Skip to main content

Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) signing the NSSF "safe gun" pledge.  Want to know why he signed it?  See below the fold.

It only took 9 months since Sandy Hook for another nut to get his hands on an assault-style weapon and shoot the hell out of the place.  The gun lobby will respectfully keep their mouths shut during the requisite mourning period.  Then Wayne-o will hold a news conference and state that this incident again proves the need for more armed security at sensitive locations, ‘sensitive’ being defined as any place where human beings might get in the way of a bullet or two.

The gun control crowd, of course, doesn’t have to wait for the shock and revulsion to subside.  Dianne already has faxed and emailed her requisite statement, ditto the President.  I’m sure we’ll hear from Biden shortly and since the Brady Campaign has already issued a statement, Mike Bloomberg can't be far behind.

But that’s about as far as it’s going to go because the Colorado recall has effectively sapped any lingering energy from the diminishing number of members of Congress who are interested in gun control anyway.  And the good news for the NRA/NSSF juggernaut is they know something that most of us don’t; namely, that beyond statements to the media, occasional testimony before unreported sessions of various Congressional subcommittees, and a once-every-other-decade attempt to pass some largely-ineffective Federal legislation, the gun control crowd doesn’t have any real strategy or commitment anyway.

What the gun control folks do have, in abundance, is a wealth of research that proves, conclusively, the link between the existence of several hundred million privately-owned guns and a level of gun violence that is ten, twenty or thirty times higher than gun violence rates in all other Western countries.   The latest contribution comes from public health researchers at Boston University who have amassed a closet-full of data that basically makes it impossible to deny the degree to which gun violence rates correlate with gun ownership.  The report, justpublished in the American Journal of Public Health, is being republished and touted by every liberal advocacy organization and then some.

There’s only one problem.  When it comes to talking about guns, the NRA and the NSSF aren’t interested in facts or data.  They’re interested in keeping their constituency – gun owners – ready and able to challenge anyone who is perceived as doing anything that might make them lose their guns.  And when it comes to grass-roots campaigns, the pro-gun groups have the landscape all to themselves.

Every month the NSSF sponsors a major gun safety event, co-hosted by NRA-friendly Senators like Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Mark Pryor (D-AR.) Not to be outdone, the NRA has ramped up its Friends of NRA organization, which holds well-attended social events, complete with a meal, a raffle with guns as prizes, a speaker and other entertainment.  So far there are 8 events scheduled for the remainder of the year in Pennsylvania, 21 in Texas.  And for the remainder of 2013 there are probably more than 150 gun shows being held around the country, all of which feature NRA exhibits and membership displays. Will the gun shows have a total attendance in excess of one million?  Yes.  Do the gun control organizations ever hold grass-roots events? No.

There may be a link between gun ownership and gun violence, but there’s certainly no link between gun violence and attempts to control guns.  And if you want to blame this on the “strength” and financial “power” of the NRA, go right ahead.  But the next time you want to get together with a bunch of like-minded folks to talk about gun control, try contacting the Brady Campaign to see if they’ll sponsor the event.  Just try.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Its time to face facts. Americans are too scared (7+ / 0-)

    to ever think of giving up any of their guns.

    I don't know what it was that turned Americans into such a nation of terrified, frightened people convinced the zombie apocalypse was just around the corner, but it has and it is too late to undo.

    Tax and Spend I can understand. I can even understand Borrow and Spend. But Borrow and give Billionaires tax cuts? That I have a problem with.

    by LiberalCanuck on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:33:38 AM PDT

    •  About 2/3 of Us Do Not Own Guns (20+ / 0-)

      and gun sales for a number of years have been going predominantly to those who already own other guns.

      There is around 90% popular support for tighter gun control laws, but the arms industry moves heaven and earth to unelect representatives who take any action for them, as the recall election in Colorado.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:42:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That doesn't pass the logic test. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        notrouble, FrankRose

        Why would someone who already has a conceal carry license need a second or third?

        From the first page of the google results, visible in the blurb google shows.
        Search was: conceal carry surges among women...
        Ohio conceal carry numbers on pace to double
        Colorado conceal carry permits dramatically increase
        Cirginia conceal carry permits surge
        Conceal carry apps reach all time high in kansas
        South carolina conceal carry permits
        Oklahoma, Tennesee, Wyoming, Nebraska already matched last year's totals
        Texas, Utah, Wisconsin on pace for biggest year EVER.

        I didn't even see the article I wanted to cite. It was about record levels of women getting their conceal carry license in florida.

        If you think that the same old people are buying duplicates of guns that they already own while the ranks of the concealed carry holders undergo a gargantuan growth of people who aren't buying anything to go with their new license, then you should lay off the beer until your head clears.

    •  Simple... (20+ / 0-)
      I don't know what it was that turned Americans into such a nation of terrified, frightened people convinced the zombie apocalypse was just around the corner, but it has and it is too late to undo.
      The gun makers watched their profits sink throughout the late `60s and into the the `70s and determined that they needed to change their marketing strategy.

      Guns went from being primarily promoted for sport purposes (hunting, target shooting, etc.) to being promoted as necessary self-defense tools. Along with that marketing effort came scare tactics from organizations like the NRA and affiliated gun maker mouthpieces.

      It's all about business. Scaring the living hell out of Americans and convincing them they need a weapon to defend themselves is what drives the bottom line of gun makers.

      That's how we got to this point.

      Calling other DKos members "weenies" is a personal insult and therefore against site rules.

      by Bob Johnson on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:49:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep and the gullible lap it up (7+ / 0-)

        They all deny that they're not afraid, that they're "only taking responsibility for their safety."  But it's painfully obvious that, unlike the majority of their fellow Americans, they can't deal with the stresses and uncertainties of daily life without their precious little (or big) firearms.

        I drive through a sleepy, reasonably safe suburb of Portland, Oregon periodically to visit a shopping center.  About a year ago, a closed facility that used to rent power tools and equipment to the weekend do-it-yourself crowd was redeveloped into a gun shop/firing range.

        Guess what it's called?

        Threat Dynamics.

        The principal threat is in these guys heads. But there's no question they aim to make money off gullible people who are afraid.

        It's all about fear and money.

        •  I can deal with daily life without firearms or (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          notrouble

          insisting on banning legal objects from innocent Americans.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:13:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There you are with the innocent Americans again (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mark Mywurtz

            You're like a little piece of paper I find stuck to my heel upon exiting the bathroom.

            Look: you can cry your crocodile tears about innocent Americans until those tears flush the mountains into the sea. It doesn't matter. It's a meaningless phrase; one, that, if you took a moment to actually think, you would realize means nothing.

            All people are innocent until they're not.

            Adam Lanza was innocent until he stole his Mom's gun and started his rampage.

            The point is this nation has a firearm problem. It's clear and anyone who denies it has zero credibility. I support major changes to address that problem.

            You evidently don't.

            That makes you part of the problem.

            •  It's clear that you find liberties 'meaningless' (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              notrouble

              "All people are innocent until they're not"
              You just justified the elimination of every liberty, right and freedom there is.
              An interesting viewpoint, however I'm not willing to throw liberties away because you-somehow-find it too scary to live in the United States.

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 04:30:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  When a nation is terrified they turn over their (0+ / 0-)

      liberties for the promise of security.

      There are plenty of us that aren't terrified.

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:15:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are right - we are scared (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mark Mywurtz, WakeUpNeo

      We are scared to outwardly support gun control laws, because the RKBAers and the NRA Have guns and too many kooks who will use them.  

      Almost every road here in rural upstate NY has a printed sign supporting the repeal of the NY SAFE Act.  The local county sheriff has publicly declared he will virtually not support enforcing it's provisions.

      If we want to put up a sign saying "Why repeal a law which makes us all safer?"  Do you know what would happen?

      It would be riddled with bullet holes by the next AM. (As our No Trespassing & Hunting signs are)  Our dog would be found dead.  Trees would be cut down and probably eventually damage to our house or a fire started in our woods or fields.  

      Local papers would not print a letter to the editor without a signature.  If we went to a gathering of those wanting stricter gun laws, I'm sure we would be photographed, monitored, spied on, IF we could find a room, building to hold such a meeting in.  The guy who plows our driveway, may refuse to do so.  The highway dept guys would make hitting our mailbox in January with a town plow, a priority.  

      •  True (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PinHole, WakeUpNeo

        At least, I guarantee that if gun law reform proponents had a significant rally for reform, the kooks with their Glocks and ARs would show up to intimidate everyone away.  GUARANTEED.  Fuck...they did it to try and prevent people from getting healthcare, so they would definitely do it to keep reasonable gun reform from getting a hearing.  

        People on the right side of this issue can't stick their necks out too far as you are absolutely right--they risk becoming the target of violence at the hands of the fetishists.  

        Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

        by Mark Mywurtz on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 03:08:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Another person got a gun and committed mass (6+ / 0-)

    murder. Obviously it was not too hard for him to do.

    There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

    by oldpotsmuggler on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:39:18 AM PDT

  •  This sounds like gloating. (9+ / 0-)

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:39:31 AM PDT

  •  wtf? (12+ / 0-)
    the gun control crowd doesn’t have any real strategy or commitment anyway.
    does this diary have a purpose other than insulting "the gun control crowd"?

    "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

    by esquimaux on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:44:14 AM PDT

    •  Trying to say things that as many people as (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos, WakeUpNeo

      possible will find to be "controversial", as near as I can tell.

      There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

      by oldpotsmuggler on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:23:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  response (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PinHole

      Yes. The purpose is to get them to stop thinking that all they have to do is let the advocacy groups appear from time to time in front of Congress and try to enlist support for their efforts at a grass-roots.  The fact that someone picks up a telephone and tells a poller that he/she is in favor of gun control doesn't get you very far in terms of getting something substantial done.  All it gets you is a headline that a "majority" of Americans favor gun control.  What I am suggesting is that the pro-gun people do a very good job of mobilizing their constituencies; the gun control people do a good job of coming up with research that shows the necessity for more gun control;s and that's all they ever do.

      •  So as a gun dealer, you want gun-control advocates (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kevskos

        to do a better job?

        Just checking.

        draw a window on the wall to remind you of the silkrain that makes things grow - Yoko Ono

        by quinn on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:46:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't necessarily see a contradiction there. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          falconer520

          Would you consider it a contradiction if the owner of a bar was opposed to lowering the drinking age to 14, or if the owner of a car dealership wanted better NTSB standards for gas mileage or safety?

          It's possible to be a gun dealer who sees the lack of national, state, and local regulations on firearms ownership and transfers as a social problem. That same gun dealer is also in a position where he or she would personally know a great many people who are responsible gun owners.

          It's not inconceivable that such a person might come to the conclusion that gun ownership should be legal, but that regulations on their purchase and use should be much stronger.

          That also happens to be the position of many people on this site who aren't gun dealers.

          "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

          by JamesGG on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:55:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  response to quinn (0+ / 0-)

          What I'm saying is very simple.  Gun control groups only operate reactively - a terrible event occurs and they mobilize public opinion around the event.  Then  life takes over, we all go about our daily business, and the event recedes from view.  Pro-gun groups like the NRA operate pro-actively; they energize their membership on a continuous basis.  I'm not against that.  The point of my piece is that it's easy to understand why the pro-gun position seems stronger; it's not that they have a 'better'argument but they work at getting their argument out to their constituencies all the time.  The gun control people don't.

  •  It is our national neurotic fetish (0+ / 0-)

    Sort of similar to the taliban getting off on beheadings and boy-dancing, sorry to say. It is very very difficult for the neurotic to abandon the object of his/her fetish, hence the lack of organized gun resistance despite the massive ongoing slaughter

    An empty head is not really empty; it is stuffed with rubbish. Hence the difficulty of forcing anything into an empty head. -- Eric Hoffer

    by MichiganChet on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:06:07 AM PDT

  •  Diarist still shilling for "Guns For Good Guys",,, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kevskos

    "Guns For Good Guys"

    ,,,and the diarist is a gun dealer, according to his own previous diary:

    For years the NSSF has sent literature and display posters to all its gun dealer members (myself included) promoting its “Don’t Lie For The Other Guy” campaign.
    (emphasis mine)

    Good luck selling your crappy book, or your friend's crappy book.

    Diarist, you really need to work on your lame 'the NRA is so out of touch and I/we are nothing like that' rhetoric, cos it's not very effective.

    draw a window on the wall to remind you of the silkrain that makes things grow - Yoko Ono

    by quinn on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:29:11 AM PDT

  •  Its getting to be routine... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mark Mywurtz

    every 6 months or so.  Soon it'll be happening so often we won't even notice.

    We have no desire to offend you -- unless you are a twit!

    by ScrewySquirrel on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 10:42:11 AM PDT

  •  Considering that the suspect appears to have (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MGross, FrankRose, JayFromPA, notrouble

    arrived with only a shotgun, and took the two pistols and assault weapon off the police he ambushed, how would supply-side gun control be relevant to this incident?

    Didn't Biden just tell us that the only weapon we should be allowed to have is a shotgun?

    Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

    by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:02:11 AM PDT

    •  If your assertion is correct, he wouldn't have (0+ / 0-)

      gotten the other weapons if he didn't have a shotgun in the first place.

      Oh, yeah, sorry...ONLY  a shotgun. My bad.

      EVERYONE should have shotguns, even the blind!

      draw a window on the wall to remind you of the silkrain that makes things grow - Yoko Ono

      by quinn on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:12:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And considering his record, he shouldn't (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, JayFromPA

        have been able to get the shotgun, if the system were given the resources to work.

        But that's not supply-side gun control.

        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

        by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:45:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That has changed, again, this AM, CNN Chevron (0+ / 0-)

      running that he did have an AR-15.

      So now are you going to start liking Biden again?

      give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

      by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:17:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bzzt. FBI still confirming that he arrived with (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, notrouble

        only a shotgun at a press conference this afternoon, this time via Washington Post.

        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

        by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:37:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  All AR-15s are shotguns, but not all shotguns (0+ / 0-)

          are AR-15s.

          So if it wasn't an AR-15, what type of a shotgun was it?

          They aren't saying. So I don't think it has been released yet.

          give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

          by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:54:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Seriously, you have no idea what you are talking (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Kasoru, nextstep, FrankRose

            about.

            AR-15s are not shotguns. AR-15s are "assault weapons".

            They are saying what shotgun it was. They're even saying where he bought it.

            The shotgun was a Remington 870, the bargain-basement defensive shotgun.

            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

            by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:14:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Good to know the bargain basement was there (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              quinn

              to serve.

              give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

              by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:34:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Dead people, that is what I am talking about. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              quinn

              Hog wild guns unlimited that's what I am talking about.

              You have no idea what you are talking about.

              give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

              by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:35:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The Remington 870 never met a conversion kit (0+ / 0-)

              it didn't like

              Gives A Tactical Shotgun The Handling Qualities Of An AR-15

              Machined aluminum stock adapter with Picatinny rail lets you upgrade your shotgun with an AR-15 or M4 buttstock to create the ultimate, tactical Remington 870 or Mossberg 500/590. Changes the geometry of the gun to minimize muzzle jump, and requires no drilling or tapping of the receiver. Mossberg models feature an ambidextrous replacement safety machined specifically to eliminate failure caused by sand and grit. Conversion Unit includes adapter/rail assembly only to accept your aftermarket receiver extension tube, buttstock, and pistol grip. M4 includes collapsible stock and pistol grip. here

              [here www.brownells.com/shotgun-parts/stock-forend-parts/buttstock-conversion-kits/shotgun-ar-15-stock-conversion-prod19976.aspx]
              Remington 870 Express Conversion
              On a manhunt for Remington 870 Express Conversion? Police Store has the best selection and pricing around. With 23 Remington 870 Express Conversion and Remington 870 Express Conversion & Supplies in stock ranging in price from $18.99 to $449.99, you'll find all the best choices available. As the internet's top seller of tactical gear and police officer equipment, we're able to bring you the best products, excellent prices, and reliable customer service every day. All the evidence points to the fact that our selection of Remington 870 Express Conversion is exactly what you're looking for. Our 100% guarantee means if you're not happy with your purchase, we'll do whatever it takes to make it right. Browse through our selection of 23 Remington 870 Express Conversion and place your order online or by phone when you find what you need. We're passionate about meeting all your needs for tactical gear and police officer equipment, and we're confident you'll find what you need here. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to give us a call!
              This isn't over yet.

              give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

              by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:44:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Could you just admit you were wrong, (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Kasoru, nextstep, notrouble, FrankRose

                instead of continuing to try to save face?

                A buttstock does not turn a shotgun into an AR-15, not even cosmetically, and certainly not functionally.

                Nor have I seen any indications from any reports from authorities that the shotgun was modified with aftermarket accessories, so now you're just grasping at straws.

                Moral certitude is no substitute for being informed.

                Oh, now the FBI is saying that no AR-15 or other assault rifle was used at all, not even one taken off an officer.

                Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:54:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So why the confusion is all I am saying. Why (0+ / 0-)

                  didn't it come straight out that it was a Remington 870?

                  It seems like a gun expert would never have been confused for an instant that it was a Remington 870 not an AR-15.

                  Why all these hours and hours of back and forth?

                  I am an anonymous poster. I read headlines. I quoted one head line you quoted another.

                  I wonder why there were 2. Actually what brand of bullets is not even an issue to hog wild guns and their needed limitation.

                  give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

                  by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:58:08 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Because media reported an AR-15 in the early (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Kasoru, notrouble, FrankRose

                    moments of the story breaking, when they were desperately trying to fill air but didn't know anything, and the meme took on a life of its own?

                    Because they were seeing hundreds of AR-15s strapped to the police and ATF responders (or rather civilian/police M-4s, the fully-automatic equivalent), want incidents like this to be about "assault weapons" so they can breathlessly debate the need for a ban?

                    Because on-air personalities are bubble-heads that throw around buzzwords they've heard but don't understand?

                    The distinction is not academic - under proposals gun-control advocates are constantly pushing, shotguns and "assault weapons" would be treated extremely differently.

                    Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                    by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:04:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Because Remington 870 upgrades are commonly (0+ / 0-)

                      available on Amazon.com?

                      give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

                      by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:09:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Christ on a cracker, quit digging. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Kasoru, FrankRose

                        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                        by Robobagpiper on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:09:53 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Nothing to see here. (0+ / 0-)

                          give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

                          by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:19:28 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  You are the gun expert. Yet you will not admit (0+ / 0-)

                          The Remington 870 is a common shotgun used to convert to an AR-15.

                          You deny that someone who took all the trouble to get a badge for entry did not take the time to convert the Remington 870 to an AR-15.

                          That the shooter rented a stock AR-15 and discarded that notion in favor of the Remington 870, which the officials, in their first statements, confused with a stock AR-15. (wherein I wonder if the Remington 870 might have had a conversion kit)

                          I would think as the gun expert you would have brought the conversion of the Remington into the conversation instead of cussing when someone else brought it up.

                          give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

                          by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:35:41 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Here's a timeline in Atlantic Monthly. (0+ / 0-)

                      here

                      THE LATEST 2:10 p.m.: The FBI and local police just updated the media on the investigation, by reiterating that there are no other suspects and that shooter did have an AR-15 rifle during the assault. The FBI says the shotgun he used to carry out the attack was purchased lawfully in Virginia.
                      (9:30 a.m.): Some new small, but important details, have emerged on Tuesday morning, as the investigation continues. The Associated Press reports that the shooter, who was discharged from the Naval Reserves, but continued to work as a military contractor, was treated as recently as last month for several mental illness, including paranoia and voices in his head. Also, the FBI has confirmed that he was not armed with an AR-15 assault rifle, as had been previously reported.
                      Looks like the officials were the bubble-heads throwing around buzzwords if The Atlantic Monthly is accurate in its reporting.

                      No there was confusion and conflict in the official's news release.

                      give the NRA the Royal Flush join Stop The NRA

                      by 88kathy on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 01:18:50 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Authoritians (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  FrankRose, Robobagpiper

                  can never admit to being wrong. Witness denials about Colorado for example.

          •  No, AR-15s aren't shotguns. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Robobagpiper

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 12:19:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  You are ROCKIN' IT! w/ that ONE rec (0+ / 0-)

    draw a window on the wall to remind you of the silkrain that makes things grow - Yoko Ono

    by quinn on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 11:03:28 AM PDT

  •  Gun control can only be done by those hands (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    quinn, tytalus, PinHole

    actually holding a gun.

    Gun limits are needed. Gun ownership limits are needed.

    I am fairly certain the 2nd Amendment does not say. Any body, Any way, Any time.

    Born in the USA does not make a person Davey Crockett or Daniel Boone when the cord is cut.

  •  The Navy & local police in TX & WA & RI have to (0+ / 0-)

    be sleeping very well tonight.  (HA!)
    Not to mention the VA lawmakers, even after the VA Tech massacre.

    The responsibility for this guy not being caught up with earlier, rests on police who let him get away with shooting tires and at upstairs neighbors and the Navy.  Esp the ones in Texas - they have a lot of blood on their hands.  If I was called to a situation where a guy with guns had shot through the ceiling/floor, was complaining about his upstairs neighbor being noisy, and came up with a cockamamie story about gun cleaning, the hair on the back of my neck would have been standing out stiffly, begging for attention.  

    Don't the police get ANY basic psychiatric training at all?  Such paranoia, along with bothersome smell (yes smell) complaints is a basic sign of schizophrenia.   Or at least to have the person examined by a psychiatrist.  

    He is someone who obtained top secret clearance to work on military projects, despite his background.  If the DC police and FBI & HP couldn't put together a record a few years ago, why could they in a matter of hours since yesterday, come up with all this background on him?

    The Navy should have dealt with his mental illness when he was in their window.  Instead they just passed him on to get rid of him.  

    The Navy is doing a really fine job lately of screening for mental illness (NOT!).  They let a young male who set fire inside a nuclear sub at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, continue to work there, until he did it again.  Millions in damages to the sub, not to mention the possibility of a nuclear disaster.

    The combination of easily obtained guns and increased schizophrenia in our society is a lethal one.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site