gun at a shooting range. The same week, I read that some nut went into a police station in Michigan and shot 4 cops before anyone could return fire. And these are the pros!
Dennis SGMM
@nancydarling:
Hon, firearms are, at best, for poaching game. A lever action 30-30 can keep the family fed.
Chris
@kerFuFFler: I just wanted to see if anyone else knew. :-)
FlipYrWhig
@pseudonymous in nc: Yup, I see both ends of that argument built into the language as well.
gene108
What do you do, if a gang of goons jumps you? I bet you’d like to have 30 rounds loaded then.
All limiting the size of clips does is limit the ability for people to defend themselves.
/End Gun-Nut Sermon/
HyperIon
@gene108:
I presume you are joking. If not, I imagine Rep Gifford and relatives of the dead in that incident would take exception to your stmt.
Martin
@Calouste: No. Because teatards say so.
Sebastian
I dont understand why people even bring up hunting when discussing this stuff. What does hunting have to do with anything? the second amendment is about being able to defend yourself from the government as a bulwark against tyranny.
many, many guns and gun features that are not useful for hunting are in fact very useful for shooting government bastards.
why is this so confusing?
gene108
@Dennis SGMM:
You lack the sufficient paranoia to defend the Constitution.
You see, if gun owners give an inch, then gun grabbers will take a mile.
The slippery-slope mindset of gun-owners is not changeable anymore. They are convinced there’s a cabal of Diane Feinstein led gun-grabbers lurking in the shadows to disarm all Americans.
It has nothing to do with messaging.
They like guns, they want guns and they don’t want any rules regulating what guns they can have or where they can carry those guns.
Like most political issues – abortion, taxes, etc. – the debate has been reduced to a “with us or against us” world view. You’re either with us in cutting taxes or against America’s continued prosperity.
EDIT: On second thought messaging may have something to do with it, but I think deep down some portion of Americans want a black-and-white world view. Catering to that world view has political benefits. It used to be “we are good hard working Protestants.” They are lazy, drunk – Negroes, Irish-Catholics, etc. Now that’s gone, something(s) has to fill the void.
Moonbatman
@MikeJ:
You got the Narrative correct.
Even if he had not dropped the
clipmagazine, the woman still would have be able to stop him from reloading.Having never touched a Firearm, I can tell you having to pick up the dropped magazine would not delay the process of reloading.
Peace Out The Power is Yours.
jl
@Mike Nardozzi:
“There is a fundamental disagreement as to whether or not the government should hold an absolute monopoly on the threat of violence.”
The Founders thought that they had settled that. A democratic government is impossible if everyone has a right to use violence to settle differences of opinion, even differences of opinion on other Constitutionally protected rights.
“A political system which does not contain an effective provision for a peaceable decision of all controversies arising within itself, would be a Govt. in name only. Such a provision is obviously essential; and it is equally obvious that it cannot be either peaceable or effective by making every part an authoritative umpire. The final appeal in such cases must be to the authority of the whole, not to that of the parts separately and independently. This was the view taken of the subject, whilst the Constitution was under the consideration of the people. It was this view of it which dictated the clause declaring that the Constitution & laws of the U. S. should be the supreme law of the Land, anything in the constn or laws of any of the States to the contrary notwithstanding.”
James Madison, Notes on Nullification 1835–36
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a6_2s43.html
Emphasis added.
In another version, dated 1834, Madison asserts that everyone, individuals and states, have a natural right of revolution against that is perceived to be (what Madison refers to as) “intolerable oppression”, but that this cannot be a Constitutional right, without eventually throwing the country into anarchy.
Madison, On Nullification, 1834.
http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=FOEA-print-02-02-02-3065
Mandramas
@shecky: A politician can forget the issue, but the true change works at a cultural level, not a political level. If we all wants a gun control law, the only way is to culturally change the opinion of the people regarding guns. You can use all the cultural forums; and Internet is a valid method. The problem with america is that “liberals” are so prone to left all the things in the hands of politicians. Ideological activism is the only way to change the opinion of the people. The Tea Party is a quick example.
Osirisopto
@gene108:
What are you going to do if there are thirty-six goons and your magazine only holds thirty rounds?
Maybe you’ll take out the big guy with your throwing stars? Then you can go after the little guy in the yellow sweater with your nun-chucks, run up the wall with your special ninja shoes and hit the last four with a sliding roundhouse blow to the back of the head and a pile driver to the nose?
What world do you live in where both a “gang of goons” will jump you and you’re foolish enough to be where you can get jumped by them?
Mike
First of all jagoff its called a “magazine”, and if you want it come and take it. And as an LEO, if you think the police are going to help think again.
JD Rhoades
I recall years ago when the NCHP went from their classic old revolvers to Beretta automatics with an 18 shot clip. I was talking about it with a trooper who told me, “yeah, if it takes more’n 18 rounds, screw it, I’m goin’ home.”
32 rounds is nuts.
EconWatcher
Add me to those who think Dems shouldn’t touch issues like this. A ban on certain clips is purely symbolic, and would mainly symbolize an effort to aggravate potential voters.
On reason why gun-owners get so touchy and worried about slippery slopes is that they think many proponents of restrictions just want to work their way to a total ban, incrementally. And this fear is not unfounded.
cleek
@Osirisopto:
blame the victim!
Martin
Oh, hey. The teatards are now formally announcing that they’re going to let the US default. Here’s my suggestion: in response, Obama should say that the US has no formal schedule for who gets paid first in the event of a default, so he’s going to use the Senate vote on the debt limit to determine which states get paid out of federal revenues. Two senate votes = 100% payment. One senate vote = 50% payment. Zero senate votes = 0% payment. If Treasury still cannot meet obligations, payments to states will be capped at 100% of their federal revenues.
jl
@Martin:
“House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) suggested Tuesday that Congress will allow the country to hit its debt ceiling, and continue to hold out for dramatic spending cuts while the nation approaches a genuine default.”
TPMDC
Cantor: U.S. Will Hit Its Debt Ceiling
Brian Beutler, April 12, 2011
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/cantor-us-will-hit-its-debt-ceiling.php?ref=fpa
The GOP thinks it has learned how to shut down the government the right way, the winning way, the way that will catapult them to total popularity and victory.
I am not so sure. Nothing good about it, except it is a chance for me to plug the term ‘TeaGOPpers’ again.
Calouste
Does anyone have an idea how US Treasury bonds are doing (I don’t know which ones are the relevant ones) after Cantor’s little screed? If the MotUs are taking him seriously, they would tank. Somehow I think that is not going to be the case.
salacious crumb
hey our politicians are not as bad as this Czech President.. watch him stealing a pen…just something to lighten up
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110412/ts_yblog_thelookout/is-the-president-of-the-czech-republic-a-pen-stealer#mwpphu-container
Amanda in the South Bay
*Sighs*
Honestly, ISTM that its impossible to discuss even the slightest proposed regulations without gun owners freaking the fuck out. And a surprising number of left leaning voters apparently luv their guns as well.
RickD
@Li:
Wow. This comment is a real piece of work.
Cris
Azeroth?
Nellcote
If we can’t get rid of gun parts can we at least dump a shit ton of money into better mental health care?
John Cole
Every time I read some internet tough guy douchebag like this, the only thing that goes through my mind is The Beastie Boys, Tough Guy. Go tase yourself, you semi-literate mall security clown.
Hermione Granger-Idiotley
166 Comments in and Not One Goddamn Godwin. Sigh. You folks are weak. WEAK i tell you.
You know who else tried to ban magazines?
There. Feel better now.
Chris Tucker
Two things.
“Handguns are only meant for killing people!”
FINISH IT!
“People who would come to rob us, rape us, or murder us.”
An old GF used the pistol I gave her some years previous to deal with a couple of scumbags interested in the rape and murder departments.
If anyone is seriously suggesting that society would have been better off if said GF had been deprived of the right to possess a pistol in her home, and had been raped and murdered and the two scumbags had continued to prey on people, well, the phrase “crazier than a shithouse rat” comes to mind.
Second, good luck holding up a 7/11 with this:
https://img.skitch.com/20110130-mtraa4kf1iswxeijaqyes4kt8d.jpg
The only thing that’ll kill is your bank account when you buy it and the match grade .22 short cartridges you need to feed it. One at a time.
sc
30-round magazine aside, if there’s more than about seven doods trying to jump you, doesn’t sheer number mean they’ll succeed by either surrounding or zerg-rushing you?
Unless, of course, they’re rational goons who quit once you’ve taken one or two of them out- in which case you don’t need the other twenty-seven bullets.
Mnemosyne
@Chris Tucker:
My brother survived a major car accident because he wasn’t wearing his seat belt and was thrown across the car into the other seat. If he had been wearing it, he would have died.
By your logic, we should ban seatbelts because a vanishingly rare occurrence saved my brother.
Oh, and as long as your girlfriend doesn’t have a criminal record and doesn’t have mental health problems, I don’t care if she has a gun or not, but you’re going to have to convince me that what she really, really needed was a high-capacity magazine so therefore we shouldn’t ban high-capacity magazines.
Svensker
@Sebastian:
Because this happens so often. It’s how we overturn the gubmint when we doan lahk it anymoah.
Origuy
The Constitution doesn’t define “well-regulated militia”, but the Articles of Confederation give a clue as to what they had in mind:
Emphasis mine.
t1
I don’t think the second amendment’s purpose is to protect squirrel hunting.
Sebastian
@t1:
thank you!
Sebastian
@Svensker:
well, ideally, if the citizenry is well armed, the government will be scared enough that it will happen pretty rarely.
Jefferson did not specify how often the tree of liberty would need to be refreshed by the blood of patriots and tyrants. he just warned us that it would happen, from time to time. best be prepared.
nancydarling
@Sebastian: I don’t know what kind of arsenal you have stashed away but the government is not going to come and take your guns away—they are going to lob something at you from 5000 yards. You sound like some anti-government survivalist in Michigan or somewhere near there who said if the government came for him, he might have to blow up the bridges. Yeah, that would stop them.
Mike Nardozzi
Hey folks..dont misunderstand me. I agree with the ‘safely regulate’ side of this debate. The people out there arguing against common sense stuff like Brady dont, and their arguments dont line up with ours at all. It’s like two different conversations, and until we address them head on and stop talking about hunting, we all might as well have picked the topic out of a hat in 8th grade debate club.
andy
@Villago Delenda Est:
That’s actually really interesting. That very blind spot is the same one that prevents (probably the very same people) from comprehending how difficult it would be to deport every undocumented alien.
Of course, that inability to keep things in perspective is what is leading them to arm themselves against nonexistent hordes of dark people and sinister government agents in black helicopters…
Chuck Butcher
Well it was a Colt Commander .45ACP I took one mule deer with and another was with a .45 Colt Ruger Vaquero revolver. Those aren’t Glocks, of course, but handguns still.
I have an M1 Garrand that is clip fed, but the Commander uses a magazine, kinda like that Glock does. Tanker.
Paul in KY
@sukabi: When I was in 6th grade, we had a basic gun safety presentation given by a sherriff’s deputy. Focused on shotguns & rifles. Nothing about pistols, if I’m remembering correctly.
Paul in KY
@Hermione Granger-Weasley: Oooh, a German dressage trainer! Well ladeeda, isn’t a good ole American dressage trainer good enough?
Also, how much training does a lady need to get dressaged anyway? I wouldn’t ask a German for advice, that’s for sure ;-)
You’d look like something out of Sprokets.
Paul in KY
@Moonbatman: I don’t know about that. Once you insert the mag, you have to hit a small lever to make the gun action slide forward to insert the 1st round into the chamber. So it’s a two step process. On a Glock or any other double action gun, if you can get something between the trigger and the firing pin (like a part of your hand), you can stop it from firing.
Paul in KY
@sc: Aren’t they supposed to attack one at a time, like they do in those kung fu movies?
JR in WV
@John Cole:
J C, she’s talking about a Leonard Skynard song about “Saturday Night Special” which states “nothing a gun good for but put a man 6 feet under in the col’, col’ groun'”
or somefing like dat.
JR
somegayname
@Ken: why limit liability to guns? Why not cars? Why not baseball bats? Why not knives?
The last two are a bit of hyperbole, but cars kill more people than guns, and often it’s not the owner driving (owner’s teenagers, spouse, or other relative) Why is one method of death more in need of legislation than another…just because of the gun’s “true purpose”? I know this will come off as concern trolling, but I am a democrat who would jump ship if my silly hobby came under more ‘security theater’ legislation. I am stupid like that too…I voted for Nader in 2000. For example, reports estimate the Giffords shooting was over in 16 seconds, the guys who apprehended him made that decision before the magazine was empty. Most of the hits were made at the beginning before people were scattering (he was not a crack shot). Honestly I don’t see less carnage with a low cap mag.
Paul in KY
@somegayname: Your carnage statement was stupid. If he’d had to reload (insert another magazine after 13 shots) sooner, then the heros would have had that time to subdue him (as they did).
Also, modern handguns are for killing multiple people (enemy soldiers) in a quick & efficient manner. Cars are not designed for that purpose.
Chris Tucker
@Mnemosyne:
Your car analogy fails. As does your dumbass comment about banning seatbelts.
I would note that NOWHERE did I mention high capacity magazines in my comment. Why did YOU feel the need to bring them up?
somegayname
@Paul in KY: So it’s OK that more people die, simply because the weapon does not meet some ‘designed intent’ threshold? I really don’t understand this irrational fear of inanimate objects. Nevermind that there are pistols designed for hunting, for conceal carry (tiny frame, short barrel and <8 rounds), for target shooting, none of which would be suitable for 'killing multiple people (enemy solders)'
Also too, my statement is not stupid unless you can demonstrate that the later shots hit people. Based on reports I was under the impression that he was using full metal jacket ball ammo, with which I would expect multiple hits per shot in a crowd of still people (bullet travels through multiple people). Later hits would be less likely to hit as people scatter and his muzzle rises due to rapid rate of fire.
The point is banning mags is security theater that, at best, is expensive to enforce, saves few if any lives, and induces an opportunity cost of political capital best spent on anything else. Mass shootings are extremely rare. When they do happen, multiple guns are more common than high cap mags. My opinion is that guns are like abortions or gay marriage…if you don't like it, don't get one.
Paul in KY
@somegayname: He went down the line pop pop pop pop pop, as fast as he could pull the trigger. I think he’d shot 9 or 10 before everyone knew what the hell was going on.
I think it is stupid (IMO) to claim that the 33 round mag he had did not aid him in his murderous intentions.