Blogging in the aftermath of the Mandalay Bay spree killing is an endless game of whack-a-mole. Or, if you prefer, whack-whacko. Specifically . . .
gun control advocates waving the bloody shirt for gun control laws that would have done absolutely nothing to to prevent Stephen Paddock from opening fire on thousands of concertgoers.
Of course, the antis’ “arguments” are .nothing new. It’s time do something! Ban “assault rifles” (again)! Outlaw “high capacity” magazines! Universal background checks!
Never mind that none of these “solutions” have been effective in those states happy to trample on the United States Constitution.
I digress. Here it is: the dumbest post-Mandalay Bay shooting pro-gun control article, simply titled Guns Kill People, via our friends at huffingtonpost.com. Here’s the warm-up:
“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people” has been the credo of NRA, gun lobby and most Republicans since the 1980s when gun manufacturers came up with automatic pistols, so that guns could kill more people.
But Las Vegas shooter Stephan Paddock had no discernible mental illness, criminal record — or anger problems, according to his brothers. The NRA will try in vain to find a reason this inhuman act was committed when there is no reason, other than the fact that military-style weapons are legal in most of America and easily obtainable.
Yup, HuffPo editorialist Harlan Green thinks the Las Vegas killer only shot and killed 59 people because AR-style rifles are legal in most of America. Pretty dumb right? Well here’s the dumbest thing ever . . .
Only guns can kill that many people — including women and children.
Need I refute that inanity? I’m sure TTAG readers can cite plenty of examples of mass murder that didn’t involve firearms, including the 2016 terrorist truck attack in France that killed 86 people. Not to mention most of human history.
Suffice it to say, gun control advocates are obsessed by guns. An obsession that’s delusional, misplaced and dangerous to our Constitutional democracy. In other words, dumb.
“Until the Next One” in 3…2…1…
So far, the only good news this week has been DCs backing off the reasonable need requirement for permits. And that especially includes the NRA refusing to hold the line on aftermarket gizmos.
Only guns can kill that many people — including women and children.
So, somehow flying a plane loaded with gasoline cans into the crowd at the concert would have not killed more people?
The idiocy of some anti-gun people is astounding.
There were fuel storage tanks nearby, which could have caused a real fireball had they been targetted.
This just goes to show the homicidal tendencies of leftists.
They think about murdering other people so frequently that they’re sure that they’d commit atrocities like this if they had the means for themselves.
Instead, they just want the government to commit atrocities on their behalf.
What does this even friggin mean? Does the author of this crap actually think this helps his side in any way? My lord…
It’s a wonder that anybody makes it out of a gun show alive! SMFH.
Timothy McVeigh (and friends)
19 April 1995
Fertilizer & diesel fuel
168 dead, hundreds more wounded
Not a shot was fired.
14 July 2016
86 dead, hundreds more injured.
Truth be told, the carnage could have been worse in Las Vegas if Paddock had rented a truck instead of buying guns & ammo.
Let us not forget what can be done with a handful of box cutters and some airplane tickets… and we wont even pretend that the airport rent-a-cops have a stellar record of catching every bit of metal that goes through the screening area.
Tim McVey’s friends didn’t do much of anything. He pretty much perpetrated the entire thing himself.
But all excellent points you brought up. There are many many more.
The upstairs lounge attack killed 32 people, by fire. No gun even used.
Happy Land arson: In NYC in 1990, an arsonist killed 87 people.
So you are unaware of the existence of Andreas Strassmeir, AKA “Andy the German”????
Should google that, mate.
Semi-autos were invented in the 1980’s? Does that mean my 1911 is really a 1981?
it’s a shame those automatic pistols invented in the ’80’s were only legal for the few years before the hughes amendment.
You are right that gun-control laws do nothing to stop spree killers. But that’s not really their purpose. What gun controllers actually want to do is create laws which symbolize their values and which functionally oppose the values of People Of The Gun. What they want to see are coercive laws—magazine limits, background checks for ammo, etc.—which do little to promote actual safety but which force gun-owners to visibly behave in ways that demonstrate the social power of gun-controllers. Gun-controllers want the satisfaction of seeing their values institutionalized as laws. That those laws don’t actually contribute to public safety is not nearly as important as knowing their “their” values are actual laws.
I believe that is a most excellent point regarding their ideology and agenda.
I’m not sure what is more idiotic: the fact that the leftist quizzling who wrote HuffPo article said emphatically that inanimate objects kill people, or fact that men who were also killed weren’t worth mentioning at all? “Women and children included,” my ass. As if any woman, or any child’s life has any more intrinsic value than mine. As an actual man unlike you, HuffPo author, go f%ck yourself. In fact, I wish you would go step in front of a moving bus so your panty-waisted “bretheren” can start pecking away at their keyboards to alert society about the dangers of, “assault busses.”
I had to read that twice…and I still could find no logic in anything he said. Did he really suggest that manufacturers make guns so people can kill other people faster? Really? Or that this guy killed a bunch of people NOT because he had issues ff one kind or another, but because he had a bunch of semi-auto rifles? The logical disconnect is extraordinary. I suggest that this guy should get a mental health evaluation; his thinking is seriously disordered. Or maybe he is just plain stupid.
“Or maybe he is just plain stupid.”
This is how stupid he thinks others are.
There are, IMHO, three primary rationales embedded in the Progressive/Socialist/Humanist/Liberal/Democrat agenda. 1) An abhorrence of the concept of God (Jesus! And, Judeo-Christian theology) 2) A desire for a Utopian-Humanist world order so intrinsic that the United States Constitution is anathema to their agenda.
3: Simple! When your ideology is so myopic and entrenched, and, you have no idea how to deal with EVIL–in fact, you refuse to recognize it even when you enable, fund, and promote it–there is no way for you/them to solve the problem. They subconsciously know this, so, they have to “virtue signal” SOMETHING! They cannot blame Human Nature, certain types of people (except for NRA), certain religions, ideologies, political forces (except for Conservative), the MSM, themselves, or, a Satan, who cannot possibly exist. They have to attack “the Gun.” And since they cannot seem to take the guns away from criminals and/or EVIL people, they must try to eliminate all guns.
That is why our Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment!
N O T H I N G
K I L L S
M O R E
I N N O C E N T
P E O P L E
S C I S S O R S
And the evil POS (D) will hunt you and kill you to prevent you from preventing them from funding the killing of those people so that they can be used for food and medicine.
ONE OF THE EVIL (D)’S MOTTOS IS:
GOT FETUS ?
The EVIL POS (D) AND ALL OF THE FING RINOS HAVE WAIVED THEIR RIGHT TO BITCH ABOUT “DANGER” TO CITIZENS AND “KILLING”. F U ALL.
these are the same people that said safe legal and rare
and people bought it
the Bible says dont condemn yourself by what you approve of
everybody who votes democrat should take this into account
in new york in 2012 there were more black babies aborted than born alive
blacks are like 13 percent of the population but they represent 40 percent of all babies aborted
anybody who is black and votes democrat should doubly take this into account
nobody and i mean NOBODY kills more blacks and black babies in america than blacks and DEMOCRATS
THIS is what the national conversation should be yesterday today and tomorrow and everyday not BUMP STOCKS
If anything, the title to this article is understatement. That was dumb.
The founders rejected democracy outright.
From spastic Twink-loving, Hentai Tentacle Porn watching, Newsweek “reporter” Kurt Eichenwald’s Twitter page:
A comment from one of his fans, a fireman:
Replying to @kurteichenwald
Call for: Update 1934 Firearms Act to include (a ban on) semi-auto with large capacity and/or rapidly swapped mag, + end open carry + track ammo buys”
Just who decides what is a “high or large capacity” magazine is anybody’s guess but we all know if it holds more than one (1) round given the chance Democrats would prohibit it.
And “rapidly-swapped magazines”? I know what THAT means, mags machined to fit just one firearm, each mag grooved to a particular firearm, no interchangeability between guns of same model, each mag unique to a single firearm and mags permanently attached by a chain or cable to the pistol/rifle itself ala WWI-era Enfield rifles .
There it is, what they are going to try and go after ie. interchangeable magazines, tracking/banning large ammo purchases, and “registering” or “banning” semi-auto firearms altogether.
As for the hawk-nosed sexual deviant himself, the GIF-sensitive, cartoon porn-watching, latex-hooded gimp, Kurt Eichenwald, he’s now calling “semi-auto” rifles “slaughter weapons”, gone is the old moniker “assault weapon”.
If you really want to see what “the Left” has planned, how they think and to what extent they are willing to go in their disarmament campaign just read his tweets and the replies by his fans, members of “The Resistance”/Democrats (keep in mind he’s a member of the infamous “Journo-List” and gets the DNC supplied “talking points” each morning telling him what narrative to push that day).
Thank GOD these idiots eschew firearms, they are overly emotional, clearly unhinged “reactionaries” incapable of critical thinking, but make no mistake they ARE “dangerous” all the same and have violent tendencies (they want us dead), they are a far greater threat to us and our nation than a hundred Adam Lanzas’ or Stephen Paddocks’. . https://twitter.com/kurteichenwald
Fire is still the favourite mass murder tool around the world.
Ban petrol, matches and go back to tinder and flint “for the children”.
I feeled mai I.Q. fall wen I red that. That was absolutely retarded. Evil will find a way to do what evil does sometimes good will stop it most often though good just punishes evil and calls it a victory. You cannot stop evil but you can equip good to deal with it and secure good against it.
IIRC, about 76 years ago, the Germans used gas on a few million.
Remember, although we tend to focus on the first part of “gun control” it’s actually not really about the guns. It’s about absolute control. The left purely hates the fact that they cannot dictate how we live and think. Their overarching, prime motivation is to control everyone and everything. They only fear our refusal because of the relative equality of force provided by guns. We absolutely cannot allow the communist / socialist / marxist / statist forces to disarm us or freedom itself will vanish.
Bonus round: since the left wants to validate all feelings, my feelings about their stupidity, ignorance of history, incomprehension of defensive use of force, and willful blindness are just as valid as their own feelings. If we’re really going to play by the same rules, they have to accept my feelings too.
Of course, they genuinely don’t believe that the rules apply to them. Rules and laws are apparently for lesser beings, not the ignorati of the left.
You are correct, it IS all about “control”, control of everything we hear, say, think, and do. The fact is if we, the patriotic law-abiding citizens of the USA didn’t own the firearms we do I can guarantee you the Democrats and their Resistance “army” of Anarchist/Marxist/Leninist/Trotskyite misfits, dopers, sexual deviants, degenerates, mentally ill, violence-prone worker drones/union members would have already staged their “revolution”. Here is was they and their Liberal Media cohorts who questioned whether WE would accept the election results last November but it’s THEM who seek to overthrow our duly elected president.
What are the chances that Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas shooter, was not a “typical” domestic terrorist or ISIS-inspired killer but such a diehard Liberal/Progressive (Democrat) that he went on his killing spree specifically choosing the AR-15 platform in order to exact “change” ie. the banning of ARs’ and/or all semi-auto rifles?
We must never discount ulterior motives here, “the Left” as whole have repeatedly demonstrated they are dishonest. I wouldn’t put it past someone on the other side of the 2nd Amendment debate to have been whispering in his, Paddock’s ear, and encouraging him to act “for the greater good”.
This is not far-fetched and totally plausible. The leftwing nut jobs were on this gun ban rant before the victim’s blood spatter was dry. Yet those same leftwing nut jobs encourage and will scream it is a woman’s right to kill their unborn baby human by abortion. That is so sick…
Thank you, I was worried I was the only one thinking that was plausible. I would NEVER put it past our opposition to do as I described, they would sacrifice dozens, nay hundreds, to get the “reform”‘ they so desperately desire. Yeah I know it’s a “sick” thought that they would resort to something like that but looking at their history, the Benghazi cover-up, covering up mass graves during the Balkan War so Slick Willy Clinton would “look good” at the peace table, trying to suppress San Bernardino and Pulse nightclub shooters motives etc. I don’t think they would ever draw a line anywhere as to what they would do to advance their (disarmament) agenda, to them bloody, lifeless bodies are props to be used to stir emotions and enact change
I noticed that everything on the control freak ban list was present either in the room or the vehicle including Tannerite, and a bag of fertilizer. I think this was staged. I heard that there was video of him and his girlfriend at anti Trump rallies. Notice haw his background was scrubbed clean.
Only guns kill that many people. Yeah, no.
Frankly I’d like to see them pass a complete “no guns at all” ban and confiscation law.
Let them try. There are 80 million people owning 400 million firearms in this country.
Almost certainly any confiscation would miss at least ten percent and possibly as high as thirty percent of the existing firearms. That would still leave between 40 million and 120 million firearms in private hands.
Not to mention all the criminally owned firearms that would be mostly untouched.
The gun crime rate would go up. The crime rate would go up.
And we would be proven right.
Then we take the remaining firearms and shoot these bastards.
Go ahead! Make my day! Pass a gun ban!
Only guns can kill that many people? Geez, that stunod must have been born on 9/12/01 or something.
What we need to do is to take a look at the over prescription of SSRI and SNRI type antidepressant drugs! People who take these things seem happy and kind’a normal until something happens that they don’t like. Then they go fricking nuts!.
I’m out there in the dating game, and I have met more than one woman who is taking antidepressants. They’re nice and pleasant people up to a point, but inside they’re still living with whatever trauma caused them to take the drugs, and if anything upsets their apple cart they go nuts! I will not knowingly date such a person again!
The mass killer who killed the largest amount of people this century is still Andreas Lubitz. He purposefully crashed Germanwings flight 9525 killing all 150 people on board. Nearly doubling the “truck of peace” in Nice France and tripling Vegas.
Some info from the local news sources. SP had lost 30 million in a failed property deal and was on prescribed psychotropic medication with known side effects including aggression.
Could this be the tipping point? (I refuse to use the word trigger in this context.)