R- Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
D- Yes, but guns make it very easy to kill people in large quantities. He would not have been able to stab 71 people.
R- Stop trying to politicize this tragedy! What we need are not fewer guns, but more guns. If only someone else in that theatre had had a gun, they would have been able to stop him in his tracks.
D- Yes. Nothing could go wrong with crossfire in a dark theatre. This is absurd. There is a clear lesson here, and we need to do something about the ease with which people get firearms.
R- There’s no lesson to be learned, the guy was crazy. You can’t stop every crazy person.
D- We could try to make it harder for crazy people to walk around with a shotgun, a rifle, two handguns, and gas cannisters.
R- I knew Obama and you liberals were coming for our guns. Second Amendment!
And after 48 hours, the topic will die down as me move on to the next scandal/tragedy du jour, and then we can have this same exact conversation again the next time someone murders a dozen people with a gun.
eric
dude, you left out 32,345 references to the need for the death penalty.
Surly Duff
Tom Tomorrow
KXB
Unfortunately, I think you and James Fallows are right:
“The Certainty of More Shootings”
wrb
But then how could we tell who is crazy?
ChrisNYC
You forgot the step where wingnuts cry about being the victims of evil media suppositions. Yeah, the abc news piece was stupid and shouldn’t have been done but geez, could they hold off on pushing to the front of the victim line just for today, maybe? Maybe that’s why Palin was so popular with them. “Memememememe! It’s all about me, all the time.”
trollhattan
You should capture that “conversation” as a macro–will make it easier to post when the next massacre occurs.
Sigh.
Nemo_N
They are for hunting.
Fezzik
Not to defend the gun nuts, but we don’t yet know how he obtained his guns. Let’s wait and see.
Njorl
M– Well thank you for being here to debate this D and R. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree and leave things exactly how R likes them.
danah gaz (fka gaz)
@Fezzik: No matter how he obtained them, someone else fucked up along the way.
Imagine a scenario and I’ll show you where and how, someone other than the wacko screwed up.
JPL
According to Boortz even though the guy was wearing bullet proof protection, had someone shot at him, he would have fled.
I listened to him for three minutes this morning. That’s my limit.
rammalamadingdong
Actually I dread the analysis of the candidates post-tragedy remarks and who is better at leading the nation in mourning.
John Cole
@Fezzik: Yes we do. They were all purchased legally at Bass Pro Shops and Gander Mountain Guns.
JPL
@Fezzik: He purchased them legally at a few different stores.
danah gaz (fka gaz)
@John Cole: heh. or this.
ETA: Bass Pro sells gas cannisters? whocoodanode?
for duck hunting?
/shakes head
trollhattan
@JPL:
You should demand your three minutes back…or else!
Brutusettu
@Fezzik:
Every time it rains a little in a flood plain, is that a bad time to talk about the need to move or have a damn or levee installed?
r€nato
AZ LEGISLATURE: “We shall immediatly convene an emergency session in order to pass a law mandating that all Arizona residents carry firearms whenever in a public movie theater. Also, freedom.”
Valdivia
@Fezzik:
already reported he bought them from two national chains and he bought them legally.
JohnnyMac
In one of the other threads someone suggested agreeing with, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” and going from there. How big a factor is mental illness in these people who kill people?
Someone used the phrase “unravel” and it’s a good one because it brings to mind the idea that this is a process and not just a “snapping” that we sometimes here about. An unravelling has the potential (maybe slim) to be stopped before it reaches such extremes.
Citizen Alan
As Tom Tomorrow, the gun control issue is effectively dead. If Republicans won’t support blocking gun sales to people who are on the terrorism watchlist (and they don’t), then there is no form of gun control legislation they Republicans would ever support or even decline to block. The unavoidable fact is that we share a nation with a lunatic party that worships death, and a spree killing or two every year is the price we pay for sniveling Republican cowards to be allowed to have as many surrogate penises as they want.
Citizen Alan
Also, in a world ruled by poetic justice, a crazy person would wander into the next NRA national convention and fire off a few rounds. Every gun-nut in attendance would then pull their own concealed weapons and start firing wildly, and the fuckers would all die in one massive friendly fire incident.
Roger Moore
@wrb:
They’re the ones who aren’t packing heat. SATSQ.
pragmatism
i just heard pretty much that conversation in the elevator. our elevators have a news/infotainment screen system that was talking about the tragedy and sho’nuff, went like that.
Fezzik
Okay, folks:
1. All right then, hadn’t yet read that. Someone fucked up, indeed. Big time.
2. I’m in favor of sensible gun control. I think everyone should be required to pass a basic safety course. I think background checks should be more inclusive. I’m even wondering whether gun registration should be implemented and work a bit like car registration.
But I also think there are idiots on both sides of this debate, ranging from the ludicrous “We need MOAR guns!” to “Melt ’em all down!” that are equally divorced from reality.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
FIFY
greenergood
Terrorist or tourist? Sorry, too many tiny vowel/consonant aberrations: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/20-1
pragmatism
@Fezzik: so both sides do it then? are you being possessed by the ghost of david broder?
pseudonymous in nc
The Onion dealt with this in May. The US has collectively decided that fairly regular mass shootings are the acceptable cost of the 21st century implementation of the Second Amendment.
Or rather, the gun fetishists have decided it on everybody’s behalf, and since they have the guns and the political power, that’s what the nation has to suck up.
@danah gaz (fka gaz):
Nah, the system as it stands worked entirely as intended. That is more disturbing than the attempt to find someone or something fucking up along the way.
eric
@Surly Duff: genius
Seebach
Interesting how you can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater, according to supreme court. But you CAN fire in a crowded theater.
Roger Moore
@Citizen Alan:
Various people have suggested setting off a string of firecrackers in a public place in Tampa when the Republican National Convention is in town. If the Teahadists are proving true to form, a ton of them will be packing and you could set off exactly that kind of crossfire. The only problem is there will be innocent bystanders around who would undoubtedly be killed in the process. That’s the problem with having morals; they keep you from following through on your evil schemes.
amused
@Seebach: I LOLed, and will repeat it whenever I can.
Roger Moore
@Seebach:
Technically, you can’t falsely cry “fire” in a crowded theater. If you’re reporting an actual fire, it’s fine.
Stand Your Ground!
Fezzik
@pragmatism: Haha. God, no. The gun fetishists are so much worse, and have ample amount of blood on their hands, and are far more craven and vocal. But there’s a plenty of daylight between “we need to find ways to curb gun violence” and “we need to pass laws that make it harder to get guns.” There is a lot of overlap there, but these are not the same things. I’ve had that kind of argument with so many liberal friends of mine–with whom on any other issue I’m to their left–that I’m ready to be almost as dismissive of their views as the fetishists.
trollhattan
@Roger Moore:
They’d probably frown on your setting it first to make the alarm viable. Also, too.
The Moar You Know
As a gun owner, I tell fellow shooters this – and since most of them are Republicans, it doesn’t go down well. But it’s true.
The 2nd Amendment is not going to protect your right to own a gun if this kind of shit keeps happening and your only response to it is “2nd Amendment, bitches” or “buy guns to keep yourselves safe, fellow citizens!” There are plenty of ways to keep the 2nd Amendment while rendering it practically useless, and if enough of the citizenry get pissed off, that will happen.
trollhattan
Pivoting back to the campaign for a moment, has Willard told us what kind of gun Ann owns two of, yet? Am hoping it’s a matched pair of handmade Italian competition shotguns that she hires somebody to shoot for her.
protected static
@danah gaz (fka gaz): If they were actual pull-the-ring-and-throw gas grenades, they were probably an illegal purchase. The BATFE clamped down on the sale of that kind of smoke and gas grenade well over a year ago, ruling that their fuses counted as explosives, and therefore required a (very expensive) Federal license and (more expensive) Federally-approved storage facility. Prior to that, you could order them online from a variety of sources, with the biggest inconvenience being a hazardous materials shipping surcharge.
jimmiraybob
I think that it’s time to remember that Romney (R-Romney Investors) has openly mocked putting police and firemen on the streets and teachers in the classroom. I assume that Romney (R-Romney Investors) is as gun/NRA gung ho as ever.
Good times.
IowaOldLady
There’s a reason we can’t even hold a sensible conversation about guns, and that reason is named The National Rifle Association. I wish responsible gun owners would take them on, forming an alternative organization if they need to.
It may be people who kill people, but they’re people with guns, and a person with a gun is a whole different entity than a person without one.
Fezzik
@The Moar You Know: Totally agreed. Also not helping: misplaced fantasies that maintaining an unregistered cache of weapons will keep the jackbooted thugs at bay. These people seem to think “Red Dawn” remains a timely documentary, its basic facts unchanged by drone warfare, heads up displays, body armor, etc.
Fezzik
Addendum: the NRA is not content with carving out the most extreme position on “personal” gun ownership, they are also now running interference for domestic gun manufacturers when it comes to tracking serial numbers of weapons shipped to drug cartels and other criminals overseas. As far as I’m concerned, they’re a terrorist organization.
Jay in Oregon
So has anyone asked, in all seriousness, how Romney and the NRA would address the problem of mass shootings in the United States?
Is “carry a gun yourself” really their answer? And if so, do we get to start pointing out all of the instances where gun-toting bystanders or would-be heroes also get themselves shot, either by the criminals, the cops, or each other?
@Citizen Alan:
And why isn’t this being shouted from the rooftops? Were there a whole flurry of ads pointing out that the NRA won’t even consider blocking people who are suspected of being a threat to the United States from being able to legally buy guns, and I just missed them?
FFS. Tom Tomorrow is right; the gun fetishists have won, and we just all get to pay the price. Over and over again.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Fezzik: Knowledge is knowing that the second amendment means you can have a gun; wisdom is knowing you’re not going to overthrow the government with it.
eric
@Fezzik: it has always been about the manufacturers with the NRA. Always.
SatanicPanic
@The Moar You Know: One of the things that gets me is the way some people talk about the 2nd amendment like it’s a universal human right on the level of freedom of speech. It’s not considered that by a good number of our fellow humans and likely never will be, so like you’re saying, they may want to tone it down a bit.
PaulW
We can’t have an honest debate about gun control because the NRA would have a f-cking hissy fit.
Jay in Oregon
@Fezzik:
So do you have any suggestions on how to address the former without resorting to the latter?
Roger Moore
@Fezzik:
FTFY.
Bex
@pseudonymous in nc: The US has also collectively decided that the dead and wounded bystanders are merely collateral damage.
MikeJake
It’s simple. America is a violent society, but given the number of firearms floating around, we could conceivably be a lot more violent. The fact that mass shootings are rare and still shock and horrify us reflects the fact that, by and large, we’re decent, moral people. We’re not the most decent or most moral, but we’re not appreciably any worse than anyone else on the planet.
Since there’s no clear moral or societal factor causing these massacres, the one explanation we’re left with is that…there are a lot firearms floating around. That aspect shouldn’t even be a debate! The debate comes in when we have to decide how much freedom (which, in the case of guns, really means “lack of regulation”) we’re willing to tolerate, and what limits can be applied that don’t disturb the letter and the spirit of the Second Amendment. But we don’t have that debate. What we’re left with is a Supreme Court decision that established a fundamental right to bear arms with virtually no guidance on how the government may reasonably regulate that right, and a level of violence that has become commonplace and sullenly accepted.
Someone once compared the support for guns in America to the support for no speed limits on the autobahn in Germany. Not having speed limits is more hazardous and results in higher fuel consumption, but it certainly allows you more freedom. The Germans have debated this, but they seem to feel the costs are worth the freedom of having stretches of open road with no speed limit. I can respect that. But I wonder if German partisans ever have the nerve to claim that there’s actually no drawbacks at all, like the gun nuts in America claim repeatedly.
Brachiator
@John Cole:
Night goggles, the new Second Amendment Accessory.
I agree with your points, but I gotta snark or else punch a wall. This shit is just too sad.
However…. while Americans are sometimes addicted to guns, elsewhere crazies and fearmongers love them some bombs.
dedc79
The Supreme Court has done its best to ensure that this will remain a problem for decades to come (if not centuries)
NotMax
One of my concerns now for the days immediately ahead is someone in a movie theater or similar venue, in the throes of magnified fear, pre-emptively shooting at someone else misperceived as a lethal threat.
jefft452
Guns dont kill people,
peoplegun owners kill peopleRaven
MSNBC is playing Hey Joe by Hendrix as the bumper.
The Moar You Know
@Fezzik: Slow down there, cowboy.
Really? Who fucked up? What laws were broken?
The answer: nobody fucked up and no laws were broken. The system worked as designed. As any engineer would tell you, if you don’t like the results then you need a different system.
danah gaz (fka gaz)
@MikeJake: While I think that reasonable people may disagree on how clear this is:
Pay close attention to the correlation between inequity and violence in any society. Things get a bit more clear.
As the rich get richer, the middle class gets destroyed, and the pool of the poor gets larger, more desperate, and more disenfranchised I expect we’ll see more this. I’d bank on it, in fact.
NCSteve
@ChrisNYC: Yup. And he also forgot the mandatory precursor to Republicans proclaiming themselves the real victims: the step where Republicans respond to their subconscious fear that this could be them by finding increasingly offensive ways to blame the victims for getting shot. “It’s their own fault. What did they think they were doing going into a dark theater at night, anyway? What kind of parent lets their child go to midnight showing of a movie? If those people had been in church instead of at this movie, none of this would have happened.”
gnomedad
It will be interesting to see if there is an uptick in gun sales, because now Obummer is gonna take our guns away for sure before We The People vote him out.
JoeK
My partner recently got me a T-shirt that says:
“Guns don’t protect people – people do”
I love it – like the “Guns don’t kill people” line, it asserts the neutrality of the tool, but in a way that completely undermines the “argument” that just because you have a gun, you’re at all likely to do something productive with it.
Dave
Yeah, well, fuck Republicans anyhow. You like the Second Amendment? Maybe you should be shot and then given a chance to defend yourself.
muddy
The NRA robocalled me today, they have never called before. They wanted to let me know that this incident should not effect OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND THIS WILL BE AN EXCUSE TO ATTACK OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS!!1!1!DID I SAY OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS?
I own guns, and could carry them around daily (in VT a hunting license is license to carry) but I don’t do it, mostly because I know myself to be impulsive at times. Safer for me to stick with the verbal buckshot, the consequence if I lose my temper is hurt feelings, not blood.
hilzoy
We could try making it possible for gun licensing boards to deny a gun license to someone who’s demonstrably homicidal. Last time I checked, it wasn’t.
danah gaz (fka gaz)
@The Moar You Know: Wait. Murdering 14 people isn’t illegal?
who knew?
The Other Bob
Not to defend the pro gun wing of the Republican cult, but if I wanted a pack of guns, I can think of many closets from friends and family, where I could pull out Grandpa’s old shotgun, rifle, etc. and then go on a killing spree.
No matter what the legisaltion, it would be pretty tough to control the 300 million guns already in the U.S.
catclub
The only gun purchases that the NRA ( nearly typed IRA, but they are now peaceful) opposes are any that can pinned to Fast and Furious (if under the Obama admin).
The Fast and Furious case is also the only case where the gun nuts will forget to say that ‘guns don’t kill people, people ( in this case mexican drug cartel members) kill people.”
The Moar You Know
@danah gaz (fka gaz): Please read entire thread for context.
Fezzik
@Jay in Oregon: To start with, I would go so far as to say restricting access should be more about jumping through basic hoops: safety training, background checks that are more comprehensive, some form of gun registration. Also, people can buy whatever kind of assault rifle they like, but it has to be kept at an accredited, locked storage facility–to be checked out, like a library book, when you want to use it.
(Few of these are possible, but we can try.)
Beyond that, I wonder if what’s really needed is to go after the “bigger” problems so as to curb gun violence: better mental health systems, eliminating poverty, etc.
With the caveat that the analogy is far from perfect, put it this way: everyone agrees that aborting fetuses/children as a form of birth control is something we want to reduce or eliminate. Is the way to do that restricting abortion access, or is it to make adoption easier, make healthcare more affordable, tackle poverty, etc.? Is gun violence not somewhat similar?
danah gaz (fka gaz)
@The Other Bob: I file that in the someone fucked up category. Guns should be securely locked away from nuts (like in your hypothetical case, hypothetically, you =) )
If you want home security – at the ready – get a dog. Guns shouldn’t be stashed where a home invader has as easy (or easier, if you are sleeping) access to them than you do.
Of course, that would mean being a responsible gun owner. And the 2nd amendment doesn’t say anything about responsible gun ownership so I suppose that makes me a godless communist.
trollhattan
@The Other Bob:
Yup, and because (with rare exceptions) guns essentially don’t decay or wear out, grampa’s stash will be just as lethal in fifty years as it was yesterday.
Yet, we’re having a kerfuffle about opening moar gun shops in the middle of my city because (as the prospective new dealers are framing it) the mandated reductions in prison populations are causing citizens to fear (even moreso than usual) for their safety, ergo, the Markets(pbut) are demanding it. In sum: you’ll be safer because you won’t have to travel as many blocks to buy a gun as you must, today.
All this gives me a massive headache.
Surly Duff
@JohnnyMac:
Agreed. Many of these situations occur when treatment is not identified and administered. However, highlighting the mental stability of a shooter in these instances also diverts the conversation from the necessity of allowing easy accessibility of automatic weapons.
I really appreciated this article from the New Yorker today:
fanshawe
@jefft452: That is perfect. Hope you don’t mind if I steal it for the rest of my life.
pseudonymous in nc
@muddy:
Life imitates Onion.
jurassicpork
Top 10 Conservative Reactions to the Aurora Shooting.
ponce
Though I’m for more gun control I realize that won’t be happening any time soon.
So I’d settle for forcing gun stores that sell weapons used to murder people to display a plaque that reads, “We sold Soandso the weapon he used to kill x innocent people.”
J.W. Hamner
@KXB:
Yeah, the certainty that mass shootings are a fact of American life that will simply never, ever change is one of the more depressing things I’ve realized in the wake of this tragedy. We’re #1, I guess
DecidedFenceSitter
@Surly Duff: Just as a point of reference – unless he illegally modified the AR-15 rifle, everything he used was a semi-auto or pump action. Not that it changes anything about the devestation – but just wanted to be accurate.
I’m actually of mixed feelings. I just applied for my CCW permit, and I’m looking to purchase some weapons eventually in the relatively near future. Heck, I’ve priced the items he has, and if he did buy all those in commercial shops, as I have no reason to doubt the news, he dropped a few grand on this. Assuming a Glock 22 (a standard .40 caliber Glock) it is a little over $500, the AR-15 guns are close to a grand +- a bit; and the pump action remington shotgun runs 400ish. Let alone ammo, let alone the flak jacket.
As far as the question, I agree above – as a society, by and large, we’ve decided we’re okay with the risk. And this is the logical consequence of that decision. As far as whether more people should be armed? Yeah, in a dark room, with smoke/tear gas, and running people and needing a solid head shot? Yeah, that’s not the sort of think shooting 200 rounds a week at the local range is going to give you.
Amusingly, one of my more pacifist friends surprised me when she said she was glad he had guns, as explosives can be more destructive, easier to obtain, and could have let him get away fairly clean.
JCT
@gnomedad: Actually there has been an incredible increase in gun sales since Obama took office and it has been accelerating over the past year. The gun manufacturers cannot seem to keep up, though some of the “shortage” is likely manufactured to maintain the holy profit levels.
These paranoid crazy gun nuts truly believe that Obama’s coming for their guns. Every once in awhile someone points out that they are being “played” by the gun and especially the ammo manufacturers — but to no avail.
The combo of their festering racism / Obama hatred and paranoia over the Feds is a nasty brew. Wayne LaPierre and the NRA play these assholes like a fiddle.
And I say this as a gun owner myself…
Southern Beale
Ah yes. Thank you. This is precisely how this will play out.
Unless.
We really DO need to organize for some sane gun laws. If everyone took to their public square this weekend, and marched on Washington in September, and rallied and made a huge fucking deal about saying NO NOT THIS TIME.. NOT ONE MORE INNOCENT PERSON … well, the script my read a little differently, no?
trollhattan
E.J. Dionne (hey, sounds French!) expanding on Cole’s orignal point.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/20/4645360/ej-dionne-jr-the-gag-rule-on-guns.html#storylink=cpy
dead existentialist
@NCSteve: Unless they were Unitarians in Tennessee.
celticdragonchick
@danah gaz (fka gaz):
Be very, very sure that the police never, ever come to your house for anything, including to ask for directions. The dog is always the first casualty in any police contact. See puppycide at The Agitator blog.
Amanda in the South Bay
I’ll admit, I’m not a gun toting man bites dog liberal, so I don’t have any particular fondness for firearms, but really, why can’t we have a sane national conversation about guns? I don’t want to ban guns, but I do want to regulate the hell out of them, and want people to stop treating them so reverently and sacrosanct.
BruinKid
Wait, you’re not going to see this coming. My Ron Paul friend said there’s a reason you never see mass shootings… at gun ranges, because everyone has a gun.
Jay in Oregon
@Fezzik:
You’ve just lost the NRA vote right there, because “everyone” knows that registration is the first step towards confiscation.
I’m not trying to shut you down, just trying to point out that the NRA has made it impossible to have ANY kind of reasonable debate about gun ownership and gun control.
I would love for someone in the anti-gun control crowd explain how you can have uncontrolled sale of firearms and a reasonable expectation of personal safety at the same time. Forget determining who should and shouldn’t be allowed to have easy access to firearms; what if you don’t want to own a firearm, based on moral or philosophical objections? Should choosing not to be a gun owner make one effectively a second-class citizen, undeserving of safety?
BigSouthern
Because when you have lung cancer, what you really need are more cigarettes…
Judas Escargot, Acerbic Prophet of the Mighty Potato God
Generalized.
Never mind ‘post-truth’, we’re well into the Mad Libs era of American politics.
(Actually, ‘Mad Libs’ has good pun potential…)
ruemara
@Citizen Alan: This
Mnemosyne
@BruinKid:
Suicides are weirdly common at gun ranges. I’m kind of surprised there haven’t been many mass shootings at gun ranges since a lot of the time, the people who go on shooting rampages are planning to be killed in the course of it.
NCSteve
@danah gaz (fka gaz): No, for bass. Those fuggin fish are unruly and uncompliant with the demands of lawful authority sometimes and you got to get em under control.
Oregon guy
I lived in Hawaii for four years, and now I’m living in Japan. I’ve been away from CONUS for long enough that this episode just makes me sad and confused. Hawaii has the strictest gun laws in the US, easily enforced because PACIFIC OCEAN, and Japan possibly the strictest weapons laws on the planet (blades over 3.5 cm – not OK unless a kitchen knife)…
So the answer is clear and staring in the face of anyone who wants to see it. Americans by and large don’t, and 70-odd people just paid the price.
Tom Tomorrow really did nail this one, and I wonder how personally safe I’m going to feel when I finally return to CONUS. Yikes.
Oregon guy
I lived in Hawaii for four years, and now I’m living in Japan. I’ve been away from CONUS for long enough that this episode just makes me sad and confused. Hawaii has the strictest gun laws in the US, easily enforced because PACIFIC OCEAN, and Japan possibly the strictest weapons laws on the planet (blades over 3.5 cm – not OK unless a kitchen knife)…
So the answer is clear and staring in the face of anyone who wants to see it. Americans by and large don’t, and 70-odd people just paid the price.
Tom Tomorrow really did nail this one, and I wonder how personally safe I’m going to feel when I finally return to CONUS. Yikes.
Oregon guy
I lived in Hawaii for four years, and now I’m living in Japan. I’ve been away from CONUS for long enough that this episode just makes me sad and confused. Hawaii has the strictest gun laws in the US, easily enforced because PACIFIC OCEAN, and Japan possibly the strictest weapons laws on the planet (blades over 3.5 cm – not OK unless a kitchen knife)…
So the answer is clear and staring in the face of anyone who wants to see it. Americans by and large don’t, and 70-odd people just paid the price.
Tom Tomorrow really did nail this one, and I wonder how personally safe I’m going to feel when I finally return to CONUS. Yikes.
Hal
If only everyone in the movie theater line was armed. Then the dozens, if not hundreds, in line would have synchronized a perfect takedown of the perp with no collateral damage.
Oregon guy
And a hearty FYWP!
HEY YOU
Would George Zimmerman say that the Colorado shooting was God’s Plan?
The Other Bob
@danah gaz (fka gaz):
You made a big leap about me considering I just stated what I see is the reality of gun control.
I dont own a gun, but question if gun control could be any more effect than trying to control drugs.
El Cid
@Hal: I don’t think this should be restricted to ownership.
Movie theaters and other public venues should provide sawed-off shotguns to any ticket holder above 18, which would be returned upon departure just like 3D glasses. Each seat can then have a fixed holster in the armrest or back of the seat in front of you.
Guests would be free, of course, to bring their own.
But we need to start thinking one shot ahead.
slightly_peeved
@BruinKid:
Well, your friend does have a point of sorts. Everyone owning or carrying a gun doesn’t make anyone safer if the guns are just holstered. The perp is always going to draw first aren’t they? And once they’ve drawn a holstered gun is useless. So for true safety you need mandatory brandishing.
El Cid
@slightly_peeved:
Mandishing! No, wait…
valency
@El Cid:
Impractical. Shot from a short-barrelled shotgun would have far too much spread, causing unacceptable collateral damage. Clearly, every seat should come equipped with Class-IV thermal imaging goggles and an M-14 7.62×51 mm rifle kitted out for the designated marksman role, not to mention a gas mask and chemical warfare kit, so the good citizens of Denver can ninja-snipe the gunman. Since I have just learned from all the gun-nuts that all Americans maintain their sniping skills with thrice-weekly visits to the local gun range just in case a terrorist should appear as they are munching their popcorn to the latest Christian Bale action flick, I can see absolutely no problems with this plan.
What’s the bet that some time in the next few months a guy with a a concealed carry permit pulls out his gun and starts panic firing in the middle of the cinema in response to a particularly loud sound effect from the movie sound track? Action films are gonna be more thrilling than ever, now, aren’t they?
Jay in Oregon
I was unaware that the NRA had a personal safety instruction program called “Refuse To Be A Victim”.
http://www.nrahq.org/rtbav/rtbavfaq.asp
hope
If the right to own guns is predicated upon the “well regulated militia” clause, why don’t all gun owners have to be part of the military or national guard – and subject to all requirements – physical, service, and otherwise – of that position?
jim parente
@trollhattan:
Americans are a very fearful, sniveling bunch of sheep. Lets all buy as many guns as we can… Gotta protect ourselves from… the nig….. pathetic.
2liberal
(eddie izzard paraphrased) I think the gun helps. if you stand there shouting “BANG” you aren’t going to kill very many people (/eddie izzard)
that being said, gun control is a lost cause. There are 200 million plus guns out there and there is no way to control them.
TenguPhule
Guns don’t kill people.
The bullets do.
Fine, let the NRA have their guns.
And nationalize the ammunition production on National Security Grounds.
Ain’t no Constiutional Right to own Bullets, Bioatches.
Rony Gharib
That same man ,who once carried a gone to protect himself , will be danger to people at some point.
The truth of the matter is , no one is allowed to carry gone, at any time .
So more guns is not the solution , no guns is the solution…
xian
@Citizen Alan: so why is it that we can’t crush them with their terrorist-coddling ways?
xian
@Citizen Alan: so why is it that we can’t crush them with their terrorist-coddling ways?
xian
sorry for the doublepost. some sort of ipad fu
Debfa
Tim Kreider knows what’s up too. What’s really sad is I’m reposting a reposting of a comic from 1997 that is (sadly) once again relevant to the news of the day.