Sandy Hook: Gun Control Goes Full Mental


The fallout from the December 14, 2012 attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT seems never to end. It was, in fact, a partially fictional article–Connecticut: The Coming Storm–based on laws passed in Connecticut in the aftermath of Sandy Hook and reposted at TTAG in March of 2014 that caused RF to invite me to be a contributor. More recently, I’ve added Sandy Hook: Lessons and Legacy (12-23-14), and Gun Control By Any Means Necessary (01-30-15). All of these articles spoke to the never-ending compulsion by anti-liberty activists to trample the bloody bodies of the dead in the service of the destruction of the Second Amendment . . .

Shortly after the Sandy Hook attack, the virulently anti-gun Governor of Connecticut, Dannel Malloy, established a commission to make recommendations relating to the attack, which has now (03-06-15) issued its final, predictable report, available here. 

It is particularly ironic, considering the content of that report and his usual smugly arrogant disdain for the Constitution and Connecticut residents that believe in it, that Gov. Malloy has recently announced there is no longer any “appetite” for additional gun control in Connecticut.

‘There’s just not a big appetite for even talking about guns at the moment in the state of Connecticut,’ he said.”

Even so, Malloy’s Commission produced a report that is the very model of the modern gun-banner’s rhetoric and desires. To understand gun-banner’s wishes for the nation, one need only read this report.

As Part III of my original Sandy Hook series at SMM noted, there were no warning signs that would have allowed anyone to predict or interdict the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary. The killer was diagnosed and treated by many mental health professionals over many years, and not one saw any sign of danger, let alone predicted or feared he might attack a school. This was actually reflected in the commission’s report, not that that recognition prevented it from making entirely predictable recommendations:

“While discerning no clear answers to the question of what role A.L.‘s [the killer’s] behavioral health challenges played in the violence he ultimately inflicted, the Commission nonetheless turns its attention to what we have learned about the role of mental disorder in violent events [p. 8].”

However, once the attack began, the killer could have been driven off or eliminated at many points during the attack if teachers and staff had been armed. No one had to die except the killer, At Sandy Hook and at every school in America.

The report, on pages 5-6, makes clear its true purpose: It is an anti-gun hit job from beginning to end, but a hit job that is careful to exonerate the mental health profession. In fact, the largest part of the report focuses on mental health issues, and states, again and again, that the mental health establishment cannot identify or predict who will commit violence in the future, nor can it be held responsible for that lack of ability. Even so, it recommends enormous expenditures for the establishment of massive bureaucracies, and, of course, the destruction of liberty.

“United States civilians own or possess in excess of 300 million guns: as of 2009, they owned or possessed approximately 114 million handguns, 110 million rifles and 86 million shotguns. The incidence of gun ownership/possession in the United States—nearly one gun on average for every resident—is the highest in the world. Most guns are lawfully owned by law-abiding persons who use them for recreational activities, such as hunting and target practice, and/or for self-defense. However, many guns are owned or possessed illegally or, even if legal, are used for unlawful purposes.

Beyond the sheer number of guns in the United States, the lethality of readily available firearms and ammunition continues to increase. The connection between the extent of the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the lethality of weapons used in the attack on the school is self-evident and beyond dispute. The Commission is deeply concerned about the proliferation, throughout the civilian population, of weapons that were specifically designed for military use during wartime. ―Assault weapons like the AR-15, as well as large capacity magazines often used with those weapons, have no legitimate place in the civilian population. The Commission finds that the cost to society of easy civilian access to assault weapons and large capacity magazines vastly outweighs the benefits of civilian ownership. By contrast, the Commission finds that the significant benefit to society from eliminating civilian ownership and possession of assault weapons and large capacity magazines can be realized with only a minimal burden on persons who want to hunt, engage in target practice or use weapons for self-defense. They remain free to engage in those activities with a vast array of long guns and handguns. In short, the Commission‘s first goal is simply to limit the possession and use of weapons designed for wartime use to members of our military services and law enforcement personnel.”

The Commission is obviously not bothered by mere facts, such as the fact that rifles of any kind, and particularly AR-15 pattern rifles are used in only a tiny portion of all crimes. The fact that there is no such thing as an “assault weapon” is likewise not a concern, as is the fact that the 5.56mm/.223 cartridge fired by the AR-15 family is low lethality and of intermediate power.

The report also makes the usual, misleading disclaimer:

“The Commission acknowledges the United States‘ long tradition of gun ownership and the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. However, the Commission also notes that although United States Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a personal right, the court also held that the right is not absolute. The Supreme Court further acknowledged in Heller that society has the right to regulate gun ownership, possession and use within constitutionally permissible limits. Through reasonable, constitutionally permissible regulations applicable to long guns, handguns and ammunition, the Commission seeks to minimize to the greatest extent possible the number of gun-related civilian deaths, while respecting the constitutional rights of lawful gun owners.”

The section of the report titled “Guiding Principles Of Safe School Design And Operation Recommendations,” reads like a statist wish list of feel-good measures. Some examples:

“Outdoor environments and indoor spaces affect the way we feel, move, and contemplate. These known design consequences must not be unbalanced in favor of protective designs, which while improving personal safety, actually detract from the core missions of self-development through learning from teachers, interacting with peers, and observing how the social process of the ―internal school neighborhood operates successfully or unsuccessfully (25).”

Notice the focus on “feelings” rather than practical, quantifiable protective measures, in essence, feeling rather than being safe.

“Being in a place/space where one feels secure allows the focus to be on the school‘s mission and the roles teachers and students need and want to fulfill. Self-protection from perceived threats requires expenditures of deleterious and defensive negative energy, a fundamentally subtle distraction from core school activities and accomplishments [p. 29].”

Those that would deny children and teachers the only effective means of deterring and stopping active school shooters commonly speak of the need for schools to “feel secure” or to “feel safe,” which to them has to do with rhetorical, symbolic measures, such as talking about “safety,” running periodic “safety drills” or posting gun free school zone signs. Notice the code words disparaging effective methods: “expenditures of deleterious and defensive negative energy.” Such people also commonly argue that having even armed police officers in schools–talk about negative energy!–somehow magically detracts from a pristine educational environment, thus contributing to “a fundamentally subtle distraction from core school activities and accomplishments.”

The Commission obviously understood that its reasoning–such as it is–and its recommendations are so anti-liberty, so irrational and so in opposition to Constitutional freedoms, they needed to pro-actively claim otherwise:

“The lethality of the weapons used in the attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School requires that the Commission evaluate access to firearms and ammunition. The analysis of the Commission is not rooted in dogma or a particular ingrained ―world view, but rather a rational analysis of what type of firearms are available to citizens and what that means to the security of communities. In its analysis, the Commission engaged in a pragmatic, not dogmatic, review [p. 61].”

The entire section then engages in the dogmatic, ingrained, and absolutely predictable world view it claims to avoid: “In setting forth the following recommendations, the Commission does not seek to deprive citizens of their right to hunt, engage in target practice or own a firearm for self-defense…[p. 62]. Neither the Constitution, nor Heller, have to do with hunting, target practice, or even exclusively self-defense. Such deceptive argument is the universal lifeblood of gun-grabbers.

The commission’s recommendations–pp. 64-78–are a virtual anti-gun wish list. Some representative examples:

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 1. Mandatory background checks on the sale or transfer of any firearm, including long guns, at private and gun show sales.

RECOMMENDATION NO. 2. Require registration, including a certificate of registration, for every firearm. This certificate of registration should be issued subsequent to the completion of a background check and is separate and distinct from a permit to carry.”

Neither regulation would have, in any way affected the Sandy Hook killer. His mother legally purchased all the weapons he used. He seized those weapons and killed her, as she slept, with a bolt action .22LR rifle before his attack on the school. Neither regulation would have in any way so much as inconvenienced any known mass shooter, nor would they stop any criminal contemplating mass murder.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 3. Require firearms permits to be renewed on a regular basis. This renewal process should include a test of firearms handling capacity as well as an understanding of applicable laws and regulations.”

This regulation too would have no effect on mass shooters and would serve only to enlarge government and inconvenience the law-abiding, which is its primary purpose. Deterring and catching criminals is difficult and not a priority for the statist because criminals serve useful political purposes. Harassing and controlling the law-abiding is much easier and more politically productive.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 4. Institute a ban on the sale, possession, or use of any magazine or ammunition feeding device in excess of 10 rounds except for military and police use. In proposing this recommendation, the Commission recognized that certain sporting events at times involve the use of higher capacity magazines. However, the consensus of the Commission was that the spirit of sportsmanship can be maintained with lower capacity magazines.”

“The spirit of sportsmanship?!” Magazines can be changed within 1-2 seconds. Replacing a 30 round magazine with three ten-round magazines would require only an additional 2-4 seconds to fire the same number of rounds. At Sandy Hook and elsewhere, this would have meant absolutely nothing, nor would it have saved a single life. The killer had more than sufficient time to kill. His stopping at 26 wounded, dying or dead was a matter of choice, not necessity. He could easily have continued killing for at least five more minutes. Such has been the case in virtually every mass killing of recent years. If ten rounds would be good, wouldn’t a six round limit be better? Why not three? Wouldn’t that be sporting?

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 5. Institute a ban on the possession or sale of all armor-piercing and incendiary bullets, regardless of caliber. First-time offenses should be classified as a Class D Felony.”

No actual armor piercing or incendiary ammunition has ever been used in an American mass shooting or school attack. Actual AP ammunition has, for decades, been illegal for citizens to possess, and “incendiary” ammunition–the report does not define it–is all but unavailable in any form except tracer ammunition, which is a tiny portion of the ammunition market.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 6. Allow ammunition purchases only for registered firearms.

RECOMMENDATION NO. 7. Evaluate best practices for determining the regulation or prohibition of the sale and purchase of ammunition via the Internet.”

Neither recommendation would have had the slightest effect on any known mass shooter.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 8. Evaluate the effectiveness of federal law in limiting the purchase of firearms via the Internet to only those individuals who have passed the appropriate background screening.”

This is a feel good gesture. No state’s laws or recommendations override federal law.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 9. Limit the amount of ammunition that can be purchased at any given time.”

This too would have had no effect on any known school or mass shooter. This is merely a harassment measure intended to annoy the law abiding in the hope they will not purchase ammunition and firearms.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 10. Prohibit the possession, sale or transfer of any firearm capable of firing more than 10 rounds without reloading. This prohibition would extend to military-style firearms as well as handguns. Law enforcement and military would be exempt from this ban.”

This was tried in the Clinton Gun Ban. While the ban didn’t actually ban any firearm with greater than 10 round capacity, it did ban such magazines, which amounts to essentially the same thing. It was a ten-year national experiment that utterly failed. It accomplished nothing at all for public safety and even Democrats did not champion it when it sunset. As with ten-round magazines, it would not in any way deter attacks or save lives. Such a ban would, however, ban entire classes of firearms–primarily semi-automatics–and even many tube-fed .22 rifles or shotguns. Banning as many guns as possible is ever the gun-banner’s goal.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 11. Require that trigger locks must be provided at the time of sale or transfer of any firearm.

RECOMMENDATION NO. 12. Require that the state develop and update a ―best practices manual and require that all firearms in a home be stored in a locked container and adhere to these best practices; with current minimum standards featuring a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety (including biometric) device when they are not under the owner’s direct control or supervision. The owner should also be directly responsible for securing any key used to gain access to the locked container.”

Such measures are merely harassment for the law-abiding. Who, planning the mass murder of children, would so much as consider obeying such lunatic requirements? These two would do nothing at all to deter or stop school attackers. Such rules would make self-defense–even in the home–difficult or impossible, and would also require wholesale violations of the 4th Amendment to enforce, which, apart from obliterating the Second Amendment, would seem to be the goal of the Commission.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 16. Require that any shell casing for ammunition sold or possessed in Connecticut have a serial number laser etched on it for tracing purposes.”

This is merely another form of microstamping.  Not only could this have no public safety benefit, it too is an attempt to force gun and ammunition  manufacturers to withdraw the sale of their products from Connecticut, and to make ammunition so expensive few could afford it.

Two final recommendations reflect nothing other than doctrinaire statist articles of faith, nothing more than feel-good measures.

“RECOMMENDATION NO. 29. Programs should be developed that focus on violence reduction through the educational process or other entities.

Rationale. When people feel that their concerns are being heard and addressed by a community that cares, such individuals are less likely to resort to violence as a solution to their problems.

RECOMMENDATION NO. 30. Alcohol awareness programs should be included at appropriate points in the K-12 curriculum.”

Unlike the other recommendations, all of which include a rationale, I included the rationale for #29 because it so clearly illuminates the magical, wishful, dim-witted thinking that went into these recommendations. There is no evidence whatever that any such “gesture” would have in any way inhibited any past mass killer, including the Sandy Hook killer. People planning mass murder are hardly going to say “Oh! You have now heard my concerns, and I perceive you care. Thank goodness! Now I don’t have to kill innocent children and teachers!” This, of course, assumes such people would seek out community forums or the “educational process or other entities” where they could engage in such group hug moments. Likewise, there is no evidence that prior mass shooters, including the Sandy Hook shooter, were in any way inspired or fueled by alcohol, or that any “awareness” program would have had the slightest deterrent or preventive effect.

Any “commission” or other body studying school attacks and making recommendations on how to deter and stop them must, of necessity, consider all means available, including the only truly effective means: arming willing teachers and staff with concealed handguns and publicizing that fact, but keeping the names, numbers and distributions of those carrying concealed secret. Failing to so much as consider this renders any effort, at best, an exercise in well-intentioned futility. This Commission does not so much as mention this possibility.

At worst, failing to consider the only way to stop armed killers inescapably reveals that those issuing supposedly authoritative reports–and in this report there is much self-referential back-patting and appeal to authority–are willing to accept some number of wounded and dead in any school attack to maintain their ideological purity and their never-ending compulsion to disarm those that not only pose no threat to anyone, but who would, given the chance, save lives.

Connecticut has, for the moment, been forced to back away from imprisoning the law-abiding for daring to believe the Second Amendment applies in Connecticut. But this report serves as an anti-gun primer, for Connecticut and the rest of America. Those that wish to preserve liberty would do well to be familiar with it. It could, at any time, be coming to a state near you.

Mike’s Home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.


  1. avatar Shire-man says:

    Rationale. When people feel that their concerns are being heard and addressed by a community that cares, such individuals are less likely to resort to violence as a solution to their problems.

    Might wanna start with that CT state pol who was playing Candy Crush or whatever it was during the public hearings on the proposed laws.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      For progressives, it’s only important that people feel it. If someone’s concerns are really heard or even addressed is of no consequence. You have to understand that feelings are important, not reality.

    2. avatar CT Resident says:

      Or CT Senator Beth Bye that was clearly bored with the testimony from people during the gun bill hearings in CT and was found to be on Facebook.

      She claims that she was keeping constituents appraised of what was happening at the hearings, and just doing her job. From the reddit thread she was indeed posting about the hearing, apparently putting up comments that were derogatory to the pro gun speakers, and lauding anti gun speakers.

      Of course the CT legislators playing solitaire falls under the same category.

  2. avatar Defens says:

    I got some “negative energy” for ya, right here.

  3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Wow, so much fail.

    I’ll ask one question: why would the commission go to such great lengths to promote infringements on the ownership of military style semi-automatic rifles when violent criminals killed more people with their hands and feet last year than with military style semi-automatic rifles?

    I smell an agenda that has absolutely nothing to do with real school safety.

  4. avatar Rad Man says:

    Remember kids, it’s ok to infringe on peoples’ second amendment rights provided it only creates a “minimal burden” on their ability to exercise that right.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      I wonder how ‘minimal’ the burden gets if anyone was to propose ‘reasonable limits’ on the 13th amendment.

      Watch the sparks fly on that….

  5. avatar mike oregon says:

    Don’t confuse me with” facts” ( whatever they are, sounds like a made up word) I know how I feel.

  6. avatar Rabbi says:

    Keep in mind that the moronic politicians that pass the idiotic gun control laws also pass all other laws.

    What makes us think that any other law makes any more sense than gun laws?

  7. avatar Gene says:

    Yet somehow they believe more words on paper will increase compliance with the law.

  8. avatar NDS says:

    “However, many guns are owned or possessed illegally or, even if legal, are used for unlawful purposes.”

    Percentage, please, of legally owned firearms used for unlawful purposes? I love how they word “even if legal” too. As if we are lucky. Disgusting.

    1. avatar Kevin says:

      You have it all wrong. If you make guns hard to acquire, have registration requirements, make conceal carry illegal, ammo and guns require an ID card to purchase and own, etc. you will have a safe society and no illegal gun use. It worked here in Chicago. /end sarcasm

      Basically these fools are recommending what has been the status quo in Chicago and Illinois for decades. Look at the crime stats to see how that worked out.

      At least we finally have CCW as of last year.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Excellent point. Another example of these self described “experts” on gun violence or whatever, who have not done the tiniest bit of reading, let alone actual research, into the question. Like the LEO a few days back who after 26 years on a police force, finally had someone point out that all the blood-curdling predictions of huge gunfights and blood in the streets had never actually happened, although loudly predicted around 30 different times since 1987.

        I can guarantee these dimwits never even once looked at the similarities of their suggestions and Chicago laws of the past 40 years, and Chicago’s results. Never even looked, but claim expertise without ever owning a gun or talking to anyone who did. Political malpractice should be punishable by a prison term.

  9. avatar Colt Magnum says:

    I feel my blood pressure rising…

  10. avatar scooter says:

    I couldn’t read it all. I tried, but found myself talking to the authors of the report and then something like “Aaaaaargh… ” came out and I was overcome with a sense that the well-meaning yet woefully misguided will forever attempt to drag us down the rabbit hole of ill-conceived recommendations and poorly-devised laws that never address any ACTUAL GOD DAMNED CAUSES OF VIOLENT BEHAVIOR. Take a freakin’ psychology class. It ain’t the brush, it’s the artist. You and the rest of the TTAG crew, however, most decidedly rock.

  11. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    Oh look, a squirrel! Thier recommendations have nothing to do with what happened at Sandy Hook, It’s just a soap box for a bunch of antis who lack the ability to process information.

  12. avatar GunTotinDem says:

    Most of that crap they are spewing is beyond the scope of what they were charged with accomplishing. Given the task, this report would have earned them an “F” in any class I ever took.

  13. avatar ThomasR says:

    If it wasn’t for the fact that they are obviously human beings, I would say we now have proof of alien visitation from extra terrestrials. A very delusional bunch of aliens

    Because I find it incomprehensible our America could harbor such bizarre and tyrannical beliefs held by fellow americans.

    1. avatar DickG says:

      They are the species “Liberal-us Progress-EVIL-us”. Their origin is unknown, but researchers have come to believe that they first appeared on Earth sometime in the early to mid 1800’s, arriving in the remote areas of the U.S. Midwest. Their propagation seems to be from sexual encounters with the sheep they attended since the indigenous human occupants of those areas would have nothing to do with them.
      The have since nearly completely migrated out of the Midwest areas to the U.S. coastal areas (both east and west) they seem to prefer.
      Scientists have cautiously taken DNA samples and have concluded that many have mated with human subjects thus creating a hybrid species known as the “Sheeple-People”.
      Regardless, genetic indications are that the species Liberal-us Progress-EVIL-us though human like in appearance, are unable to progress emotionally or intellectually beyond the development stage of human early to mid-adolescence.
      One word of caution: The pure-bred of the species seems to be able to exercise extraordinary control over the Sheeple-People, and are thus able to “force-multiply” if you will, their effects on an entire population.
      It has also been discovered that both the pure-bred and highbred versions use a form of logic they call “Liber-Logic”. This logic system has no counterpart in the logic system that humans have developed over 100’s of millennia and is nearly impossible for the human intellect to decipher. Researchers are fervently working to decode this system. Some members of the human species have been driven insane in this attempt.
      When cornered in an intellectual debate, they will resort to name-calling, personal insults, and diversionary tactics such as “projection”, lies, damn lies, distortions and “moving the goal posts”. Their final pronouncements are usually to declare themselves winners, and resign from the discussion. Do not be alarmed. Just as it is imposs9ble to win an argument with a adolescent human child, you can never “win” an argument with a member of the species Liberal-us Progress-EVIL-us.


      1. avatar Alex waits says:

        LoL. +1

      2. avatar franklin the turtle says:

        stealing lol

  14. avatar L,John says:

    Seems to me one of the fundamental “core school activities and accomplishments ” should be ensuring our children get home safe and sound by any means necessary.

  15. avatar DaveL says:

    weapons that were specifically designed for military use during wartime.

    I assume they mean the Mauser bolt-action rifle? No, no, they must mean the Brown Bess musket. Perhaps the Welsh longbow? The Roman gladius?

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Perhaps the “war” hatchet or “war” ax sitting on my wood pile.

      Or the really cool “war” sling I made as a child from shoe string and a piece of leather that could sling a stone over a hundred yards and could easily have killed someone if it had hit them on the head.

    2. avatar tdgrafton says:

      Or like a trenching shovel

  16. avatar Dogg says:

    Teaching children to be self sufficient and responsible adults directly counters the public school’s agenda for the last 60-80 years and that’s why you will see a majority of schools remain gun free zones. If you can defend yourself from a criminal you might get the idea that you can defend yourself from a whole government filled with criminals, and that’s a lesson the socialists/progressives/fascists (call em whatever you want) will not allow in their schools.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Yup. Keep taking those “baby steps”, ‘Murica. That’ll surely get us there… not.

  17. avatar Southern Cross says:

    The arrest and imprisonment of gun owners was demanded by a local “progressive” group back in the early 1990s. In a TV interview they called for gun owners to be arrested and imprisoned, and to be interrogated for their “crimes”. They also demanded that gun owners be sacked by their employers and to be actively discriminated against. After all, doesn’t gun owner = criminal?

    In a peculiar example of hypocrisy, the same group was fighting against discrimination on racial, religious, or political reasons, but on sporting affiliation lock ’em up and throw away the key.

  18. avatar JohnF says:

    RECOMMENDATION NO. 30. Alcohol awareness programs should be included at appropriate points in the K-12 curriculum.”

    Yeah! Back in my day, alcohol awareness was strictly extra-curricular. I didn’t get into it seriously until High School, but I made up for lost time and became somewhat of an expert on it, if I do say so myself!

  19. avatar Excedrine says:

    Two months before the Sandy Hook tragedy, the Democrat-controlled legislature in that state shot down a bill that would have allowed the shooter’s mother to involuntarily commit him to a mental institution.

    If the “panel” wants someone to blame, they cannot look any further than their own state houses.

  20. avatar John L. says:

    Simple rebuttal:

    “Which of these measures would have prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy?”

    Repeat the question until you get the honest answer of “None of them would have stopped it.”

    Then you can move on to the next question:

    “What would have stopped the killer earlier?”

    Repeat the question until you get the honest answer of “Someone with a weapon who was willing to use it.”

    End of discussion.

  21. avatar CentralIL says:

    “United States civilians own or possess in excess of 300 million guns: as of 2009, they owned or possessed approximately 114 million handguns, 110 million rifles and 86 million shotguns. The incidence of gun ownership/possession in the United States—nearly one gun on average for every resident—is the highest in the world.”

    If those numbers from 2009 are correct then there are definitely more guns than people in this country now.

    I’m annoyed every time I read the old 89-90 guns for every 100 people statistic in a news story or op-ed. Tens of millions of new guns have been sold in this country since the Small Arms Survey report was written in 2007.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      All of those estimates are bullhockey, keeping any sort of national list is illegal. I suspect 150 million owners of more than a billion guns, and my guess is just as good as anybody else’s.

  22. avatar Grindstone says:

    have no legitimate place in the civilian population.

    I had to stop reading there. While my dinner was very good, I don’t feel like tasting it a second time.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      If you read further you will see where they turn around and say that those same firearms belong in police hands. I guess police will be on some blue island somewhere outside of the population.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Yeah, one of the big complaints about personal firearms is that bad people will kill you to get your guns. Have they never figured that bad people can kill the police and take their guns, too?

        I suppose they rely on the concept that that would be illegal.

  23. avatar Fox Hunter says:

    The solution to sandy hook is simple, shut down the public school system, but the liberals don’t want their communist pro-homo, pro-abortion indoctrination centers shut down, so they blame gun owners.

  24. avatar John in Ohio says:

    “Self-protection from perceived threats requires expenditures of deleterious and defensive negative energy, a fundamentally subtle distraction from core school activities and accomplishments [p. 29].”

    The reality of one’s responsibility for their own safety and security detracts from the indoctrination of the latest generation of sheep by the State.

    They’re growing the latest crop of anti-gun progressive statists. This is just one of the big reasons that “baby steps” and “eating elephants” is a losing strategy. We can’t get ahead of this with small measures.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Any “commission” or other body studying school attacks and making recommendations on how to deter and stop them must, of necessity, consider all means available, including the only truly effective means: arming willing teachers and staff with concealed handguns and publicizing that fact, but keeping the names, numbers and distributions of those carrying concealed secret.

      No, that is not the “only truly effective means”! Public schools shouldn’t be “gun free zones.” By only allowing teachers and staff to be armed further indoctrinates those young minds to turn only to government for their safety and security. Since these are public schools and minors are compelled to attend, the public ought not be barred the exercise of its right to bear arms on the premises. Calling the arming of staff and teachers the “only truly effective means” is incorrect or disingenuous.

      Those that wish to preserve liberty would do well to be familiar with it. It could, at any time, be coming to a state near you.

      Your concluding sentence is somewhat ironic given the first part of this comment.

  25. avatar Chris says:

    I’ve been hearing this 300 millions guns number for almost two decades now.

    Have there seriously been that many boating accidents to account for the huge increase in gun sales since 2008?

  26. avatar J3W1 says:

    I was hoping the Sandy Hook Commission might have discovered that the Sandy Hook attack never happened, no students or teachers were killed, and the Sandy Hook Elementary School was condemned for asbestos for more than 3 years before the fateful day of the FEMA drill.

    All the parents of the “dead” children were crisis actors, and if you check the real estate transactions for the Sandy Hook area, those “victimized” families all paid $12,000 or less for their large Suburban homes and all moved into the area less than one year before the “attack”.

    Some of the “dead” children appeared at the White House with Obama and several danced at the Super Bowl the following year. And all the major media who covered the “event” knew it was phony and went along anyway. It was a deliberate and treasonous attempt to undermine the 2nd Amendment. It was the exact same game plan used to disarm the UK and Australia. But there’s something different about Americans. The plan backfired. Even though virtually all gun owners believe the Sandy Hook attacks happened, the response was to BUY MORE GUNS AND AMMO BECAUSE THE STATIST CREEPS ARE LOOKING TO BAN STUFF AGAIN.

  27. avatar franklin the turtle says:

    “Through reasonable, constitutionally permissible regulations (INFRINGEMENTS) applicable to long guns, handguns and ammunition, the Commission seeks to minimize to the greatest extent possible the number of gun-related civilian deaths, while respecting the constitutional rights of lawful gun owners.”

    change regulations and you see how much respect they have for the 2nd

    1. avatar franklin the turtle says:

      also you can find incendiary ammo for many calibers at, that’s the only place i found them, they may be made for him. very fun when u get mad at the lawnmower

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        That URL resolves to a “Domain for Sale” page…

        A quick StartPage search for “exotic ammo” should yield plenty of results to look through.

        1. avatar franklin the turtle says:

          i sent them an email it changed to . sorry bout that, been a while since i ordered from them

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @franklin the turtle: No problem. Just the other day my son asked me where to get 12 gauge Dragon’s Breath so I was hoping your original link was to a site I hadn’t seen before. 🙂

  28. avatar DetroitMan says:

    “RECOMMENDATION NO. 29. Programs should be developed that focus on violence reduction through the educational process or other entities.

    Rationale. When people feel that their concerns are being heard and addressed by a community that cares, such individuals are less likely to resort to violence as a solution to their problems.”

    The Newtown shooter was known to be reclusive and antisocial for at least a year before the attack. Does anyone really think he would have shown up to a community forum to discuss his feelings with a bunch of complete strangers? Recommendations like this show that they aren’t addressing the specific incident at all. They are just using a tragedy to push the same ideological garbage that they push every day.

  29. avatar Dempsterdumpster says:

    “United States civilians own or possess….”

    Is it possible for a thing to be possessed, but not owned by someone somewhere? If 300 million guns were each briefly passed to a neighbor would U.S. Civilians then suddenly own or possess 600 million guns?

    Just wondering.

    1. avatar tdgrafton says:

      Stolen property comes to mind. Loaners from a friend. Weapons issued by work?

      But to answers your other question, yes; and that is why you have to look at how the numbers were generated.
      Most authors would site a source for that information.

      The sentence is written very poorly for a professional report. Most people that generate reports from studies try to avoid ambiguity like possessed or owned.

  30. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    When you have a full grown, able-bodied man who doesn’t work, doesn’t attend school, does’t have any real life friends, doesn’t leave his room, doesn’t communicate with the mother he lives with, except via email, then not at all, but does have a long, painful, pathetic history of massive anti-social behavior, who spends his days playing violent video games, shooting guns, and obsessing over past spree shootings……then what you have is a PSYCHO KILLER FREAK!

    Don’t give me the b.s. about not being able to predict or no warning signs having been seen. Mr. Magoo on a foggy day could see those signs. Crystal clear. Don’t give me the 20/20 hindsight excuse, either. One or two or a few of those traits may not mean anything, but taken together, one can only conclude that this individual is obviously dangerous and should be institutionalized. I still say the mom thought this, too, but was hoping he’d just kill himself and be done with it. Turns out, she was right. She just overplayed her hand.

    You POTG who pay only lip service to mental health intervention, while bemoaning every imaginable potential abuse of rights, are going to find yourselves legislated right out of actual gunownership rights. Then you’re going to learn, like many (every?) other society has, what true and widespread abuse of government power is really like.

  31. avatar 33AD says:

    “…have no legitimate place in the civilian population.”

    Ahhh – the “for the greater good” argument. The value of my life and the right to self defense of such does not equal your right to “feel” safe.

    Turds. All if them.

  32. avatar Matt says:

    Well written, and thanks for pointing out right at the beginning, that the commission was very quick to exonerate the mental health profession of any failure on its part but simultaneously did the exact thing they exonerate themselves of; put all the blame on the gun industry and gun owners.

    Also recommendation 29 is an assumption that all disaffected persons will result to violence. Well guess what gun owners are the disaffected persons in CT since we failed to find a community that listens and cares in the politicians (for the most part) and those screaming do something, anything! We haven’t resorted to violence! What the commission is telling me by this recommendation though is that if we did resort to violence we would be completely justified because that’s just how it works.

    Nit picking points:

    1 – CT did at the time of the shooting have a legal definition for assault weapon. That doesn’t make it right, but assault weapon was and still is a thing in CT. Point of interest, I have never seen conclusive evidence that the AR15 used in the shooting met the statutory requirements to be an assault weapon in CT; the pictures of it also suggest it was not.

  33. avatar LarryinTX says:

    It is fun laughing at these people and their cluelessness, but I must point out they are not alone. My brother has lived in FL all his life, but I had to inform him about the history of CC there. I was stationed in Okinawa in 1987, but heard the buildup and then the fact of CC passage, including claims of gunfights at the OK corral and blood running in the streets. More than 15 years later I was in a conversation with my brother (who, to be fair, was anti gun in 1987) on the subject, and discovered that he claimed he had never heard a thing about it until I told him. This is an engineer with a graduate degree, BTW, takes care of his own business better than most, but the whole question of CCW just slid right off him.

    More recently, visiting with my roommate and best friend from 50 years ago, who moved from CA to AZ something like 10 years back, he allowed that he and his wife were going to buy handguns and seek CC licenses, and would not believe me when I told him licenses are not necessary in AZ, he had completely missed the change.

    My sister, a few years back, took me into her confidence by showing me a S&W .357 Mag she had secreted in her home, lowering her voice to confide that “it wasn’t registered.” When I told her there is no way to register a gun in TX, even if you want to, she looked like I had just flown in from outer space. And she had lived in TX almost 10 years at the time. Somehow, for a lot of folks, it is just an easy subject to ignore. Not that that is an excuse for public officials to ignore their responsibility to inform themselves before trying to control people’s lives.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email