I heard that some people got shot

User avatar
Jon
Posts: 969
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:01 am
Location: West O' The Divide

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Jon » Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:33 am

"In the aftermath of the massacre of 26 people in a small-town Texas church, you might have seen that the killer used a gun called an AR-15. It’s a popular weapon—relatively easy to use, endlessly customizable, military in appearance. How popular? It’s the same gun that a killer used in the massacre of 58 people at a Las Vegas concert last month, and by the killer who murdered 49 people in a nightclub in Orlando, and the one at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. And the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. And the party in San Bernardino, California.

Oh, but wait: It’s also the gun, apparently, that someone in Texas used to shoot back at the killer at First Baptist Church, accurately enough to pinpoint places his tactical vest didn’t protect. 'We keep hearing that AR’s are useless for self-defense, that they’re simply "weapons of war," useful only for mass killing. This is simply not true,' writes David French at The National Review. He didn’t save lives inside the church, French goes on to say, but this straight-from-the-gun-advocate-storybook good guy with a gun 'did stop the shooter and prevented him from harming anyone else. He did so with exactly the kind of weapon that the gun control lobby would like to deny to law-abiding Americans.'

Well, OK. Good question then. Is it possible that the AR-15 isn’t just an overpowered long gun beloved by the National Rifle Association but a necessary component of civilian defense in the absence of armed authorities? Somebody should figure this out, right?

Except you can’t. The government doesn’t keep track of how many AR-15s are out there or who owns them. Only through painstaking excavation of crime reports could anyone even begin to figure out which crimes involved AR-15s or when AR-15s stopped crimes—much less where those ARs came from, how they were stored, or how they were modified.

That data is either off-limits or simply doesn’t exist...the Trump administration is running in the other direction. Any data that has even the faintest whiff of potential contradiction goes right out the window. Of course, these folks aren't the first people in power to succumb to a fear of data. They do, however, seem to have found a profound expertise in the practice of eliminating it. Dataphobia chills them to the bone, I suspect because they hope to undermine not only some truths but all truth. David Roberts at Vox has written about what he calls an epistemic crisis in America, the idea that certain rulers and rich people hope to take away the basic idea of knowledge. If nobody can know anything, why bother to try to regulate anything? It’s government-by-ignorance—a shrugocracy."


Full Article

To make any kind of intelligent policy decisions, we need facts. Good luck getting them.
"unsalvageably incoherent"

User avatar
Adams
Posts: 2239
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 1:01 am
Location: above ground

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Adams » Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:14 pm

I'm all for allowing the CDC (or any governmental agency for that matter) to collect data on firearms deaths, injuries, and accidents.
If you need a reason to drink, you have a problem. . .

"I just think it's funny that the one constant in this place over the past five years is that it was a cool place right up until the next person joined." nemo

When life gives you limes, it's Gods way of telling you that you're an idiot. spudnik

User avatar
Wingnut
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Kalifonia

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Wingnut » Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:08 pm

WASHINGTON — Remember bump stocks?

The previously obscure gun conversion kits, which turn semiautomatic rifles into weapons capable of firing long, deadly bursts, were the bane of the Capitol a month ago, after a gunman used the devices to kill 58 people and wound hundreds of others in Las Vegas. Lawmakers in both parties quickly vowed to ban them. Even the National Rifle Association appeared to endorse restrictions.

But the proposed ban on bump stocks, once hailed as a modest step toward bipartisan compromise on gun safety, may be turning into a cautionary tale of how energetic intentions in the wake of mass shootings can dissipate quickly. As attentions moved elsewhere, the N.R.A. turned against action, and Republican lawmakers decided the devices would be someone else’s problem: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or A.T.F.

“Right now everyone’s in a holding pattern, because some people around here have hope that A.T.F. will bail us out,” said Representative Carlos Curbelo, Republican of Florida, who has co-sponsored a bipartisan measure to ban bump stocks.

And now, with another mass shooting, this one in Texas, capturing the nation’s lamentations, Congress is moving on to yet another gun issue, the failure of the government’s computerized background check system to stop firearms purchases by killers who should have been flagged. On Tuesday, Senators Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, and Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico, said they would introduce legislation to bolster the reporting of domestic violence acts to the background check system.

For opponents of congressional action. the A.T.F. has proved to be a convenient foil. The agency, which regulates firearms, has said it has no jurisdiction over the gun conversion kits because bump stocks are, in fact, not guns. Yet Speaker Paul D. Ryan said he believes “a regulatory fix,” rather than legislation, is the correct way to take bump stocks off the market. That stand has, for now, stalled legislation until Congress hears from bureau officials.

That could happen as soon as next week.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, announced Monday night that the committee will convene a hearing on bump stocks on Tuesday. The witness list has not been made public, but bureau officials are expected to testify.

The desire to ban bump stocks still exists on Capitol Hill, even if it is quieter. Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, has proposed legislation banning bump stocks and has more than three dozen co-sponsors, all Democrats.

At least two Republicans, Senators John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, said they would be open to banning the devices, depending on what bureau officials say at next week’s hearing.

“If you believe that automatic weapons should be highly regulated and limited, then why would you be against banning a device that makes a gun an automatic weapon?” Mr. Graham said.

But Congress will probably have to take action if lawmakers want bump stocks off the market. The A.T.F. has deemed bump stocks “a firearm part” not subject to regulation under federal laws that, since the 1930s, have sharply limited the manufacture and possession of fully automatic weapons.


The N.R.A. was actually the first to put the onus on the A.T.F. In a statement after the Las Vegas shooting, the powerful gun lobby said the bureau should revisit the bump stock issue, and “immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law.” That was hailed by some as a change for the group, but in fact, the N.R.A. never embraced a ban.

In a recent interview on YouTube with James Yeager, a Tennessee gun enthusiast who runs a firearms training business, the association’s chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, bragged about its head fake.

“The day before we put out that statement there were enough votes in the House of Representatives, the pro-gun Republican House of Representatives, to pass a Feinstein-Curbelo type of bill,” Mr. Cox told Mr. Yeager. He went on: “The truth is we needed to slow down the process and have an educated conversation.”


What the N.R.A. calls an educated conversation, gun safety advocates regard as slow-walking.

“I don’t think the N.R.A. has killed it, but they have certainly put the brakes on,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, a national advocacy group. “Their original statement was a wink and a nod by saying that it should be something that A.T.F. looked at. They knew very well that actually that was an effort to divert attention from legislation.”

To Democrats who support the ban, the bump stocks debate follows a depressingly familiar pattern.

“Every time there’s a gun massacre, we have outrage, grief and silence, and that’s what’s happened here,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat. “It happens again and again and again, and this situation is so obvious. It’s a simple fix. And when the National Rifle Association said, ‘We don’t want to see legislation’ — end of story.”
Where can I buy some wanderlust?

User avatar
austrotard
Posts: 8802
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:24 am
Location: the austrocity exhibition
Contact:

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by austrotard » Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:33 pm

today would be a good day to bet on a mass shooting.
but tomorrow's better. /taps nose

bookiemitch.com.au
49% of americans assume I give a shit about what they think.

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5913
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by BigCliff » Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:12 pm

As long as we keep turning murderous assholes into celebrities, we're going to keep seeing more of these.

AR-15s might be still more effective, but an asshole with 3 revolvers can still kill 18 ppl in less than a minute.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2163
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Upsetter » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:04 pm

BigCliff wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:12 pm
As long as we keep turning murderous assholes into celebrities, we're going to keep seeing more of these.
We finally agree on something. Fill the sob full of lead in an alley and leave the remains for the coyotes. And I dont mean the traffickers smuggling il-e-galez across the border. Dont even give a name to the media vultures. Stonewall the worthless assholes...say, any stonewall statues left in this god forsaken country?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests