D’oh! . . . The CDC’s latest report on firearms might not make many gun control activists happy – “Gun rights advocates have long defended their right to bear arms out of a need for self-defense. And now they have a new report from the Centers for Disease Control that says they make a darn good point. The $10 million study commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January says ‘self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.’ ‘Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,’ the CDC study revealed.”
But on his way out the door . . . Obama Pushes for New Gun Control in Op-Ed for Harvard – “In a lengthy essay titled “The President’s Role in Advancing Criminal Justice Reform,” Obama urged the country to ‘take commonsense steps to reduce gun violence’ while celebrating the executive orders he has enacted.” Gun grabbers gonna grab. Or try to.
Remember kids, don’t try this at home . . . David Blaine’s Attempt to Shoot Himself in the Mouth Went Awry, Making You Wonder If You Even Understand Magic – “In case you’re wondering why “David Blaine” is currently trending, the answer is, of course, “a horrible reason.” David Blaine’s special Beyond Magic re-aired this past weekend on ABC and, in case you missed it, the magician recounts how his attempt to safely shoot himself in the mouth turned out to be, unbelievably, not very safe at all. As he explains, the magician intended to fire a bullet into a metal cup in his mouth, only to later discover that the cup had shifted within his mouth guard.”
Springfield Armory® Announces New Year, New Gear Giveaway – Springfield Armory® is pleased to announce its participation in the New Year, New Gear Giveaway. The promotion will give one lucky winner over $1,400 of concealed carry gear including gun, holster, and training tools. The New Year, New Gear promotion aims to outfit the winner with everything they need to go from zero to fully-equipped lawfully armed citizen. The promotion not only includes the gun and gear but practice and training materials. In short, the contest provides everything except ammunition and the carry permit, assuming one is needed in the winner’s home state.
How did Fort Lauderdale suspect get gun back? – “Authorities were so concerned when Esteban Santiago visited the FBI Anchorage, Alaska, office in November that they confiscated his gun and ordered a mental health evaluation. A month later, Santiago retrieved the weapon from police headquarters. Last week, Santiago, 26, used that same gun, law enforcement sources said, to kill five people and wound several others at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. Santiago confessed to planning the assault, according to court papers. As authorities work to pinpoint Santiago’s motive, others are asking another question: Why did the suspected gunman still have his firearm?” The gist: we need to make it easier to take guns away from, well, anyone.
Democratic Lawmakers Send Gun Show Ban Bill to Full Board – “The Northeast Gun Show would take place on Jan. 21-22 at the White Plains venue but the Legislation, Labor/ Parks/Planning/Housing and Public Safety & Social Services committees are sending a measure to the full board for its next meeting this Monday, Jan. 9 that would prohibit gun shows at all county-owned property, including the County Center. The lawmakers argued that hosting the show would promote a culture of violence and the glorification of firearms on taxpayer-financed property.” Because there’s nothing much more violent than a gun show.
2 killed, 2 wounded in shooting at Pasadena vigil for homicide victim – “Two men were killed and two more people were wounded in a shooting in Pasadena late Friday evening that began at a vigil for the victim of a previous homicide, police said. Pasadena police and paramedics responded to a report of gunfire at a vigil in the 100 block of West Claremont Street at about 11:53 p.m., Pasadena Police Lt. Mark Goodman told KPCC. The vigil was being held in honor of a person who was killed on Dec. 22, 2016 in Pasadena, he said.”
You Monday evening moment of zen:
Wait so an executive order signed by the traitor in chief says the exact opposite of what he wants to hear…. then he goes to Harvard and brags about his common sense gun reform????
I don’t think common sense means what he thinks it means.
You have to remember that Obummer would not know ‘common sense’ if he was smacked in the face with it. Total asshole & moron.
remember, he was a community organizer in Chicago, a community where the only thing that was ever truly organized is crime
As a former resident of Chiraq, I would point out the efficiently organized political machine that has been in place FOREVER.
But that is, in fact, a redundant comparison.
aptly titled, although i missed the gun on initial viewing.
it occurred to me that one can contemplate gun pocket lint as well as navel lint.
“Authorities were so concerned when Esteban Santiago visited the FBI Anchorage, Alaska, office in November that they confiscated his gun and ordered a mental health evaluation. A month later, Santiago retrieved the weapon from police headquarters.”
A better question might be why did he get his gun back due to his domestic violence issues?
“The assault case was resolved in March when Santiago entered into a deferred prosecution agreement, an alternative to adjudication where prosecutors agreed to dismiss the charges in exchange for Esteban’s completion of requirements, the details of which are unknown. Anchorage municipal prosecutor Seneca Theno told The Daily Beast that the charges are unlikely to be dropped now, considering Santiago’s alleged attack in Florida.”
If true, I would guess that one of the requirements might be to not possess firearms during this period. So again, the question is why did he get his gun back?
“If true, I would guess that one of the requirements might be to not possess firearms during this period. So again, the question is why did he get his gun back?”
He wasn’t convicted of domestic abuse and never would have been if he completed his requirements and the firearm was not evidence in that particular case. I’m not seeing how they could have legally prevented him from getting it back and it’s not for sure that they even knew he had it beforehand.
“He wasn’t convicted of domestic abuse and never would have been if he completed his requirements and the firearm was not evidence in that particular case.”
My guess is that the deal was a form of probation, which can include conditions like no use of alcohol, obey the law, etc. It will be interesting to see how the PD explains this one.
It can include those things, it doesn’t have to.
Then there’s government oversight where one hand doesn’t know what the other is doing. He’s not supposed to get his gun back but no one told the people who have it, when they’ve held it a certain amount of time they return it or he asks and they return it.
“deferred prosecution” means that you are not being prosecuted. You can’t have probation in such a case, at least not be that definition. Often a deferred prosecution will happen when the defendant agrees to do community service and stay out of trouble for some time period; if he succeeds, the prosecution will drop the charges and so there are no legal ramifications (including gun ownership). If the guy gets in trouble or breaks the agreement the prosecution will go ahead and prosecute him and the process starts back up.
In my county, we have “pre-trial diversion” and “deferred adjudication.” The first is a deal with the District Attorney to not prosecute if probation is successfully completed, and the second is a plea of guilty in court in which the judge will dismiss the case if probation is successfully completed. In either situation, the government can require just about whatever they want because it is an agreement between the prosecution and the accused in both cases.
No stiletto heels. A disappointment. I mean on the young woman, not on Barry. 8>)
The CDC’s latest report on firearms might not make many gun control activists happy'”
It isn’t new. Its two years old. I’ve been using it to aggravate hoplophobes since it came out in 2013. Here is a link for the document,
^ This. Thank you for pointing out that the study is old. The link is to the website RARE which then links to a CNS news story from 2013. Not sure why this is on the daily digest. I thought the daily digest was supposed to be current stories that TTAG didn’t have time to create an individual post for.
So shooting a boo-lit in your mouth can go WRONG!?! Who knew…yeah alASSka- you got some ‘splainin’ to do.It seems our Peurto Rican was heading for NYC. But Florida was warmer…
So you can keep track: https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?p0=263&iso=20170120T00&msg=Time%2520left%2520until%2520Obama%2520leaves%2520office
When I heard about the David Blaine incident, this came to mind.
Don’t know about Zen, more like suburban housewife who hasn’t done E in a decade is starting her roll.
(Which means we put the firearms away…)
“As authorities work to pinpoint Santiago’s motive, others are asking another question: Why did the suspected gunman still have his firearm?”
I have a question… why was he released? The answer to that question- presumably that he was not a threat to the public- is the answer to the previous question.
“The gist: we need to make it easier to take guns away from, well, anyone.”
-including those who have just passed a mental health evaluation.
Re: the NY gun show article
““The main purpose of guns is to kill living things. All it takes is one misguided mother who buys a bunch of assault rifles to bond with her son to essentially dismember 20 first-graders and kill six of their teachers,” said Legislator Maryjane Shimsky (D-Hastings-on-Hudson), referring to the December 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.”
Riiiight… except you can’t buy assault rifles in NY. In fact, you can’t even buy rifles that LOOK like assault rifles (i.e. scary black guns) in NY. So… bullshit.
“The main purpose of guns is to kill living things.”
If her car performed its “main purpose” as seldom as guns do (not as often as the THINKS they do), she’d be pissed.
While no one knows how many rounds of ammo are sold in the US annually, I’ve seen many estimates for .22 rimfire alone in the billions. According to this idiot, we’re all dead.
Eh, I think it’s fair to say that the purpose of guns is killing. I don’t get the pushback over that. It’s why guns were invented and it’s why almost every innovation in guns was created (with the exception of safeties)- for military uses or hunting.
I don’t carry a gun around with me in case I have to go plinking.
The difference is, unlike that woman, I don’t get the vapors are realizing that my steak was killed. Nor do I demand that someone else defend me at all times.
Re: scary black rifles
AR-15’s are still legal and readily available in NY, either featureless or with a fixed magazine. Neither style has to be registered. They featureless version functions he exact same as always, it just looks weird. You can also buy stripped lowers and build your own (featureless, fixed mag, or evil non-compliant/illegal).
I don’t think so. yes, the neutered AR-15s can still fire bullets out the muzzle- it’s still a gun- but they do not function identically to normal ones. The features that make up an AR have uses- that’s why they exist.The adjustable shoulder stock also makes it easier to handle, particularly for different people. The threaded barrel allows one to decide what barrel attachment is appropriate to aid firing. The flash hider makes it much easier to shoot in low-light conditions. And most importantly to me, someone with not so young hands anymore, the pistol grip makes quick firing comfortable and more controllable.
It’s not all ‘cosmetic.’ I know that line is thrown around to show that the law is useless (which it is) but it’s false.
” …have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,’ the CDC study revealed.”
Is that one of things Al Gore was referring to a while back, you know, something he called ‘An Inconvenient Truth’? 🙂
Re: David Blaine: regardless of anything else, the guy has enough faith in whatever testing/simulation process he hopefully has to actually stand up in front of a live audience and shoot himself in the face with a gun. And apparently he’s been doing this for the better part of a decade.
Re: the CDC report: echoing what was mentioned above: it’s a bit dated. At this point a big portion of the gun-control response can be summed up as, “this is why we need more studies!…[whisper] to show that gun control is effective! [/whisper]” since moving the goal posts is a time-honored tradition at this point.
Re: President Obama’s Harvard op-ed: It’s late and I’ll have to read it tomorrow, but even if there are a few nuggets of wisdom to be found, I fully expect the self-congratulatory back-patting to interfere.
Dwight D. Eisenhower was president when I was born. I remember the Kennedy assassination vividly. There are presidents I miss and and some I don’t. Obama won’t be missed at all, ever.
First Obama pic looks like he just took a 30 second long toke and is trying to hold as much in as possible.
OT but you should all enjoy this video:
Idiot Tries to Rob Gun Store
“The lawmakers argued that hosting the show would promote a culture of violence and the glorification of firearms on taxpayer-financed property.”
Sane people argue that banning the show would promote a culture of passivity and the glorification of victimhood on taxpayer-financed property.
CDC should really stick to medicine……
And in other articles….Tyranny, and authoritarianism… The ususal…….
I went and read the report. It doesn’t exactly say or pitch the idea that defensive gun usage is an important crime deterrent (I certainly think it is). What it does do is at least discuss the area and quote Kleck and others. The actual report is much broader and goes into detail about research methods that might be used.
Anyway yes it is good. And it’s great that the researchers here were honest and diligent enough to include information the administration clearly does not like. It should just be noted this is not a major part of the report.