Last night’s drive-by spree killing by Elliot Rodgers claimed the lives of seven people and injured seven more, one of them critically. We don’t know the critical details yet: which gun or guns Rodgers used to commit his heinous crime, what caliber, how he got the gun(s), etc. When it comes to the push for civilian disarmament, the devil’s in the details. If Rodgers used a semi-automatic long gun – an “assault weapon” – it will strengthen all anti-gun bills currently working their way through the California legislature. To the point where their passage will become inevitable. If, as is likely, he used a handgun or handguns, the focus will be on his access to guns . . .
Rodgers was 22 when he took his life and the life of seven others. He was old enough to legally own a gun. If he purchased it legally, the gun control crowd will demand that ownership requirements be “strengthened.” If Rodgers had a history of mental illness, the National Shooting Sports Foundation will agree (in line with their Fix NICs campaign). If not, the anti-gunners will still gun for “tougher” background checks, arguing that a history of any mental illness should be grounds for disqualification.
As the anti-gun bloody shirt wavers do their thing, the momentum for more civilian disarmament in the Golden State will continue. And elsewhere. If Rodgers used an illegal “high-capacity” magazine the resulting anti-gun coverage will provide cover for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who’s staring at a mag cap ban sitting on his desk. He’ll sign it.
On a more general level, the fact that Rodgers committed his crime via drive-by shooting (as far as we know) blunts the pro-gun community’s usual reply to spree killing: gun control laws made it worse. There wasn’t an armed civilian to stop the killer. Or limit the carnage.
This despite the fact that Rodgers was stopped by armed civilians (i.e. the police). And the “revelation” that Rodgers had a history of mental illness and/or anti-social behavior. On that score, The Daily Mail has already dug-up some dirt.
Rodger was a website forum called PUAHate.com, which describes itself as the ‘Anti-Pickup-Artist Movement’ and aims to reveal ‘the scams, deception, and misleading marketing techniques used by dating gurus and the seduction community to deceive men and profit from them.’
Its members are all men who have spent a lot of time and money on books and seminars and other materials that claim to help men ‘pick-up’ women – but failed.
The bitter, often misogynistic threads are full of tales of woe from men who don’t know how to get women to date them and blame the women themselves for the problem.
He posted in 2013, ‘If you could release a virus that would kill every single man on Earth, except for yourself because you would have the antidote, would you do it? You will be the only man left, with all the females. You would be able to have your pick of any beautiful woman you want, as well as having dealt vengeance on the men who took them from you. Imagine how satisfying that would be.’
Rodger’s actions have been lauded on the site by other members who have called him a ‘hero.’
The above info means it’s only a matter of time before Rodgers’ spree killing is framed as a predictable manifestation of misogyny. Which the anti-gun left will use to hammer on a familiar theme: gun owners are compensating for sexual inadequacy. That gun owners are [male] women-haters. The meme will be tied to domestic abuse and “gun violence.” Ad hominem über alles.
How will pro-gun folk “spin” Rodgers’ attack? As clear evidence that there’s evil amongst us. That we must arm ourselves against it. That anything that prevents us from doing so puts us in harm’s way. Which we are anyway.
And so the disarmament dance continues. As Ralph said, the “debate” over gun control is driven by events. This is one of them. But it won’t be the last. Because it never is.