Until an activist judge overturns it on appeal:
One of the nation’s biggest sellers of crime-linked guns was found liable for negligence Tuesday in the case of two Milwaukee officers wounded by one of the shop’s firearms.
Jurors in Milwaukee County have ordered Badger Guns to pay almost $6 million to Officer Bryan Norberg and now-retired Officer Graham Kunisch, who were both shot in the face while in the line of duty in 2009.
The two officers sued for negligence, alleging that the West Milwaukee gun shop should have known that the gun eventually used in the shooting was initially sold as part of a “straw” purchase. In those cases, someone buys the gun on behalf of someone else who is not legally permitted to purchase a gun.
Badger Guns was also previously called Badger Outdoors, and at times was the No. 1 seller of firearms used in crimes in the U.S. — moving 537 guns that were recovered from crime scenes in 2005 alone, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Norberg and Kunisch weren’t the only members of the police force injured by a gun bought at Badger: Between 2007 and 2009, six Milwaukee cops were hurt by guns sold by Badger Guns or Badger Outdoors, according to the suit.
Kunisch himself was shot several times by a gun-toting bicyclist in a 2009 attack, losing an eye and suffering a brain injury. He had to retire from the police department, he said.
Jurors on Tuesday ordered Badger to pay him $3.6 million, Norberg $1.5 million, plus another $730,000 in punitive damages.
The case has been a rare trial pitting law enforcement against a gun seller, and has been in the public spotlight after Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton mentioned it on the campaign trail as part of her call for gun reform.
Since we can not count on the bought and paid for Republican Congress and many of the NRA owned Democrats to do anything, this is actually probably our best chance of accountability regarding gun control.
Iowa Old Lady
I heard this on the radio. I thought Congress had protected gun makers and sellers from lawsuits, but it turns out there are loopholes, one of them being the seller knows the gun is being bought illegally. I hope others who are injured follow suit. (no pun intended)
amk
It would be interesting to hear bernie sanders’ view on this.
Punchy
Wouldn’t ya know it, a Ride-By in Wisconsy.
catclub
Somehow I fear that the only people who will successfully sue in cases like this are police officers.
ruemara
@catclub: I feel this is a reasonable fear.
Felonius Monk
It appears that the RWNJs are starting to come around on the issue of gun control:
Ariz. GOPer: Let’s ‘Take Guns Away From Blacks As They Are The Main Killers’
Oatler.
The police state vs. the NRA. Who will win, and more urgently, will they kill each other off and delight the rest of the country?
boatboy_srq
Interesting. This is the textbook objectivist libertarian method of dealing with the situation: make shady gun sales an exceedingly expensive proposition through litigation. (Mind you, this is my chief beef with actual objectivist libertarianism: the Pollyanna-ish assumption that businesses won’t scr3w their customers from the outset, which mandates rectifying the wrong after the fact rather than inhibiting it from the beginning.)
Cue Rand Paul and the rest of the “objectivist libertarian” wingnut set howling about “2nd Amendment”, “injustice” and “tort reform” in 3… 2… 1…
gogol's wife
@catclub:
At least it’s a start.
I feel as if the ground is shifting somewhat. I thought Sandy Hook would do it, but it didn’t seem to, but there is a cumulative effect.
boatboy_srq
@catclub: @ruemara: Very reasonable fear, of a significantly unreasonable outcome.
amk
Is r2r around?
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/poll-donald-trump-south-carolina-nevada-214802
Ella in NM
THIS will be the only way we will eventually begin a reasonable, rational reform of laws governing gun sales and ownership in this country.
Money talks.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@catclub:
That is my fear as well. And since private citizens are shot much more often than police officers are, this will end up being a totally inconsequential case.
Ella in NM
@catclub:
The more lawsuits that are filed, the more civilians will be awarded. Ramp ’em up, as far as I’m concerned, until the gun manufacturers and sellers feel the heat coming in from all sides.
Roger Moore
@boatboy_srq:
And the real-world “Libertarian” approach is to say that we’ll control misbehavior through lawsuits and then work as hard as possible to stop “frivolous” lawsuits, i.e. any lawsuits that actually try to control misbehavior. It’s from the same playbook as defunding parts of the government that enforce regulations and then using their ineffectiveness as an argument that government regulation is pointless and should be repealed.
Iowa Old Lady
@amk: You know, there’s an old superstition that if you speak the devil’s name, you summon him.
Ella in NM
@Punchy:
That would be really funny if the officer involved hadn’t been shot in the face, lost an eye, suffered a permanent brain injury forcing him into early medical retirement.
MattF
@Felonius Monk: Also, the guy said that Hillary was ‘too well prepared’ at the debate. He suspects that she’d been briefed!! A scandal!! If ever a one there was!!
chopper
i have this sneaking suspicion that these guys wouldn’t have won if they weren’t cops.
West of the Cascades
@amk: I think Sanders said last night that he would remove the statutory liability protection.
the Conster
Charles Johnson at LGF who monitors the wingnuttosphere made a comment the other night – the night of the 3 campus shootings last week plus the kook shooting at the Home Depot shoplifters – that he detects a shift in the zeitgeist, that even the gun nuts feel. It does feel like we’re at the inflection point. The gun nuts have had their day and they obviously can’t handle their unfettered right to bear arms responsibly, so they need to be treated like the children they are and take away their toys. Toddlers with guns have become a bigger threat to Americans than terrorists.
chopper
@the Conster:
here’s hoping.
El Cruzado
@Felonius Monk: Should be noted that Ronald Reagan was very much into Gun Controlling the Black Panther party back in his CA politician days (and one of the things that made him popular in CA back when it was a much whiter place than it is now).
FL
On the surface it seems like less than a big deal because the lawsuit rests on the clear evidence that this was *known* to be a straw purchase– it’s not that the gun was used in a shooting, it’s that the gun store knew or should have known, etc., because the straw purchaser went in with the actual purchaser and had him pick out the gun. It’s not like getting around this is difficult.
Ultraviolet Thunder
You would think that the police would back gun control laws because it could reduce violent crime. And I think it used to be that way; cops openly supported stricter laws on gun purchases. But I see more and more anecdotal cases of chiefs of police coming out against gun control and seeming to side with the 2nd amendment absolutists.
I’d be interested to know if this is a trend or a few visible outliers.
Amir Khalid
@MattF:
More precisely, he accuses Hillary of getting the questions in advance. Of cheating, in other words. I wonder if he has anything to back it up. I tend to think not.
Amir Khalid
@FL:
That sounds mind-bogglingly stupid.
Calouste
@West of the Cascades: So he is against it after he was for it? I don’t mind him changing his minds, but acknowledging that his original vote to protect the
Merchants of Deathgun industry from liability was wrong would be helpful.Yatsuno
@catclub: @ruemara: Unfortunately even the cops will still lose. Thanks to the federal law that makes gun manufacturers immune from these lawsuits. The judge will be found in error and the suit will get tossed. Thanks NRA.
David Koch
@amk: As late as 3 months ago he was defending it saying there is no difference btwn a hammer and an AK-47
Calouste
@Ultraviolet Thunder: Chiefs of Police are often elected, specially Sheriffs, and people who really care about that election are typically gunnuts, so they elect a gunnut.
Paul in KY
@MattF: He sure knows it can be done. Maybe even a hidden 2 way radio…
Amir Khalid
@Amir Khalid:
Speaking of mind-boggling stupidity …
amk
@Ultraviolet Thunder: yeah, but the kenyan usurper was for gun control, so they had to now go against it, so, it’s all obama’s fault basically.
SFAW
@Amir Khalid:
Of COURSE he does. The voices in his head told him, and who are YOU to question them?
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@Yatsuno:
This was a retailer who was successfully sued, not a manufacturer. I don’t know if the law also protects retail outlets.
Like I said, I suspect that in practice this is going to be a “no shooting cops” ruling, not a “no straw purchases” ruling.
Steve from Antioch
Given the facts of this case – where it was pretty obvious from videotaped evidence that this was a straw purchase – the outcome seems like a good one.
Shakezula
@catclub: Yes, this.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Calouste:
This is a reasonable explanation and seems to cover the situation in MI where I live.
One of my FB friends is a retired cop and I’ve known him since the ’60s. He’s never posted anything pro or anti gun, though he is active on FB. I should sound him out on cops’ attitudes toward gun laws. He’s one person I can trust.
Thoughtful Today
@David Koch:
There’s a huge difference between a manufacturer and a sale of what’s manufactured.
Is Toyota responsible for manufacturing cars used by ISIS?
Probably not unless they knew those trucks were being sold to ISIS.
Does that make sense?
Steve from Antioch
@David Koch: fun fact: although the data are incomplete, more people are killed by blunt instruments such as hammers and baseball bats than by “assault weapons” in United States each year.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@amk: He’s busy guiding Brinks trucks full of cash into the leading docks at JEB! HQ.
amk
@Steve from Antioch:
yeah, let’s make these killers’ job easier by giving them guns instead. so much fun.
Fair Economist
This particular ruling is a big deal even if it’s easily gotten around, because it will take out one gun shop that makes a specialty of selling guns for criminal use.
Gin & Tonic
@Steve from Antioch: Fun fact: hammers can be used for construction or demolition work, and baseball bats can be used for playing baseball. AR-knockoffs can be used for…
bemused
@Amir Khalid:
Unbelievable. People as brain dead as this guy boggles the mind.
srv
Another day, another Obama War:
Roger Moore
@Amir Khalid:
If he had direct evidence, he’d lead with it.
bemused
@MattF:
To be fair, it must hard for a Republican like this guy to imagine that anyone could be that well prepared without cheating.
NonyNony
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
The cops I know don’t think you can reduce violent crime by removing access to weapons – they’re in the camp that believes that violent criminals will find ways to commit violence. But they do believe that if there were fewer guns out there they’d get shot at less by drunken dumbasses when they go out to investigate domestic violence calls. And they generally approve of this.
gian
@Gin & Tonic:
A substitute for herbal v!agra?
Stopping an A10 warthog?
Matt McIrvin
What we really need is a cultural shift toward seeing a gun as a safety hazard (which it is, obviously) rather than something that actually keeps you safe.
The use of guns in hunting and target shooting would be irrelevant to this except inasmuch as the shift would encourage reasonable safety culture in sport.
It’d be similar to the changes that happened around smoking and seat belts. But in both cases, there were laws passed hand in hand with the cultural change, laws that restricted public behavior.
Cigarettes were never made illegal (for adults); no cop was ever going to stop you from smoking in your house; but smoking could be banned in offices and restaurants, public-health warnings mandated, etc. And an interesting thing happened along with that: a lot of people started insisting that nobody was going to smoke in their house, either. Even smokers started to go along with it.
So far, though, the trend with guns has been in the opposite direction, with new laws being passed to actively legalize public behavior that wouldn’t have been tolerated in the Wild West.
Mandalay
@Yatsuno:
Don’t blame them, blame Congress.
(Thanks Bernie.)
gian
@Matt McIrvin:
I still want to see the President do a national memorial in the national cathedral with the families of the victims in mass shootings.
In my darker moments I wish for people with crime scene photos poster sized outside gun shops like the abortion protestors do
Grumpy Code Monkey
@amk:
God, stop teasing me. I can’t believe Trump (or Carson) is going to hang on until February, but we’re halfway through October and he’s still chugging along. If he’s still in the race in November and still polling well, then Jeb? is fucked. Fucked
My original fantasy was for Trump, Jeb?, and whichever True Believer is left to split delegates going into the convention, but somehow Jeb? coming out of Stupor Tuesday with nothing to show for it has far more appeal.
Gravenstone
Believe I’ve actually browsed Badger Guns some years ago. There was also an outfit up by Green Bay (name escapes me at present) whose online business supplied magazines to the Va Tech shooter and another mass shooter. Believe the latter business might have closed down due to the notoriety those connections brought. In all, couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of ghouls.
David Koch
@Steve from Antioch: I’m sure the mothers and fathers of the 28 kindergartners massacred to bits at Newtown will take solaces in Sanders’s disturbed defense of corporatist merchants of death.
you can’t spell Bernie Sanders without NRA
sm*t cl*de
@boatboy_srq:
There is a huge overlap in liberitarian circles between “customer dissatisfaction is sufficient inducement to keep corporates acting honestly,” and “we need tort reform — dissatisfied customers and their lawsuits are holding back the Engine of Wealth”.
[ETA: What Roger Moore said up at #15]
Archon
@srv: So Obama is a warmonger instead of a weak-willed sissy unwilling to project American power.
Must be Wednesday.
PurpleGirl
@Amir Khalid: This man deserves a Darwin Award honorable mention even though he didn’t end up taking himself out of the gene pool. My g_d, what was he thinking (or not thinking). Head-Desk.
amk
@Grumpy Code Monkey:
well, I don’t know how true scott walker’s words are (I do, but I am digressing) – “trump could be our nominee”.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/scott-walker-on-donald-trump-gop-nominee-214803
Roger Moore
@Matt McIrvin:
I think it would also help if we could do something about the climate of fear that makes people want a weapon to protect themselves. The people who are so scared of the world that they need a gun with them at all times to feel safe are also the kind of people who are most prone to shooting first and asking questions later.
David Koch
Sanders loves to say the US should be like Denmark. In fact, he says it so often it might as well be his campaign slogan.
Fine.
Denmark has full restrictive gun control. Oh – that he rejects.
SFAW
@Steve from Antioch:
Fun fact: the FBI study to which you are presumably referring does not separate out “assault weapons.” Various persons parroting the same “fun fact” that you did have somehow overlooked that, or have said that the “assault weapons” fall into the “Other” category (or however they name the category); the study does not specify that they do.
If there’s some other study, we’re all ears.
Duke of Clay
@Punchy: I blame the culture of violence among bicyclists.
Thoughtful Today
@David Koch:
If guns is your single issue, that’s fair.
Could you point me to where Hillary Clinton has argued that all guns should be outlawed?
Is she planning on outlawing bullets as well?
I’ve seen some right-wing headlines accusing her (and Obama) of planning on doing that but haven’t seen any action or even statements supporting such plans.
Perhaps I’ve missed something?
Not That Guy
@Steve from Antioch:
I call bullshit. Maybe you are using “assault weapons” as a weasel word to deliberately narrow the scope. But if we talk about guns, plain and simple, I can assure you that if 30,000 people were dying each year from hammer blows, we would know all about it.
Cacti
Didn’t Bernie say that this is the type of lawsuit he wanted to prevent?
Calouste
@Thoughtful Today: You’d get more respect here if you actually addressed what was in the post you are replying to, rather than replying to stuff that’s not in there.
Although I’m not sure if that is your goal.
Shlemazel
@amk:
This is great news for JEB?
Just thought I’d beat right to retch.
Calouste
@Steve from Antioch: Only a few kids were ever killed by Lawn Darts, yet they are still banned.
David Koch
@Cacti: why yes. yes he did
chopper
@Not That Guy:
and if you compare it to ‘assault weapons sold on a tuesday between 9-10am’ the numbers are even crazier! clearly guns are not a problem in this country.
Calouste
@Shlemazel: Bush is a solid 5th in both polls, with 6%. He’ll turn it around any day now. Watch those adverts. Brink’s truck full of cash!
Roger Moore
@David Koch:
That’s talking about a manufacturer, not a seller.
Gin & Tonic
@Roger Moore: it would also help if we could do something about the climate of fear
What’s particularly odd is that the climate of fear is completely unmoored from reality. I was driving over the weekend and listed to a radio report that NYC is on track for 2015 to show the lowest annual number of crimes reported in something like a half-century. I think similar statistics are at play almost everywhere in the US.
Cacti
@David Koch:
He’s also been keen on the “guns are different in rural areas” trope.
Then some fellow had to thoughtlessly shoot up a community college in rural Oregon and turn that one on its head.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Calouste:
Not soon enough for me to get through childhood un-punctured. Jeebus, the stuff we managed to live through…
Face
Divorced, former pro athlete and Kardsashian consort Lamar Odom near death due to drug overdose. At a brothel. Near Vegas.
Christ, every friggin stereotype in the book applies.
David Koch
@Thoughtful Today: I am not a supporter of Clinton. I am a long time critic of Clinton. Ask anyone.
But I live in reality. She won last night. She blew the doors off. All the weak, sad spin won’t change reality.
As for Sanders, a 75 year old socialist from a tiny homogeneous state can not win a national election. McGovern already proved that. clap louder – but it won’t break reality.
boatboy_srq
@Roger Moore: @sm*t cl*de: EXACTLY.
Which is why libertarianism as currently embodied is entirely unworkable, because all the things that libertarianism relies on to encourage good business practices are the very things libertarians oppose because they’re Bad For Business.
David Koch
@Cacti: Newtown is pretty rural. It’s smaller than Burlington.
the Conster
@David Koch:
That’s exactly where I am today too.
SFAW
@boatboy_srq:
Took out a few superfluous words, without sacrificing the truth_value.
I hope you don’t mind, I hope you don’t mind, that I took out the words.
Thoughtful Today
@Calouste:
I’m deadly serious.
I fully support well regulated guns and gun owners. Bernie has offered specific plans that were sharply criticized by Hillary as being inadequate.
Does Hillary Clinton plan on outlawing guns and bullets? If not, what’s her compromise?
And please post a link to the legislation she proposed while she was Senator of New York.
I’d be especially grateful if you could cut and paste the specific legislation she proposed on eliminating handgun violence in cities.
Cacti
@David Koch:
The exchanges with Clinton and O’Malley on guns were probably the worst moment of the debate for Bernie.
He’s not running for President of Vermont, and canned platitudes about hammers and rural culture aren’t going to cut it.
David Koch
@Roger Moore: no you’re wrong. the law he voted for immunizes both manufacturers and retailers
Flanders' Other Neighbor
My thought is that just because a company has made firearms for over a century doesn’t mean it can’t, you know, manufacture something else. Forges and CNC machines don’t care if they are turning out parts for assault weapons or suspension parts for high-speed rail lines..
boatboy_srq
@Felonius Monk: Wow. Next, let’s take the franchise away because Those People all vote for free stuff… oh, right, Tentherism already covers that.
Roger Moore
@Gin & Tonic:
They’re moored in reality, but a different part They have a general feeling of fear because the world is changing in ways they don’t like. Some of that is worries about demographic change and loss of privilege, but a lot of it is based around growing economic uncertainty. The big story, though, is that they’re unhappy with the general direction of the world, and fear is the symptom.
SFAW
@David Koch:
It’s smaller than Burlington, less urban than Danbury, but I’m not sure it qualifies as “pretty rural.” Straddling I-84 is part of that.
Calouste
@Thoughtful Today: Obviously it is not your goal to have people take you seriously. Rant on if you want, no one is really going to pay attention.
boatboy_srq
@SFAW: How wonderful
lifepolitical discourse is while you’re in theworldconversation.I can’t really argue. It’s just that the bilge the Pauls (pere et fils) and the rest are pushing seems worse than most.
Calouste
@Flanders’ Other Neighbor: I think that was mentioned a while back in a well read book.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Roger Moore:
Conservatives I talk to are absolutely convinced that crime, and violent crime in particular, are spiraling out of control. This is demonstrably false*, but it’s what’s in their heads and it’s what drives their behavior. It’s beneficial to a lot of entities to keep people frightened and defensive. And they’ve done a fine job of creating those fears.
* violent crime peaked around 1975 and has been in steady decline. We’re safer now than 40 years ago in almost every way.
Thoughtful Today
@David Koch:
” McGovern already proved” … that some haven’t gotten the memo this isn’t 1972 … or 1980 … or 2004 …
I’d like to think I’m living in 2015 under the KenyanMuslimSocialist President I voted twice to elect … but maybe I missed a memo?
Yatsuno
@Calouste: Bernie does not have voters. Bernie has evangelists. And you are a heathen sinner if you do not fall to your knees kissing the feet of the Great Progressive Wonder.
SFAW
@boatboy_srq:
Opinions vary on that one.
It seems – although probably not completely accurate – that the ones who are the biggest Libertarianism boosters are the ones who already have money/power, and don’t want Teh Evul Others impinging on that. I’m a-thinking that the not-as-well-off who push it are the ones who think they’ll be next Koch brother, and don’t want their (imaginary) climb to the top hampered.
schlemazel
@Gin & Tonic:
Don’t try to confuse me with facts! The police are just lying & not reporting all the horrible, horrible crimes being committed every day!!! Since there are more guns on the street I must have more guns myself to be safe. BTW – this marketing plan worked for Badger.
RSA
@Steve from Antioch:
False, at least if you’re looking at the same FBI table I see (from 2011). The category “Other guns or type not stated” could contain assault rifles, so it’s not clear one way or the other.
Relevant stats from that table: Of 12,664 murder victims, 8,583 (67%) were killed by firearms; more specifically within the category of firearms, 323 (2.5%) by rifles and 1,684 (13%) by other or unstated firearm type. 496 (4%) of the murders were by blunt instrument.
Roger Moore
@boatboy_srq:
This. The way I see it, Libertarians got an important concept, but they missed the very substantial caveats. That is that greed can be channeled to positive ends. The problem is that this is not the natural condition of untrammeled greed; it is the result of a whole economic, social, legal, and political climate that has been developed to tame greed by making it so that the easiest way- or at least the easiest safe way- of satisfying greed is by doing something socially useful.
The lesson most favorable to capitalism from all this is that the best way of achieving various desirable ends is by crafting new rules that will tweak the markets so greed does an even better job of serving desirable ends. That’s where you get ideas like carbon taxes to control global warming and the three legged stool of Obamacare to provide health insurance. Libertarians are screwed up because they only listen to the “greed is good” part, ignore the rest, and try to eliminate all the regulations that keep greed within socially useful bounds.
Shakezula
@Cacti: I don’t know about you, but I can never get enough of politicians shouting THUG THUG THUG THUGGITY THUG!! Why should the GOP have all the fun?
Cacti
@David Koch:
Yep.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was shepherded by the NRA in response to multiple troublesome lawsuits for the gun industry.
Among them were suits by the City of Gary, Indiana against Smith & Wesson, the City of Cincinnati, Ohio against Beretta, and a private party lawsuit against Glock by the family of a mass shooting victim.
But the one that sent them into a stone cold panic was when Bushmaster and Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply paid a $2.5 million settlement to the victims/victim’s families of the Beltway Sniper.
Roger Moore
@David Koch:
That may be true, but the specific quote you referenced was only talking about immunizing manufacturers. IIRC, his claim in the debate was that he thought some parts of the bill- presumably those protecting manufacturers- were good, and he was willing to accept the rest of the bill to get them. I’m not very happy with that answer- I don’t think the manufacturers should have blanket immunity, much less sellers- but his position is slightly more nuanced than you’re making it out to be.
Mandalay
@Yatsuno:
That smearing with a broad brush is just as tiresome and false as the right sneering about how Obama’s supporters had proclaimed he was the anointed one.
schlemazel
@Yatsuno:
Obama does not have voters. Obama has evangelists. And you are a heathen sinner if you do not fall to your knees kissing the feet of the Great Progressive Wonder.
Clinton does not have voters. Clinton has evangelists. And you are a heathen sinner if you do not fall to your knees kissing the feet of the Great Winner.
Its a fun game we can all play, lets bash our allies! I happen to like some of what Sanders says, I also happen to like some of what Clinton says. I was not an Obama supporter until caucus night when I saw what he brought to the party. It drives me nuts that we can eat each other when we are all so close in opinions. The enemy is not in here, its out there. It’s not just you or just one side of this squabble but that comment got under my skin
Southern Beale
@catclub:
You are 100% correct.
boatboy_srq
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
This is my experience as well. It doesn’t help that shootings, robberies etc make better sensationalist television than the “community interest” or civic procedural stuff that made for news thirty years ago. It’s always easier – and quicker – to scare people with images of nastiness than it is to discuss complex issues in depth.
Alex
@Roger Moore: He tried for nuance, but failed. His debate claim was that people should not be able to sue good gun shops… but bad ones or manufacturers are ok. And he sort of shrugged on how to define bad gun shops. On the follow ups, he emphasized his D- NRA rating and said things were special in Vermont because it’s a rural state and why is everyone shouting at him.
It was a poor response that did very little to spin the question.
schlemazel
@boatboy_srq:
Its expensive to have a reporter at city hall and one at the state capital. Plus, not many people want that beat, it isn’t very exciting, the issues often are complex & solutions require compromise and thought. Its easier to have a camera crew, a truck and a police scanner and the visuals (which is what TV is all about) are so much more exciting than politicians droning on and on about problems that need to be solved.
Yatsuno
@Mandalay: Bullshit. I’ve received NOTHING extolling the virtues of Sanders as a candidate and TONS of “Vote for him cuz he is teh awesome and you’re too dumb to realise it!” from his supporters. I had enough problems with Bernie before his evangelist hordes got unleashed on the Internet.
And you’re certainly not convincing me I’m wrong. Not that you ever do.
Mandalay
@schlemazel:
Although I couldn’t quite put my finger on it myself, you just precisely identified why I found that comment so inane and offensive. Thanks for that.
Shakezula
@David Koch: That’s a whole lotta dishonest from the Bernster.
schlemazel
@Yatsuno:
please, share them with us, maybe I am lucky but I don’t get those things. Also are they from Sanders campaign or random nutters – heaven help us if every candidate is guilty of the sins of the nutters who say they support them. I have worked on campaigns for 50 years ad have yet to see one that did not have a nutter or two wondering around.
Roger Moore
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
Not quite correct. The rapid increase in violent crime started to flatten out around 1975, but it continued to rise more slowly until the early 1990s. The big fall in violent crime rates has been mostly since around 1995.
Thoughtful Today
Part of the ugly reality of all of this is that there are gun owners that would absolutely consider voting for the socialist that wanted to give their kids a free State University education, free health care, and 15$ an hour minimum wage jobs … as long as they weren’t a’feared of someone taking their guns away from them.
schlemazel
@Mandalay:
This reminds me so much of the ‘Obot-PUMA’ warz of 2008. It is needlessly offensive in no small part because it is non-specific (show your work) and paints the candidate and everyone of his supporters with a very broad brush.
Yatsuno
@schlemazel: I confess that I will have a very tough time supporting Sanders should he win the nomination. It really does matter that he wants to head a party he freely admits he wants nothing to do with. So why would he do something he cannot stomach? Also, he has no coattails. He will have zero pressure to work for Democratic nominees. These things matter. I’ve left that spot blank on my ballot before, I can do so again.
gene108
@Matt McIrvin:
I believe this was beginning to happen in the 1970’s, but then some far more radical people starting taking over the gun lobbies, in the latter part of the decade, from the folks, who just figured law abiding people needed to guns for recreational purposes like to hunt or target shoot.
boatboy_srq
@Mandalay: This is why the Teahad so often wins: at the end of the day Dems are too interested in purity ponies, and the GOTea is too well trained to shut up and vote (party line).
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Roger Moore:
Those data seem to bear you out and I don’t dispute it. I was recalling from memory a single chart with a peak in 1975 and consistent decline after. can’t recall where that was from.
ETA: though if you look at crime/population the falloff begins earlier. That chart is total crimes, and population is rising.
In any case, it’s still true that crime is not on the increase as many conservatives and gun enthusiasts seem to think. Some of the blame has to go to the ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ orientation of the media. Crime is cheap to report on, holds people’s attention and provokes strong emotional reactions. People predisposed to believe that the world is dangerous absorb the crime stories and it reinforces their world view.
Gian
@Flanders’ Other Neighbor:
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
http://biblehub.com/isaiah/2-4.htm
Elaine Benes
@the Conster: Since Roseburg, I’ve had several women acquaintances (we don’t normally discuss political stuff much) bring up the whatever daily shooting and express their disgust at the gun culture. Even so far as be fed up with men – that it’s men committing these terrible massacres and it’s other men (ie gun nuts) protecting the shooters and allowing this carnage to persist. These are middle class married women and I sense they feel it’s time their husbands – responsible gun owners – take a stand on this issue instead of ignoring it.
We shall see.
Central Planning
@Calouste:
They should have been called Lawn Guns.
Bill
@Gravenstone: I prosecuted some gun crimes in Milwaukee County a few years back. Virtually every illegal gun in S.E Wisco passed through Badger Guns.
This case is a step in the right direction.
It could be an interesting case study. This verdict has the potential to set gun sellers against gun manufacturers on the question of who’s responsible to pay. Both are Republican constituencies, and it will be interesting to see how that shakes out.
Of course, the verdict will have to survive our Supreme Court first. Which is not a given.
schlemazel
@Yatsuno:
certainly good point but it still does not answer my actual question – can you show the Sanders campaign saying or acting or are you projecting the contact with a couple of loons?
As I said, there are things I like about the top 3 (the second tier not so much) I have issues with Sanders as I do with Clinton as I did with Obama. I have not yet decided who I will caucus for (though I am leaning Clinton) I just am not ready to attack any Dems (well, maybe Webb, screw him :))
john fremont
@Roger Moore: This. For years the NRA said “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people,”that’s why you hold the people accountable not the gun. Then the NRA pushed for Stand Your Ground laws to make people’s decisions to use deadly force held to a lower standard of scrutiny.
SFAW
@Elaine Benes:
Have your acquaintances read Lysistrata, it might give them an (in)action plan.
sm*t cl*de
@SFAW:
Or they are salaried staff aboard a corporate-sponsored Foundation.
Yatsuno
@schlemazel: Would like to, but most are on Twitter and the work computer won’t let me do that. It allows the Juice for reasons that baffle me. Government filters are weird sometimes.
SFAW
@sm*t cl*de:
Good point.
Matt McIrvin
@Ultraviolet Thunder: From the charts I’ve found, there was a double peak in the overall crime rate: an early peak in the 1970s, and then a second peak associated with the crack epidemic in the early 1990s. In between, in the mid-1980s, there was a small dip, though it wasn’t enough to be tremendously heartening.
The 1970s peak had a higher rate of property crimes, and the 1990s peak a higher rate of violent crimes. If you look at the violent crime rate, it looks more like a steep rise to the early 1990s and a steep drop after, with the 1970s peak as a temporary false summit on the way up.
the Conster
@Elaine Benes:
Exactly my experience – guns and the idiots who love them have made me and my women friends single issue voters now. Men and their need to control women’s bodies and their gun fetishism is the manifestation of the same problem now in our minds. It’s become increasingly clear that men need to be told no.
Matt McIrvin
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
There’s been a major uptick in homicide in several cities just this year, and it’s gotten a lot of attention, not least because one of the cities is Baltimore and it’s been assumed to somehow follow from the Freddie Gray protests.
But, as Ta-Nehisi Coates pointed out, the rise in Baltimore actually started before the Freddie Gray incident. And as 538 pointed out, the rise is not consistent across all American cities (homicide in Boston is way down!), and may not even exist across the country in general.
I’ve been trying to figure out whether mass shootings are getting more common, or if this is an illusion of media attention. It may depend heavily on what you call a mass shooting, and the numbers are low enough that you can easily end up trying to pick trends out of random noise. They’re not getting dramatically less common.
Meanwhile, the slow rise in gun deaths is mostly from an increase in suicides. (And mass shootings often effectively involve suicide.) Gun advocates like to insist that it’s somehow not kosher to count suicide, and that these people would somehow manage to kill themselves no matter what, but there’s substantial evidence that that’s not true: guns are way more effective than most other methods people try.
Elaine Benes
@SFAW: LOL Good idea.
Roger Moore
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
They have charts on a per-population basis if you scroll down a bit further. The absolute highest rate for violent crime per capita was 1991, when there were 758.1 violent crimes per 100,000 population; 1992 was only a smidgen lower. But both of those were after more than a decade of very high numbers overall. There was a massive increase between the early 1960s and the mid 1970s, after which it continued to rise more slowly until the early 80s. There was a small dip in the mid 80s, followed by a spike up to all-time highs in 1991-1992, after which there was a very rapid decline. The violent crime rate in 2000 was almost 1/3 lower than in 1992. The decline has continued since then, but not at the same rate as during the Clinton years.
Betty Cracker
@Yatsuno: Close your eyes and think of the Supreme Court!
Bill
@Roger Moore:
To them the greed itself is the desirable end.
I describe these people as having seen the first half of “Wall Street,” and then left the theater.
KS in MA
@chopper:
A link within the linked story says this gun dealer was really, really notorious … and that the cops were represented by a lawyer from the Brady Center. Most interesting.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/historic-case-alleging-gun-dealer-was-negligent-goes-trial-n339421
Roger Moore
@john fremont:
They don’t really believe it, either. Look at how fast they are to talk about guns just going off by themselves when some gun fondler mishandles one. What they really mean is that white people don’t kill people, black people do. When white people kill somebody, they’re just defending themselves, or their gun goes off by accident. When black people have guns, they’re dangerous criminals who need to be taken down before they can hurt somebody.
boatboy_srq
@Roger Moore: “Domesticated greed” vs. “wild greed”, perhaps?
Bill
@Felonius Monk: It would make more sense to take them away from men.
trollhattan
@Bill:
Very interesting, thanks for sharing your take on this.
boatboy_srq
@SFAW: Say rather that the ones who are the most effective Libertarian boosters: it’s surprising how many folks further down the food chain claim libertarian leanings.
trollhattan
@Roger Moore:
Wish I could unsee that video of the little girl shooting the Arizona range employee with the full-auto Uzi. (NB the posted video stopped one frame shy of the round hitting his skull, but the mind is more than willing to fill in the missing information; in fact, it can’t be stopped from doing so.)
Unanimous winners: Parents of the Year–2014.
trollhattan
@boatboy_srq:
Capital L Libertarianism is essentially a multi-level marketing scheme, wherein the current distributors are always seeking new recruits one level down, spinning tales of riches, only in this case not selling essential oils but rather, selling an equally fraudulent scheme of dismantling every arm of government not called the Armed Forces. And those could be so privatized, while we’re on the subject.
That explains “Libertarians” still living in their stepdad’s basement. “Once we pass this legislation, I cast off my shackles and become rich.’
Roger Moore
@boatboy_srq:
I would probably say “tame” rather than “domesticated”. A domesticated species is one that doesn’t just live in captivity but has actually been bred to serve human needs better than its wild counterpart. A tame animal is one that has been captured from the wild and taught to get along with people, but there’s always the worry that it will revert to its wild habits. Think of the difference between a St. Bernard and a wolf you raised from a pup. Greed has not been domesticated. At best it has been tamed, and more likely it’s only being kept in a cage.
Keith G
@Yatsuno:
My emphasis.
This seems to be quite a broad brush, but it does sound uncannily similar to:
Thoughtful Today
Apparently not an Onion article:
Missouri Man Tries To Put Out Garbage Fire With Van Full Of Live Ammunition.
Villago Delenda Est
@Roger Moore: Prezactly. Libertarians basically want to assert their rights at the expense of everyone else.
The French solution for neo-feudalists looks better all the time.
Villago Delenda Est
@boatboy_srq: Those people are the Libertarians’ next meal.
A guy
One thing you can count on. If you come to take my guns. You will not leave my property. And I won’t either I suspect.
Villago Delenda Est
@A guy: Right, sure, Mr. Internet Tough Guy.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@Keith G:
I think you’re underestimating the vehemence with which a lot of people feel Al Gore lost in 2000 by distancing himself from Bill Clinton, which is the other factor in people worrying that Bernie will put too much distance between Obama and himself and thereby blow the whole damn thing like Gore did. It’s not quite historically accurate, but there’s a grain of truth that’s worrying people.
When was the last time an elected Democrat followed a Democratic president into office? Even Truman and Johnson don’t count since they were both elevated to president first by the deaths of their predecessors.
Yatsuno
@Betty Cracker: Heh. The Democratic candidate will win my state regardless of my little vote thanks to Seattle. Probably bonus points if Bernie is somehow the nominee, although I doubt he gets much further than New Hampshire.
@Keith G: That second statement is absolutely true. And something Hillary is just now waking up to.
trollhattan
@Thoughtful Today:
Whoa, the Darwin award folks just halted nominations for 2015.
trollhattan
@A guy:
Since we’ll take your property first, it won’t be your property we’ll be leaving. Breathing just fine BTW.
–The Area Collective
les
@Matt McIrvin:
This is only sorta true–the uptick is only major compared to 2014, which was the lowest in history. It’s getting lots of attention, but not for the right reason.
catclub
@Bill:
Federal or Wisconsin?
Gian
@Thoughtful Today:
are there some grave sites out by the highway, place that nobody knows?
Matt McIrvin
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
I think the only ones ever (unless you count the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans as Democrats) were Martin van Buren and James Buchanan, neither of whom covered themselves in glory.
The Republicans have had longer strings, but their last one before Bush the elder was Herbert Hoover.
Roger Moore
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
1856. Yes, it’s been a long time.
Matt McIrvin
Though that factoid does involve pointedly ignoring the historically unique case of Franklin Roosevelt getting elected four times.
SFAW
@A guy:
It’s OK, when “we” leave, we’ll let you know, so that you don’t stay cowering and weeping in your hidey-hole for weeks on end.
BOO! Boogity-boogity-BOO!
burnspbesq
@Yatsuno:
I find your lack of faith … troubling.
Seriously, though, I wouldn’t be so sure about that. The Wisconsin Supreme Court isn’t likely to find a Wisconsin statute pre-empted by Federal law. The Federal Supremes can dodge this if the want, simply by denying Cert. And if they do decide to take it, the Roberts Court has been all over the place in pre-emption cases, and Alito loves him some police.
A guy
Ha ha to all. Bring your pens and pencils!
J R in WV
@Gin & Tonic:
But all the TV news shows have to harp on murders by gunfire every day. Even if they have to go into the next state, 150 miles away, to find a gunfire murder. If it bleeds, it leads, even if it’s way far away. So that makes people more fearful than the actual dropping crime rate should indicate!
We hired many Indian software geniuses back when I still worked in software development. One of the things we told them in the interview process was that West Virginia was a very low crime rate state, which is true.
But some time after joining us, Arpan asked me about it. He said “Every night on the TV news there’s another murder!” and I replied, “Many of those are in Ohio or Kentucky, or up around Morgantown, a 3 hour drive away.”
In other words, “If it bleeds, it leads, and we’ll go as far as we need to go to find some bleeding!!” I mentioned that crime was dropping in a steeply descending curve, and that he could Google FBI crime statistics both nationwide and by state for himself.
We had a good conversation, and he ended it by saying he would pay more attention to where the crime occurred. He never did bring it up again, until he finally resigned to take a position with a firm in the DC Beltway area. That was years later, he worked with us for quite a while.
I always feel proud that I helped bring many very intelligent software developers straight from India to West Virginia, where they got Green Cards eventually, and many then went on to become citizens.
But that fact remains that in spite of steeply dropping violent crime rates, TV news shows beat the drum so loudly when a violent crime occurs, they make it appear as if we should all fear being killed and then raped in our beds every night!!
Ouch!! Every night!?!?
Yes! Every night!! So get fearful!!!!! And TV News, that’s why the NRA has it easy drumming up fear, in order to sell more gunz!
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@Matt McIrvin:
It’s relatively easy for an incumbent to get reelected. Getting someone else of the same party elected as one’s successor turns out to be harder.
Bill
@catclub: @catclub:
Bill
@catclub: State.
Steve From Antioch
@RSA: assault weapons are by definition rifles. (At least according to the definitions currently in place in states like California.
So looking at the FBI data you supplied, more people were killed by blunt instruments than by rifles, which includes many rifles OTHER THAN assault weapons.
Wait, what about that “other” category you say? That includes other an unknown weapons, so it does include at least some rifles -and “assault weapons”. But there is no reason to believe that the proportions of weapons in the “other” category skew any different than they do in the known categories.
The point of all of this is to merely underline the fact that the expenditure of enormous political capital in attempts to ban “assault weapons” was just very, very stupid. “Hey everybody, let’s focus our efforts on removing a type of weapon that has a negligible impact on overall murder and crime rates.”
SFAW
@Steve From Antioch:
But not in the FBI study.
You’re making a bunch of assumptions which, although they conveniently fit the “narrative” you’re trying to sell, have no basis in fact. In other words, there is nothing in the FBI study which says where assault weapons – of any type – are categorized.
Steyrs, MAC-10s, Tec-9s, and a number of others are machine or semi-auto pistols, not rifles. Are you telling us that they’re not assault weapons?
So, your repetition of your unwarranted (and likely wrong) assumptions, and the half-baked conclusions you have drawn from those assumptions, does not magically increase the Truth_value of said assumptions and conclusions. But you knew that.
SFAW
@Steve From Antioch:
And, as better persons than I have already noted: the primary purpose of hammers is something other than killing or injuring others. The primary purpose of assault weapons is to kill or injure as many living creatures as possible in the shortest possible time. (I decided to use the word “creatures” instead of “persons” because I’m sure there’s some asshole out there who will tell me that they use their H&K MP5 to bring down moose or elk.)
gian
@SFAW:
He’s also full of shit as to how CA defines assault weapons as any mope with Google could figure out.
So he’s a fucking liar
Yes Steve in Antioch is a fucking liar
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs#1
David Koch
I love how Sanders’s “liberal” supporters are defending the NRA
what a hoot, comrades
SFAW
@gian:
I’m shocked, SHOCKED!
Now if only I could figure out how to do a Brit accent whilst pretending I’m French, I’d be all set.
ETA: And, following your link, I have discovered that YOU are the liar – only rifles are designated as assault weapons. Well, if you ignore the semi-auto pistols and shotguns designated as such, that is. But OUTSIDE OF ALL OF THOSE, it’s only rifles. Sort of.
gian
@SFAW:
Cali has some of the best gun laws.
On the pistol list are semi automatics with large (being basically double digit) capacity magazines
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/genchar2
gian
@gian:
Left off fixed before magazine from the statute. Can’t we edit on phone
Paul in KY
@Yatsuno: I will crawl over broken glass to vote for him in general election. Will do same for Hillary or O’Malley, or even that odd duck Sen. Webb or that Chafee fellow.
Paul in KY
@Elaine Benes: Hope you are on to something here.
Paul in KY
@trollhattan: Felt sad for the little girl. Not so much for idiot employee.
Paul in KY
@Gian: I always think the wood chipper is a good idea. Then feed remains to hogs or flush down commode.
Paul in KY
@J R in WV: I’ve had Indians tell me that India is quite violent. Just that since they don’t have guns, they just go at it with fists or sticks or knives.
Steve From Antioch
@SFAW:
Assault weapons are clearly defin d by CAlifornia law. Just look up the definition and see whether those weapons fit. It isn’t a matter of opinion.
And even if your post were correct, it would just reinforce my point that focusing on assault weapons is silly.
Steve From Antioch
@gian: It’s debatable whether a magazine forward configuration is a pistol, bot the larger point is that Ca has a ban on large capacity magazine, regardless of the configuration.
SFAW
@Steve From Antioch:
Are you lying, or just being willfully stupid? Inquiring minds don’t really want to know, since the effect is the same.
And, even though your “interpretation” of the CA law is incorrect, it does not matter, because the study was from the FBI. Last I heard, “FBI” is not an abbreviation for any CA state regulatory or law enforcement group.
Typical wingnut troll. You’re not even as good as Reich to Rise at this. Well, I mean, you both lie, and are both delusional, so there’s that.
ETA: And, Steyrs et al. seem to fit the CA definition, so what’s your point? That they’re somehow rifles? You really need a third-grader to give you some help with this “thinking” thing that you seem to be attempting.
SFAW
@Steve From Antioch:
Apologies for the long reply. Here’s my abbreviated version:
Shorter Steve from Antioch: “Look! over there! At that thing that’s unrelated! See? It doesn’t prove any point, but LOOK LOOK LOOK!”