“There is nothing normal about innocent young men and women being gunned down at work,” the President opined at Sunday’s memorial service for the victims of the U.S. Navy Yard spree killing. Hmmm. Seems to me there’s been a number of mass shootings lately. I’m not saying they’re “normal” in the sense that normal people don’t commit mass murder. Well, not normally. But spree killings (with or without guns) are “normal” in the sense that they’re not inconceivable. They happen. On a regular basis. So shouldn’t we accept the possibility and prepare for it? Not by hiring more SWAT teams and creating new laws. By tooling-up as individual citizens. The more often these black swan events occur, the more “normal” concealed or open carry should be. Is that the way it’s going, now that the post-Newtown push for civilian disarmament has run its course (outside of California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey)? Your thoughts?
Perfectly logical to enable a personal self defense strategy.
Defensive carry, that is.
It worked for the early settlers of this country and our Founding Fathers. I can’t understand why we wouldn’t try something that worked in our history/past. What’s the saying, if you don’t study the past you are destined to repeat its mistakes.
So why would we create more gun free zones? That’s where the crazies seem to want to go for their notoriety/infamy. Why would we pass more laws that only “law abiding citizens obey”, and obviously in the Navy Yard shooting all the laws and Executive directives that should have prevented this didn’t. Why does anyone think more laws will work when the ones we have work soooo well?
Stupidity is repeating the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, Albert Einstein (who was anti-gun)
as Joe implied I’m in shock that anybody can get paid $6098 in a few weeks on the computer. browse around this web-site… ℱB39.ℂℴℳ
It gets better.
Pay close attention to…
“There’s a super-heated group of gunmen who were victims and offenders,” McCarthy said. “This individual was a victim of gun violence and then became an offender.”
It does not take a genius to figure out the way these guys think.
A new euphemism for gangs.
it also says one of them used a military style firearm but wont go into details. on a lighter note i got my military shovel today, its got a thingy that goes up and a high cap blade with a sereated thingy. that dirt better watch out as its way more lethal then the civilian version
Message for McCarthy: Stupid liberal hand wringing.
It is what it is. The crying Democrats who are in charge have never in all these years put forth an effective way to deal with the gang and other socio-ecenomic problems that infest most urban areas. That says it all.
Looks like McStupid is off on another one of his alcohol-fueled rants again. Maybe he should have pushed to put the “gun victim” in the slammer instead of state boot camp. Or maybe enforced the thousands of laws still on the books for felons with guns and assault.
Tip o’the hat to SCC for the original thoughts.
Lets face it, we have risks everyday of our life. I have never feared being gunned down in a public setting. The chance of it happening is not that good. Do I carry? Yes. Is that added protection? Yes. I am more afraid of getting killed behind the wheel of a car. On a weekly basis, I see more tragic car wrecks. Drinking and driving kills close to 10K people a year. Text messaging and cell phones seem to be a huge distraction too. Do we need to start banning alcohol and phones?
Jon Stewart claims that over 300 people died from mass shootings (more than 4 people) this year. Is that any different than any other year? I know of a mass stabbing that happened locally with 4 people stabbed recently. In addition, watching the news on Labor Day, several stabbings took place. How the hell am I going to cut my steaks with outlawed knives?
We live in the greatest country on Earth. A socially responsible political system gives us rights and responsibilities. Why do we have to punish everyone rather than the culprit? I guess it is the blame game.
Yes, well…keep it up, Mr. President.
Maryland residents buying 1,000 guns per day in advance of forthcoming regulations: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/24/Marylanders-Buying-1-000-Guns-A-DAy
A further reason for the rush: After October 1st, Maryland requires an HQL “Handgun Qualification License”, which – depending on the details of your situation – requires fingerprints and a training class that includes range time. However – as of late September – there is still no way to apply for this license, or complete its requirements. I suspect something will be rolled out by the 1st – but starting the license process isn’t the same as having a completed license. Marylanders are comparing this upcoming situation to the current handgun background check process: By law, it’s supposed to be completed within 7 days; in practice, it’s taking several months. The first HQL applicants will likely be fortunate if it only takes a few months to complete. Many are recognizing that this could create a de facto handgun sales ban.
I expect the legal wrangling to start shortly after October 1st.
The MSRPA and others already have an harmed citizen with legal standing, and have forced the State Police to do things legally again rather than have the case heard in court. I expect that since this citizen is a “John/Jane Doe” in the filings, they’ll be harmed by the deadline and have the case eventually taken to the SCOTUS.
Meanwhile we suffer, and Maryland hangs her head in shame.
Being shot at work isn’t normal, but on gun free zone it is.
I suspect that one of the biggest issues preventing gun owners from carrying in daily life is simply practicality. All other arguments aside, carry (open or concealed) requires a lot of work. You have to make sure you’re carrying properly (draw capability, printing, comfort, etc.), make sure you’re complying with laws and restrictions, make sure you have control of the weapon at all times . . . the list goes on. For a lot of people, even those who obtain carry permits, the risk of possible victimization does not outweigh the day-to-day costs associated with carry. Can you argue both ways? Absolutely, and I assure you anyone who gets mugged when they could have been carrying would certainly regret not doing so. But we play these cost/benefit games every day. Should I get flood insurance or “self-insure”? Do I want to take the extended warranty on a cell phone? Do I choose a safer car or one with more sporty features? All of these questions have to be answered with an individual value and risk assessment. If you want more people to carry, you have to reduce the personal “cost” of doing so; make the rules simple, broad, clear, and applicable everywhere.
Jon Stewart is a full of shit liberal retard.
Yes, Mr. Lame
AssDuck. Mass casualties at a gun free zone is normal. Trying to bomb Syrians instead of negotiating with them is normal. An antiwar activist Secretary of State arguing for an immediate assault is normal. Wanting to negotiate with Iranians instead of bombing them is normal. ATF shipping guns to Mexican cartels is normal. Eavesdropping on your own people is normal. IRS screwing with pro-American organizations is normal. The Attorney General advising black groups on how to circumvent IRS rulings is normal. Most of all, an incompetent left wing nut in the White House is normal.
We’ve got to have a good olde scotch if you’re ever in SoCal, sir. RF has my email.
You’re on! BTW, good Scotch is normal. bad Scotch is an oxymoron.
BTW, this bloody shirt waving is being done behind bulletproof glass, surrounded by heavily-armed badasses who face the helpless citizens.
“Normal” should be:
1. Known criminals and those diagnosed as mentally ill cannot get firearms.
2. Everyone else who is eligible and who wants firearms is allowed to keep and carry them and is trained to use them.
IMHO, that would mitigate the risk to great degree. (Risk can never be eliminated, only reduced or transferred.)
As is currently the problem with the gun laws already on the books, I’m not sure how you would go about enforcing “Known criminals and those diagnosed as mentally ill cannot get firearms.” In the first place, which criminal offenses disqualify you and who gets to decide? In the second place, who determines the diagnosis of “mentally ill” and at what level does it disqualify you? How man times have you seen the comment “Liberalism is a mental disorder?” And we all know that the Progressives think the right wingers are crazy and dangerous.
At the very most I would allow that convicted VIOLENT felons should be prohibited from being in possession of quality pistols and/or long guns of any kind. This would retain for them their natural, civil and constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms that the government “… shall not be infringed.” Being a convicted felon does not remove your natural right to protect your own life.
Giving any government authority the ability to determine what constitutes a mental defect is the same as simply repealing the Bill of Rights altogether. You have just admitted that the whole “…shall not be infringed.” business is a farce and they will now have the authority to set whatever limitations they want on any of those enumerated rights. Do we really want to go there in an attempt to fruitlessly prevent a potentially deranged individual from buying a gun? What are the chances he was as sane as me, and maybe you, when he actually bought the thing and went crazy later?
If everyone is allowed to exercise their Second Amendment rights the problems of criminals and crazies with guns would self-correct in short order. Signing away our natural, civil and constitutionally protected rights in a useless effort to try to prevent them from obtaining guns is futile and possibly suicidal.
“There is nothing normal about innocent young men and women being gunned down at work,” the President opined at Sunday’s memorial service for the victims of the U.S. Navy Yard spree killing.”
But, isn’t it just ‘workplace violence’, Mr. President? That’s how you described the Ft. Hood shooting. And are you saying there IS something normal about being gunned down at a gun range, like Chris Kyle was? A war hero whom you have never, to this day, acknowledged was murdered in cold blood? Your words are hollow, Mr. President.
“The more often these black swan events occur, the more “normal” concealed or open carry should be. Is that the way it’s going, now that the post-Newtown push for civilian disarmament has run its course (outside of California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey)?”
Not here in MA, a May Issue state with any restrictions whatsoever up to the local licensing authority, Chief of Police. Here in Springfield, MA the local Chief does not recognize for all lawful purposes and restricts an LTC Class A to hunting and target. And guess what, since he’s been Chief crime has skyrocketed, just a couple days ago rolling shootouts on Main St in broad daylight. Yeah I think he’s got it right. /sarc
The Aurora movie theater shooting was the water shed moment. Prior to that event, most people who did not own nor carry handguns were content to go through life unarmed. The day after that event, I heard more than one person express a similar sentiment: “I am going to purchase a handgun, learn how to use it, get a concealed carry license if necessary, and carry it pretty much everywhere.” The Sandy Hook School shooting convinced even more people on the fence to begin carrying.
The Navy Yard Shooting is pretty much the last straw now for all but the most ardent worshipers at the alter of civilian disarmament.
First, people have finally realized that government is impotent: government could not even act when the Navy Yard killer previously shot a neighbor’s apartment, shot another neighbor’s tires, and went to police telling them that he was hearing voices in his head. If that combination was not enough for some serious intervention, there will never be intervention. Plus, when you consider that the previous spree killers were obviously mentally ill (Tuscon spree killer Loughner and Aurora Movie Theater spree killer Holmes), and yet again no one intervened, that clearly establishes that no one is going to prevent violent, mentally ill people from acting out.
Second, the Navy Yard shooter carried out his rampage in a secure facility with armed guards! The reality is hitting people hard: if a single attacker was able to overcome armed guards and kill 12 people in a “secure area” in a “secure building” in the “gun free zone” that we call Washington D.C., no place is “safe”.
Make no mistake. People are waking up to the sober reality that they cannot depend on anyone else for their security. They must take care of it themselves. And they are coming to our side in droves to do just that.
Is there really a need…or even a capability…to deal with ‘mass shootings’? Mass shootings are a statistical anomaly. And I’m not convinced you can stop anomalies.
You can stop, or at least alter the outcome of, an anomaly IF you are in the right place with the right tools.
You cannot alter the course of statistics by any single act, given a large enough sampling, but you could certainly alter the statistics of a single anomalous event if you were present. I refer you to the report on the Brit Marine in Kenya.
Historically; mass murder is the norm, read the old testament; the Mongol Hordes, the siege of Jerusalem, the crusades; the hundreds of millions murdered in the name of communism, socialism; mass murder is one of the most normal of activities; our relative peace in this country over the last hundred years is NOT the norm.
The fact We are just blessed that in most states; those that choose to be mature responsible adults have the option to provide for their and their fellow citizens protection.
The beatings will continue until morale improves.‘
The questions become:
• Where will they turn loose the next homicidal maniac?
• What weapons will he use?
• How many will he kill?
Why do I say this?
Because there have been more mass murders during Obama’s reign of terror than all the other years I can recall put together.
Not denying your point due to insufficient data, but, statistics, please.
Holmes, Lanza, Alexis, the Gifford shooting, the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting.
All on Obama’s watch. All perpetrated by ‘mad men’. All in the last 14 months or so.
What can you bring up from Bush’s? Except 9/11. But that wasn’t a mass shooting now, was it.
Can you find another ‘cluster’ of such events in the last 30 years?
The system broke. That is why those were killed in the Navy Yard. Simple as that. He should of never had access to guns. He should of been in a mental hospital.
You’re absolutely right because if he didn’t have unfettered access to guns he would be a model citizen incapable of murder, [email protected] these evil inanimate objects.
Funny, this administration didn’t seem to mind giving the Fort Hood
shooting the more normalizing term of “workplace violence”.
Dear Mr. President: Have you noticed that all of the mass shootings since Columbine, CO – including the Aurora theater, Ft. Hood, Newtown, the Washington Navy Yard, the Clackamas mall (OR), the streets/parks of Chicago every week, and the mall in Kenya – have one very important thing in common? They are/were all GUN FREE ZONES! and Kenya is even a “gun free country”, which prohibits the ownership of firearms by civilians (except, apparently, Muslim terrorists).
So my question for you, Mr. Prez, is this: Is it normal to see innocent children, men and women being gunned down in your idiotic “gun free zones”? Yes, yes it is.
When was the last spree killing in Maine? How about Vermont? New Hampshire? Kansas? Alaska? Montana, maybe?
Anyone percieve a pattern, here?
It’s not red versus blue. It’s free versus not. Simple.