Meet the Police: NBC’s David Gregory Under Investigation For Weapons Violation On Show

david_gregory_ammunitionNBC is dealing with an unexpected legal problem after a segment by David Gregory, who displayed what he said was a high-capacity ammunition clip on “Meet the Press.” D.C. law prohibits the possession of high-capacity ammunition clips. This may have been a case where a picture — or consultation with counsel — might have been in order. There is no exception for the media in such possession cases.

On the show with the National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre, Gregory showed him the clip and said “Here’s a magazine for ammunition that carries 30 bullets. Now, isn’t it possible that if we got rid of these . . . if we replaced them and said, ‘Well, you can only have a magazine that carries five bullets, or 10 bullets,’ isn’t it just possible that we could reduce the carnage in a situation like Newtown?”

The predictable response from LaPierre was “I don’t believe that’s going to make one difference.” The less predictable response came from gun owners and gun control advocates who noted that the possession of such a clip is a crime. The D.C. law states “No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device.” This does not require that the clip be attached to a weapon and does not appear to require that it have rounds in the clip.

The reported investigation could also ensnare those NBC employees who obtained and transported the clip.

I honestly believe that Gregory is not blameful and that the law should have some flexibility for news or artistic speech when the clip is empty of rounds. What do you think?

Source: Washington Post

195 thoughts on “Meet the Police: NBC’s David Gregory Under Investigation For Weapons Violation On Show

  1. This is so ridiculous. They won’t stop the sale of these things but David Gregory is being investigated and NBC for showing one on TV. What happened? Was he too negative about the NRA?

  2. I agree – the law is both too aggressive and too rigid – there should be commonsense exceptions and exclusions for inadvertence (the law used to require mens rea).

    That having been said, I can’t help but feel a little schadenfreude about a journalist advocating tougher gun laws being ensnared by those same gun laws that he feels are too lenient.

  3. Short of murdering someone (hyperbole) for demonstration purposes, I find little reason to fault the media for show and tell. They have so many other faults that have no legal remedy. Slaying of truth being one.

  4. This is a perfect example of just how unworkable a total ban on anything can be.

    Years ago, lawmakers were debating on limiting export of a new solid state technology that could conceivably be used in weapons. A representative of the company who made the product came to give testimony, and ended his testimony by asking the subcommittee members if any of them had ever seen the item in question. Of course, they had not. So he took off his tie tac and passed it around. The tiny silicon chip was embedded in his tie tac. The congressmen decided there was not a whole lot they could do to restrict the item.

  5. I think that the event is probably harmless, but I do see a legitimate interest by law enforcement to investigate in order to make sure the magazine (it is not a “clip”) isn’t associated with an illegal assault rifle within the District.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if LaPierre was the source, bringing it in from NRA HQ across the Potomac River in Virginia where there are no restrictions.
    And although I disagree with many NRA arguments, LaPierre is probably correct that the magazine capacity would not prevent psychotic people from doing the damage they do (I know in most, if not all, of the recent cases the shooters changed magazines several times to continue their carnage; a process that takes only a few seconds, not many).

  6. Would this be an opportunity to remove/replace a mouthpiece for the GOP with a more engaging journalist that might actually challenge the delusional talking points of the John McCain/Lindsey Graham Show?

  7. sauce for the goose.

    he should be locked up if he violated the law. doesnt matter why. but he wont be because he is an elite, liberal member of the MSM. A poor black person would be in jail in about 30 seconds.

    Flaunting the law on national television and after a terrible shooting. What kind of insensitive, lame brain is he?

  8. That’s flat-out idiotic.
    The DC police have better things to do than arrest a journalist for showing an object to a camera. And the DC courts should be paying attention to more important cases than “the criminal show and tell guy on TV” — they should all be ashamed of themselves for that dumb detestable charade. And Gregory’s lawyers should sue for false arrest and false light.

  9. High capacity.. low capacity. It really doesn’t matter. Can change a magazine so quick or use a stripper clip in a gun with fixed mag it won’t matter to a bunch of unarmed victims.. A man with a revolver and a bolt action rifle is nearly unstoppable unless someone else has a gun or possibly a bow and arrow. As far as NBC s legal trouble I want to say Ha! ha! ha! But; I digress. He is no more a threat than you or me. Non issue.

  10. I honestly believe that Gregory is not blameful and that the law should have some flexibility for news or artistic speech when the clip is empty of rounds. What do you think?

    Why should the news media be exempted for an empty magazine that is illegal to possess? An average person could be arrested for doing the same thing in that jurisdiction. If the 30 round magazine is so terrible to possess then why was this reporter not hooked up? The argument might be “oh well he was just a reporter, there was no harm in showing it as an example.” Well I would counter that with “so is the same magazine shown by a regular person to his friend as a curiosity any different?”

    Last I checked there was nothing in the law that said the news media was exempted from possession of illegal weaponry. Maybe this reporter should be locked up. So why would one say “oh he was just showing a magazine, no harm.” if the possession of such a magazine is so outrageous? It might actually be that in reality the possession of the magazine is not a big deal to anyone but something to which the threat associated with it is greatly exaggerated.

    So if the state is prepared to let this reporter off the hook they better also let every other citizen off when their possession was jsut as innocuous.

  11. Interesting argument that mega magazines shouldn’t be banned because guns can be so quickly reloaded that the size of the magazine does not matter. I would guess that reloading fast enough to be as fast as simply continuing to fire with a mega magazine must take some skill and experience. I would suggest as it doesn’t matter to skilled and experience persons it shouldn’t matter to them when they are “hunting” if we ban them so that inexperienced mass murders will have to stop and reload.

    As to prosecuting David Gregory, any prosecutor who dis that is obviously looking for some publicity. They can exercise prosecutorial discretion.

    Did LaPiere bring it and then have some one complaint? Wouldn’t put past him.

    I have an idea lets work on gun control instead of Gregory control.

  12. It’s all just so idiotic. No matter what law they put on the books there will be someone who will find a new way to work around it. (Just as in tax law, etc.) Human ingenuity knows no bounds.

    The naivete’ and ignorance of the “let’s churn out more and more laws and make the world a great place” crowd is stunning, and depressing.

  13. The Media Should Bury NRA’s Wayne LaPierre on the Business Pages Where He Belongs
    By Peter Dreier, E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics, Occidental College
    Posted: 12/22/2012
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/the-media-should-bury-nra_b_2352279.html

    Excerpt:
    Imagine what would happen if the top lobbyist for the tobacco industry gave a half-hour speech announcing that “smoking is good for your health” and called on the federal government to subsidize the distribution of cigarettes in every American school.

    Would every American media outlet — television, radio, newspapers, and news magazines — flock to the speech and cover it as an important “news” event? Would major TV networks interrupt their regular programming to broadcast the speech live, in its entirety, then replay it over and over again throughout the day? Would talk radio stations devote that day’s shows to serious discussions of the lobbyist’s proposal Would The New York Times and other major newspapers splash the lobbyist’s major talking points across their front page the next day?

    Of course not. The media would recognize the lobbyist’s speech as a blatant and misleading corporate propaganda, ignore it, or at most relegate it to a one-paragraph story in the back pages of the business section.

    But on Friday, America witnessed the spectacle of the nation’s major news organizations providing the National Rifle Association — a lobby group for gun manufacturers — with tens of millions of dollars of free publicity.

    Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s executive vice president, invited the media to an alleged “press conference” in Washington, D.C. to break its week-long silence after 20 children and six adults were killed with an assault weapon at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut.

    LaPierre stood behind a lecturn and ranted for 30 minutes, repeating the NRA’s well-worn propaganda that violent video games and movies — not the proliferation of military-style weapons — are responsible for the nation’s epidemic of mass shootings, called on the federal government to pay for armed guards at every American school, and generously offered to have the NRA train this massive army at taxpayers’ expense. Then he repeated a one-line sound-bite that he knew would be repeated on radio, TV, YouTube videos, and newspaper headlines: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

    Imagine that! The National Rifle Association, which gets most of its money for gun manufacturers and lobbies against all restrictions on gun sales and ownership, wants more Americans to have guns! Stop the presses!

    But that’s exactly what happened. Major television and radio networks did, in fact, interrupt their regular programs to give LaPierre a half hour of uninterrupted free publicity that even the NRA couldn’t have afforded to pay for if this had been a prime-time infomercial.

    Immediately after LaPierre stepped off the stage (after refusing to answer any questions), TV news shows and radio talk shows began serious discussions of his proposal to add armed security forces in America’s schools. For example, the morning talk show broadcast on KPCC (National Public Radio’s major outlet in the Los Angeles area) devoted an hour to the subject. It invited several academics, and invited listeners to call in, to discuss LaPierre’s ideas. The next day, The New York Times ran a front-page story about LaPierre’s speech under the headline, “NRA Envisions a ‘Good Guy with a Gun’ In Every School.” The front page story in the Los Angeles Times was headlined, “NRA Calls For Armed Guards in All Schools.”

    This is a classic example of what social scientists call media “agenda setting” and “framing,” but which most people simply call “changing the subject.”

  14. Mespo,
    I agree, but David’s best and most fitting defense is to plead ignorance. It is his most enduring trait.

  15. Elaine:

    David Gregory a republican? now that is news. And all this time I thought he was another liberal journalist. What is this world coming to?

    I thought he was a lamebrain, well, I guess, it turns out he is a genius with the ability of highly complex thought. Who would have thunk?

  16. Bron,

    I don’t know if Gregory is a Republican–but he certainly doesn’t appear to be a liberal. It seems most of the people commenting here DO think he’s not the brightest bulb on the string of Christmas lights.

  17. Elaine, you go girl! You hit the nail right on the head about David Gregory…thanks, you did the typing and I didn’t have to!

  18. The media responsiveness amazes a resident in this naive land.
    Reasons?
    —-Looking for more ads from the gun sector.
    —-The pre-Christmas lack of sensation. “Santa bites chlld”
    —-Media being played very skillfully by the NRA.
    —-Media competition and lack of integrity, partcularly the newschannels.
    —-Big brother said so.
    —-All of the above and a dozen more.

  19. David Gregory Under Police Investigation Over Gun Magazine On ‘Meet The Press’
    Posted: 12/26/2012 9:16 am EST | Updated: 12/26/2012 1:41 pm EST
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/26/david-gregory-police-investigation_n_2364637.html?ref=topbar

    Excerpt:
    UPDATE: NBC News had requested and was denied permission to use a high capacity magazine on “Meet the Press.” Legal Insurrection’s William A. Jacobson looked into an email allegedly from the Metropolitan Police Department which said that the network contacted the police before the segment. The MPD’s Aziz Alali confirmed it, telling Jacobson:

    “NBC contacted the Metropolitan Police Department inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for this segment. NBC was informed that that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and the request was denied.”

  20. Elaine:

    then how did he get the spot? It is high profile. Some executive must think he has the chops. I didnt like his questions for the most part, I didnt think he got to the meat of a matter, he asks superficial questions in my opinion and it seems he takes it easy on the dem guests.

  21. Dick Gregory looks as though he needed a brain transplant. A repeat of the media’s school for mentally handicapped broadcasters would not suffice.
    He obviously failed the first time. But mystery of mysteries, why? There are so many smart ones around.

    I know, so many people identify with him, ie great audience appeal.

    Snarky snark snark.

  22. I think the point that many 2nd Amendment advocates are making is that Gregory is perfectly willing to impose these idiotic regulations upon others (idiotic, in this case, because a clip without a gun & ammo is not dangerous), but will now, predictably, use the artist/media twit/VIP exception to escape the consequences of his violation of the DC criminal law.

    As 2nd Amendment jurisprudence develops further, this kind of this will stop. In 1st Amendment jurisprudence, we have the concept of the “chilling effect,” which renders invalid state-imposed restrictions which do not themselves violate the 1st Amendment, but which threaten, discourage or chill future speech. With regard to the 2nd Amendment, a crazy patchwork of nonsensical local & State restrictions place a chill on an individual’s decision to keep & bear arms, because even when he acts in good faith, he might find himself violating the criminal law, just as David Gregory found.

  23. Arrest him and put him in jail. The law is the law. There should be no flexibility whatsoever. He should be treated no differently than anyone else.

  24. Bron,

    He’s a lightweight. He takes it easy on most of his guests. I stopped watching the show quite a while ago–only tune in every now and then.

    The trouble with most of these types of news programs is that they often invite the same idiot pundits over and over again to express their opinions on politics and the state of the nation. There’s not a lot of in-depth discussion about important issues that might really enlighten the population and provide us with information instead of political talking points.

  25. mespo:

    ““NBC contacted the Metropolitan Police Department inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for this segment. NBC was informed that that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and the request was denied.””

    how do you say “ruh roh” in Latin?

  26. Elaine:

    most are that way. I guess they dont want to ask hard questions for fear of losing access to the politicians.

    Politicians should be afraid to not go on a show which asks hard questions. The press in no longer free but the boot lickers of the current political class, both republicans and democrats.

  27. Where is Edward R. Murrow when you need him? Walter Cronkite was one of the last of “Murrow’s Boys.” Now we have sycophants who try to pass themselves off as journalists.

  28. Bron – Uh-ray, oh-ray…

    Q: Was the alleged item functional/operational? If not, then it’s just a paperweight. Sometimes a cigar might just be a cigar, but for the purposes of the law, I think some proof that it was what it was purported to be, is the question.

    But, that’s life inside four-ninety-five ;-)

  29. This is sooo ripe w/ irony. Of course, David “Howdy Doody” Gregory is an idiot. He proves that weekly. However, the same people who are so adamant about controls are willing to give him a pass. I am a moderate on this issue. Here’s my take. I don’t know enough about guns to know what type of guns, mags, etc. should be banned or controlled. I believe in the 2nd amendment. I know some of the gun people are kooky, as are the “ban all guns” people. Howdy Doody was doing a prop cheap gimmick. Prop comedians like Gallagher are as dopey as Howdy Doody. He should not be prosecuted, he should step aside for Chuck Todd, who deserved the job more than Howdy Doody.

  30. With zero evidence, the conclusion drawn by several here is that the head of the NRA, who probably knows the DC laws forward and backward, must have entrapped the poor journalist by planting a magazine knowing he couldn’t resist using it. That seems reasonable, rather than it being yet another journalist who knows virtually nothing about guns or gun law. Regardless of your position on gun control, there are few subjects about which journalists show a more consistent ignorance and incompetence at covering accurately. Jesus, I can’t stand the NRA in general and LaPierre in particular, but the rationalization going on here is amazing.

  31. Please excuse my earlier typos. Voice activation isn’t always perfect. And the oops was meant to express what mister Gregory did.!

  32. Okay he and or somebody at NBC intentionally broke the law. Yes they called DC Police and were told not to do it as it was against the law. Now let them pay the price of breaking the law they are pushing. These people are pushing the police state so let them live under it. Would I as a traveler through DC be given a break even though I did not know the law? Doubtful… they need to pay the price for breaking the law just like anybody else NO EXCEPTIONS!

  33. I love the NRA. Are they perfect?? No, but they defend our right to self defence and our right to throw off tyranny were it to arise. I’m sure 6,000,000 Jews and 4,000,000 political prisoners would of loved to have had access to”assault weapons” in Germany. Some 70 years ago.would of been pretty hard to push them into gas chambers. The victims the communist purges in Russia and China would of loved to have an absolute right to state of the art rifles. Some 60 to 100 million people were murdered by those two governments. I see such a unhealthy phobia people have for inanimate objects they know little or nothing about. Again, the truth is a mad man with any modern firearm, revolver, shotgun bolt action rifle is unstoppablel by unarmed people.

  34. I don’t know whether “possess” is defined in that statute, but typically to “possess” something under the law means more than simply holding it in your hand and/or showing it to somebody. Some relationship similar to ownership has to happen.

    I’m surprised Professor Turley didn’t pick up on this.

    Black’s Law Dictionary Online definition of possession [http://thelawdictionary.org/possession/]:

    “The detention and control, or the manual or ideal custody, of any- thing which may be the subject of property, for one’s use and enjoyment, either as owner or as the proprietor of a qualified right in it, and either held personally or by another who exercises it in one’s place and name. That condition of facts under which one can exercise his power over a corporeal thing at his pleasure to the exclusion of all other persons.”

    The Legal Dictionary online definition of possession [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/possession]:

    “Possession” is “[t]he ownership, control, or occupancy of a thing, most frequently land or Personal Property, by a person.”

  35. Yup no hi capacity magazines & no soft drinks over 16oz, good thing he didn’t have a giant soda….

    Like to see them prove that the magazine was in fact a high capacity one, maybe he had it ‘slugged’.

    But then the bottom line is why bother with all this BS, when it makes no friggen difference at all!?!?

  36. Jason,
    “Regardless of your position on gun control, there are few subjects about which journalists show a more consistent ignorance and incompetence at covering accurately.”
    Rankings, rankings…… My favorites include almost all subjects. But for me tops is MIC “control and need of”…..

  37. John
    December 26, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Yup no hi capacity magazines & no soft drinks over 16oz, good thing he didn’t have a giant soda….

    *****

    I believe giant sodas are legal in D.C. Gregory can sip super-size soft drinks to his heart’s content in our country’s capital.

  38. giant soft drinks are OK but DC has a ban on hot dogs which weigh 1 lb or more.

    Big Gulps are OK but you cant have a big wiener in our nations capital.

  39. Fabien P, about 5,000,000 of the 6,000,000 Jews you describe in your post would have nobody to shoot with their machine guns in Nazi Germany. Whom, after all, would you expect them to shoot? Let’s take a German man 34 years old with a machine gun and a job in an engineering firm and two kids in school and a wife who had a degree in teaching French but who was a housewife at the time his city began “selections” for the final solution. Whom would you suggest he shoot? Perhaps he should have shot the Gestapo agents who came to his home to register him and his family as “Juden” so they could be shipped off a month later? OK, let’s try that. He shoots down 6 Gestapo agents. Immediately the German Amy goes into gear. His wife and two kids are raped and tortured to death at headquarters and then the remaining Jews in town are herded into the local synagogue by tanks and more machine guns, where they are burned alive. Some of them, on the way into the conflagration, shoot some soldiers, but they also miss and shoot some civilians. There, does that help?

    The idea that everybody has to be not just armed but also trained as a fighter and a marksman and a military expert is an idea whose time has not come and will never come. The solution to problems must graduate from, “I’m gonna kill you!” to something more predictable and less chaotic, if not more peaceful and less hostile. The addiction to the idea of killing our way to safety is our main problem.

  40. Malisha – So you’re saying there’s no difference between going out on your feet, or going out on your knees?

  41. Malisha.

    So would the alternative just be to sit idle and let the Nazis escort everyone into the boxcar to die in an extermination camp? If everyone fought back with a vengence it certainly would have saved a great many hundreds of thousands.

    Your position would be one that would be the case if nobody else joined in and defended themselves.

    In my view it is better to go out fighting than to be executed on one’s knees. At least you have a chance of winning.

  42. Bron – With Photoshop, anything is possible.

    Darren – Was there an echo? I think it’s b/c that, even while sitting on opposite sides of a courtroom, there are a lot of similarities between the players.

    Too bad the resistance wasn’t as motivated, before they got locked into the ghettos. By then, it was just a matter of patiently going after them block-to-block, house-to house.

    I would hope that we don’t wait that long.

    First they came for the communists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Martin Niemöller

  43. My understainding is they were told “No.” before they did the segment. Should have not asked then could have pleaded ignorance.

  44. With only one round remaining in the 30-round clip, it should still be possible to shoot the messenger. Did LaPierre call any of his Congressional stooges to repress for an investigation, I wonder?

  45. Melissa. Yes! Shoot every one of those damn Gestapo as they came. Exactly. Eventually they WILL stop coming when the people they wanted to murder made them pay a price too high. Would rather of died fighting the Fascist than puking up my lungs in a gas chamber. But off course, they first passed laws disarming their victims, then they murdered them.The history of mankind is dungeons and killing fields. Never give up your right to self defence and self determination. We are NOT superior human beings. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  46. I would have used a steel Airsoft mag. On camera you can’t tell the difference. Even a polymer one looks the same and are even made by the same companies that make the real ones. But I guess they aren’t that smart.

  47. Malisha. Your use of the term “machine gun” shows a lack of knowledge of the subject. No one has been talking about machine guns in this discussion that I’m aware of. If so I apologize. We are talking about “look alike” guns. It’s like putting Porsche body kit on a 68 VW Bug. It may look like a Porsche but doesn’t perform like one. Until 1934 machine guns were easily available to the general public. We didn’t have the huge problem we have now. They said they “would make us safer” by not allowing us to have easy access to them. Things are far worse now. The Saint Valentines day massacre killed 7 and was the excuse for the new law. It is far worse now and now t hey want more gun control to “make us safer”

  48. Only a dickhead would pick on Dick Gregory and accuse him of being too old or senile.
    As to the clip. She me the money cop. Show me the clip. Sorry, it was one of those wallets from Hong Kong that thousands of people own. It holds money not bullets. If it was a clip, was there a spring in it? Was it complete? If it looks like a clip but is not a clip then its not illegal.

    Then there is the story of that guy in NYC who put up the posters of the Mayor with his Drone program. The ipPays went to his house, searched it and busted him for having an unloaded 22 cal pistol under his bed. In Missouri he would have been busted for not keeping it loaded. What a nazi town NYC is.

  49. Malisha. The Jews and political prisoners did pretty much what you are endorsing in your post. Except for a few in the ghetto they did nothing. How did that work out for them???? It took other people with guns killing the bad guys and many civilians in the crossfire to stop the I industrialized murder machine. The world is better off for it. Before there were guns the biggest meanest people ruled over the weak. The gun brought equality to mankind and doesn’t allow the brutes in society to rule unless they allow themselves to be disarmed.

  50. Fabien,

    Speaking to the culturally and mentally handicapped in derisive terms is not civil. The only thing that motivates you here is attention and/or lack of it.
    Your claimed knowledge base is very narrow, and certainly does not include the Shoah.

    You and others should leave that to the jews to explain. They have spent much time at it. Israel went your way simply because their neighbors forced them to go the everyman and a gun route.

    Personally, I don’t want to end on my knees. But I see the whole (practically) of America, on theirs before the corporatocracy which rules there. And they do not know it, it seems to me.

    Heated words, screaming debates, but no fights here, and certainly no guns to solve the issue. Only within the family, might the hunting rifle be used.
    The rest can roam the streets without fear.

    Come some summer and enjoy.

  51. My my my, we do have some seriously swaggering dicks here.

    And using the WWII slaughter of Jews, Gypsies, Poles, the mentally disabled to bolster their swagger. How very brave, and gratuitous.

  52. It is the history of mankind. Lets not forget China and Russia and Romania and Cambodia. The slaughter of u unarmed people is the history of the 20th century. You can deny history. Let’s not forget the slaughter of on arm civilians in Rwanda. Again you can make snarky remarks all you want but the historical facts on my side. Only a disarm people can be slaughtered wholesale. To say it can’t happen again or it can’t happen here is ignorant of history. To believe we are somehow better people is elitist best

  53. His interview with LaPierre stunk. He didn’t once ask about who the NRA really represents [weapons manufacturer’s] and that is the crux of the story.

  54. Really?? Then why don’t you give me a history lesson. Using voice activated texting it screws up a lot sorry. Tens of millions of people were not murdered by the government ????

  55. Old nurse. The NRA represents me and I’m not a weapons manufacturer or dealer. We are about 3,500,000,000 strong and 10s of millions claim to be members but don’t pay dues.

  56. Darren Smith, Fabien Pruett, and anybody else who believes that the Holocaust was caused by the victims having failed to either arm themselves adequately or having failed to appropriately take up arms and defend themselves and their families valiantly enough, now hear this and think on it a minute before you come back on here telling me how much the victims were to blame.

    THEY DID NOT PRESUME THAT THEIR GOVERNMENTS WERE THEIR ENEMIES.

    Would you have had them presume their governments were their enemies? Are you endorsing that kind of a culture — if so, where, for whom? Just for Jews? Or maybe for Jews, gypsies and Russians? For Tutsis or Hutus? For Blacks in the US perhaps? For Skinheads, for libertarians, for Jews in Idaho, for Arabs in Michigan, for whom, for all of us all the time? Is that the way we are supposed to solve these problems? And how the hell do these problems arise?

    Here’s what I know about the Jews of Europe: They did not arm before the Shoah started because they had no expectation that they were suddenly the enemies of all the peoples of Europe, see? They thought they WERE the peoples of Europe, see? And you do not go gung-ho-notso-getagunand-athousand-bullets unless you are either (a) an enemy of some armed enemy or (b) paranoid, hostile, or any weird and unnatural combination of them both.

    Easy solution to what the Jews “should have done”? You SURE you would have done better than all those passive little whimpering victims over there, you Darren, YOU Fabien? How damn dare you!

    Trayvon Martin shouldn’t have been such a little sniveling teen-aged wimp; he shoulda been carrying on 2/26/2012 in case some wannabe cop hopped up on Adderall and fake testosterone wanted to stalk and kill him, huh? Like Anne Frank’s father who should have armed himself and killed somebody as soon as he got wind that bad people were in control of his — HIS — government.

    P1SSES ME OFF! People are living normally and they are not hurting anyone and they are not expecting that suddenly a situation that is ordinary and commonplace will turn into some kind of horror-movie-nightmare and you want to analyze it after the fact by saying they should have armed themselves?

    So then you get two, three whole generations of Jews who start to think like that. They’re militarized from the soles of their feet to the tops of their heads and everywhere Jewish in between and they MEAN it and they mean to NOT BE VICTIMIZED and they’ll damn well KILL YOU if you look at them sideways and they won’t stand for anybody — anybody — talking to THEM about how to be normal and … Oh, hey, stop criticizing them. That’s actually how you WANT them to be. Had their ancestors only figured that out a little sooner, Hitler wouldn’t have been forced to go ruin his reputation herding a bunch of unarmed wimps into the ovens so y’all could go “tsk tsk tsk, passive little dead Jews, what a damn shame.”

    Which way you want me: dead passive or armed and dangerous and ready to tell the whole world, “I’ll run over anybody and put my foot on all your necks and you can’t say boo to me about it because I’ve got myself all armed up and respectable”? Just let me know. Not that I’ll comply, just curious.

    And about Americans now, getting armed and dangerous: Who? Blacks living in a neighborhood you don’t want to go into? Hispanics working in rich men’s backyards and laundry rooms? Or just suburban whites who have what they think is the luxury to fantasize about defending their “freedom”? Just askin…

    Peace of the season be with you.

  57. LeeJ’s link indicates that NBC got an ok from ATF and a no from DC Metro. It’s a DC law so I guess the no should prevail. There is also some question as what he was actually displaying.

  58. Malisha, why do u have to go to either extreme?? No middle ground?? You don’t have to be a over confident, trigger happy nut to arm yourself with the knowledge, state of mind, and equipment to defend yourself with..

  59. Malisha. Frankly I don’t give a damn if I p*** you off or not. If the Jews of Europe had a undeniable right to self defence right to be armed equal to all of theirs in Europe it could never happened in the way that it did. It it’s not possible to march armed people into gas chambers. You maybe able to defeat them on the battlefield but not slaughter them like cattle. That would have exacted a high price for the Nazis. As far as the Jews being wimps, far from it. Many fought gallantly in the ghettos with just handguns. the writer of the Constitution said ” the best reason for the people to own arms is in extreme cases to fight the wrong government if it were to become tyrannical” that’s a paraphrase not a quote look it up. How dare you want to disarm people against even knife wielding thugs. We have an absolutel right to self defense. We have a absolutel right to throw off the tyranny of government. If you think this government can’t become tyrannical you are delusional. All of Europe or just civilized d probably more so than we are today justice cultured probably more so than we are today. Yet they murdered the wrong people by the way that was over 3 million members of the NRA not 3 billionthat was voice activated texting screwing up then there is still the USSR China Romania Cambodia north Korea has murdered millions of its own people. The Armenian people we’re disarmed in the murdered by the Turks. That is the history of mankind in the 20th century

  60. They murder their “own” people. Not the “wrong” people . Again voice texting errors. There are a few more errors in there. But I think you understand it

  61. Malisha. I think you are probably a racist. I don’t care what color you are you have a right to defend yourself and your family

  62. Fabien P, you think I’m probably a racist and you get there by which progression of facts and logical conclusions? This one I really want to read.

    About your idea that your belief that American need to be more armed than they are at present (which Americans, by the way?) being logically related to the fact that the civilian Jews of Europe were not armed when the Shoah began its inexorable progression, or that my pointing out the illogic of that idea being related to your assumption that I don’t understand that the American government could (could?) turn repressive and dangerous, I have no idea what you think you read.

    “If the Jews of Europe had a undeniable right to self defence right to be armed equal to all of theirs in Europe it could never happened in the way that it did. It it’s not possible to march armed people into gas chambers. You maybe able to defeat them on the battlefield but not slaughter them like cattle. That would have exacted a high price for the Nazis. As far as the Jews being wimps, far from it. Many fought gallantly in the ghettos with just handguns. the writer of the Constitution said ” the best reason for the people to own arms is in extreme cases to fight the wrong government if it were to become tyrannical” that’s a paraphrase not a quote look it up. How dare you want to disarm people against even knife wielding thugs. We have an absolutel right to self defense. We have a absolutel right to throw off the tyranny of government. If you think this government can’t become tyrannical you are delusional. All of Europe or just civilized d probably more so than we are today justice cultured probably more so than we are today. Yet they murdered the wrong people by the way that was over 3 million members of the NRA not 3 billionthat was voice activated texting screwing up then there is still the USSR China Romania Cambodia north Korea has murdered millions of its own people. The Armenian people we’re disarmed in the murdered by the Turks. That is the history of mankind in the 20th century.”

    I’ll go sentence by sentence.

    The Jews of Germany had a right to arm themselves but they had no reason to suspect that their chosen way of life — as ordinary people and not as soldiers for the most part — was inadequate for the circumstances in which they lived. Once their way of life was changed (by political means, I remind you, not by armed invasion) they were in no position to suddenly go out and form themselves into a well-armed militia. Jews who lived in the surrounding countries that later fell to the Germans were soldiers in the various European armies and they were, as such, armed. Ordinary citizens, civilians, both Jewish and non-Jewish, were not generally armed because that was NOT their way of life and they had no intention to be soldiers since they were NOT soldiers.

    It’s not possible to “march armed people into gas chambers” — this is a very common stupid fantasy. You think that people can transform their entire lives into entirely different lives like you pick up weapons in a video game? Where does this lunacy come from. How easy it is to say. Take your common example, take Anne Frank. She’s what, 14? Her father is what, a businessman? He has no guns. Does Anne have guns? She’s studying Latin and German and Dutch and mathematics and history; does she also study weaponry and tactical deployment? Why? Must we make our whole lives into a form of individual self-defense with the expectation that everyone everywhere is in a dangerous jungle and it’s every man for himself? It’s utter nonsense; a society cannot function this way. Some (few) people are soldiers and other (most) people are not.

    “How dare you want to disarm people against even knife wielding thugs” — HUH? I want to disarm you against knife-welding thugs? No I don’t. I want to disarm you against waitresses who can kill you with a coffee pot, that’s whom I want to disarm you against. You don’t see how very different your and my imagination of your imminent demise can be?

    “If you think our government can’t become tyrannical you are delusional.” Are you kidding? I think our government is already tyrannical and getting worse by the day. If I thought I could successfully take out enough tyrants to change that I might go buy an uzi on the street in DC for $1,200 — don’t think it’s not possible. But you are delusional if you think that is going to de-tyrannize our government. Our government puts people to death on a daily basis for no reason other than it increases the power of our government and increases the wealth of corporate interests. The time to change this was back in the 1700s some time if then, and the moment is lost even if I have a tank and a bomb, all delusional “freedom fighters” like Timothy McVeigh to the contrary notwithstanding.

    You don’t have to prove to me that millions of people murder millions of other people and that the 20th Century has made that more extreme than it could have ever been before (even in Rome). Will you stop that please? And if you will promise to stop that, I’ll promise not to disarm you, OK?

    But it is my suspicion that: (a) you have no evidence of my racism; and
    (b) your plan to arm enough people to make all the killing stop is not going to work in the long-run or even in the short run, especially considering those “knife-wielding thugs.”

  63. Malisha,
    Consider the source. The NRA is an out of touch corporate lobbyist organization that makes money when gun and ammo manufacturers make money. They do not care if people die because of their illogical and dangerous actions. The facts never get in their way.

  64. Seasoftreas, of course neither extreme is necessary and of course there’s no reason for anyone to either arm to the teeth or to disarm others who believe they need guns. What I was writing about was EXTREMES that have occurred and the take that two people, at least, on this thread, have on one of those extremes.

    My own opinion about gun control? I don’t study it enough to be very much involved OR to speak authoritatively about it. I do believe that nobody who is not a licensed law enforcement or military person should have or need a magazine with 30 bullets in it. That’s not needed for self-defense or for hunting. My son owns guns and he hunts and he knows how to use guns and I believe he’s a little bit too overly defensive but after all, he lives in Virginia where there actually are lots of hostile folks in his vicinity. Fortunately he does not imagine that he needs a machine gun with 30 bullets in a clip. And I think that so long as he can prove he will use weapons responsibly it’s OK for him to have weapons. But of course, one little mistake and he should have to deal with the “little mistake” immediately and his gun operation and ownership should come under review. He agrees on that count. He used to ride a motorcycle, had one bad accident, and stopped riding. That’s reasonable and rational in my opinion.

    But it’s offensive and foolish to misuse the Holocaust to buttress an argument that Americans need to be in possession of more and more lethal armaments and that this should be more unregulated than it presently is. That’s just ridiculous, besides. So I use extreme examples and knowingly so. The Israelis are a very defensive people. Do they need to be? Sure they do. Have they learned a form of maladjustment as a way of life because of a gross misfunction of the society their parents and grandparents lived in? Absolutely.

    That’s what I mean. If I could have my way I would have the Israelis be a lot less defensive right now, but who am I, after all, to preach to them? I am not prepared to defend them, even though they are actually prepared to defend me.

    Peace of the season upon you too.

  65. Rafflaw, I know and I do, and thank you.

    Just one of those careless Holocaust quotes pushed one of my buttons this evening. I think it’s because I did a lot of research this last week (for a friend of mine who was writing an amicus brief) on the psychological lives of the children of Holocaust survivors. A man who was the first-born son of TWO (count’em, TWO) Holocaust survivors was being held in prison because he would not testify against another Jew, based on his understanding of the “Mesirah” law in the Torah. As a secular Jew, I interpreted the “Mesirah” differently from him, but who am I to tell him what to think about his own religion? Anyway, in doing the research I read way way WAY too much about the effects of the Shoah on the children of its survivors, and when I see a careless “TV-like” take on what the Jews should have done to prevent the Shoah, it really sends me into high gear.

    The NRA are, in my opinion, “KKK Light.” Insanely powerful, of course, of course, and once more, it’s all about the money.

  66. Germany, 1928 law required all firearms to be registered and firearms dealers to be licenced. Mandatory prison time for all professionally transferred firearms without proper clearance from government
    1931 law enabled police to confiscate any weapon and ammunition and put it in police custody. Even stabbing weapons.
    1933 Jews lost all civil rights and government jobs.
    Nov. 11 1938 new law Barred Jews from owning firearms.
    Soon after the murders began.
    You say “they didn’t see their government as their enemy”. I think by 1933 they had clue.
    The history of mankind is dungeons, killing fields, and slavery.
    I’m not willing to ovelook that. Oh yes.. my mistake, that paraphrase was from Thomas Jefferson. I think he new something about the context of our second amendment rights.

    P.S. My remark about you being a racist is because of your remark about (brown people doing yard work and poor inner city blacks or just white suburbanites being armed) You brought race into a discussion that has NOTHING to do with race. ALL people regardless of color have an absolute right to defend themselves and their families.

  67. KKK light?????!!! That is right out of the book (Rules for Radicals) isolate your opponent. Call them names so no one will dare associate with them. I am a pround member of the NRA and I could not care less what color anyone is. We are all children of God and only one race… HUMAN!!

  68. What’s it called when a society it makes war in several countries and leaves manned [sic] bases behind when it [doesn’t really] leaves; has warrantless surveillance on all communications; cameras everywhere and more to be deployed in form of drones, big and tiny ones; military munitions in the hands of the police; indefinite detention without charges or hearings; “kill” lists; legal sexual assault for travelers; searches without warrants, etc. And what happens to that society when the only ones who have weapons are the police, the military, and the security forces for those who can afford their own private police, the corporations and the extremely wealthy? And when SYG laws protect them from killing. I think it’s a damn scary place to be.

  69. John? I don’t believe that David Gregory should be prosecuted under this law. I will leave a link to the DC law for you:
    http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/default.aspx?cite=UUID%28N7496AEB040-7F11DEBED1F-A98FBEFE5AD%29&db=1000869&findtype=VQ&fn=_top&pbc=DA010192&rlt=CLID_FQRLT17200535232612&rp=%2FSearch%2Fdefault.wl&rs=WEBL12.10&service=Find&spa=DCC-1000&sr=TC&vr=2.0
    I don’t see how Gregory gets 1 to 10 years in prison simply by using this as a demonstration on a talk show. It is like saying a Defense lawyer or a Prosecutor may not hold the same clip before a jury and be subjected to prosecution simply because they used it as Demonstrable Evidence.

  70. Malisha,
    I worked and lived with Holocaust survivors and their children growing up in Skokie. The children were impacted mightily by what their parents and grandparents witnessed and endured during the Holocaust. it should never be made light of.
    Fabian,
    Me thinks you protest too much.

  71. Well Rafflaw, like Robert Zimmerman Jr., apparently Fabien believes mentioning or discussing racial issues makes the discussant a racist or something like that. Then you get a Hallmark Card “scolding” about not understanding that we are all brothers blah blah. Meanwhile, a short course about how the Jews were not allowed to be armed before Shoah got into gear. So how was it the Jews’ fault that they were driven off to the ovens while unarmed? And all this has to do with the idea that we need lots of guns and clips full of lots of bullets right now so we can be free from prejudice here in America and so we can defend ourselves against “knife-wielding thugs.”

    Here we go, Fabien, here’s my take on it: The government will disarm those it wants to dominate, exploit, and disempower. It will, meanwhile, increase the power coefficient between those intended victims and its agents of control and disempowerment. Meanwhile, individual paranoids will use their weapons in ways THEY DECIDE to use them, and most of the time, that is a factor that tends to provide more of an excuse for a repressive government to do more of what it was doing before anyway. While this goes on, certain people want to feel powerful and they’re not; to them, guns are important so they can feel better. Many of those who can’t feel better without lots of guns and ammunition will misuse them and hurt or kill innocent people, but they will be protesting all the while that they are protecting their freedom and nobody should deprive them of that right. They’ll kill people like Trayvon Martin and people like the grade schoolers in Connecticut and the movie-goers in Colorado. And they’ll kill whomever they hate. And that will make the NRA insist that it has to pump more guns into the equation, for self-defense.

    It’s dumb. Using unrealistic and arrogant fictional depictions of the Holocaust doesn’t imbue it with any dignity, either.

    There are plenty of people around who feel that their own need for “manhood” (or it could be womanhood, theoretically) trumps everybody else’s sensibilities to the point that they can use, misuse, and distort any historical event for their own jollies. Shoah is particularly and unfortunately suited to this kind of disrespectful conduct; not that the First Amendment doesn’t allow it, just that the First Amendment also enables people who want to criticize it and point out how essentially low-class it is to do so.

    Author Vladimir Nabokov’s brother, a non-Jew who happened to be a homosexual, perished at Auschwitz. This proves that homosexuals should be armed, preferably with BIG BIG clips full of lots of bullets. You’d have known a lot better and you’d have taken care of business, had you been there. If only if only if only — but alas, our hero was not there, long ago and far away — (and besides, the wench is dead).

  72. Malisha

    I apologize. I did not at all intend to imply the Jewish people and others who were murdered and horrified by the nazi murder spree were responsible for their own deaths. I’m sorry if my words seemed to convey that. The nazis were responsible and well as those who ardently supported them and allowed them to remain in power.

    I am just saying that if people collectively fought back, the outcome would have been different. But you are correct in that people get lulled into passively accepting impending doom cast upon them by governments.

    I would also point out there are many examples in history where people have fought back using weaponry to oust a government that was repressing them, murdering them, or leading them to tyrrany. Sitting quietly and hoping for the best seldom brings about a reversal of a murderous government quickly. And sadly these governments tend to linger around destroying the lives of too many. Look how long Pol Pot had free reign to murder anyone he or his followers desired. It wasn’t put into check until Vietnam invaded militarily and cast him into hiding.

    It is not that people should turn themselves into survivalist types who suddenly live and die by the sword. There is nothing in my view wrong with law abiding citizens having arms to defend themselves. And having arms does not mean a person is a Rambo. It is a tool for the worst case situation that no reasonable person ever wants to happen. If the worst happens and the people have arms to defend themselves it is a decidedly better situation than not having them and getting killed. I am not proud of this but I will tell you that I have been in that situation myself several times where I have had to pull a handgun on someone to protect myself or one of my coworkers. I don’t care to think what would have happened if I did not have a means to defend myself. I hope that I won’t ever have to be in that situation again and I especially hope that nobody else ever will. But sadly in our state of development of human society we are not likely to see a farewell to arms within our lifetimes.

    I understand what violence does. I don’t know how many people I have seen killed or maimed by shooters or those using deadly weapons. It is probably over 100 and proabably quadruple that number assaulted badly by fighting. It is senseless and terrible every time. There are people out there who either as individuals or leaders of groups or even governments that for various reasons have evil intent both on their minds and in their hands. These people will victimize anyone they can. Fortunately they are rare in the world but they do exist and you can never be sure where they will crop up.

    As you might expect, I have a different perception than others do about violence in society. I have owned arms, yet I do no “live by the sword.” because I know that people that do tend to “die by the sword.” Living on the edge preparing for the zombie apocalypse as some fringe types do can lead to disasters. People should not live thinking weaponry is the answer to everything. Life is more about living than engaging in a cult of dying and killing. Yet, there are times when people have to step forward and defend themselves or others from these tyrants or thugs.

    I would like to live in a world where the only use of a firearm might be for target shooting or, if some choose, hunting game. We need to change the thinking at every level of human society so that murder is not even thought of as a possible outcome or answer to a disagreement over issues.

    I agree with you that it is abhorent for an othewise civil people to be cast into the role of defenders of their families, race, or society. Forcing people to take up arms is an awful thing. But the sad truth is that has been necessary for survival at times.

    Life is worth defending, but life is not always ideal or fair.

  73. “You don’t have to be a over confident, trigger happy nut to arm yourself with the knowledge, state of mind, and equipment to defend yourself with….”

    But there is a risk that you will become one, or in rage use one unwisely, or someone you loan the gun to will do so..

    Every gun is a death looking for a place to happen. The more guns, the more deaths. UK stats prove that.

    Oh, yes, we have kitchen knives, but there is no culture supporting their use in stopping assailants. Yes, we even have knifewielding thugs, but you can be assured that he will buy a “piece” as soon as he has the cash.

  74. Malisha. I support our absolute right to criticize the government also. (1st amendment)The right to own firearms is more important than actually owning them. You seem to have already passed judgement on Zimmerman. I don’t know what happened. Do you?? We do know that the news media Dr. the audio and video recordings to make him say something he didn’t. Lets wait and see what the process finds out.
    “Extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice.moderation in the face of tyranny is no virtue”
    Btw the way my mother and her mother hid Jews in an underground railroad in Bordeaux France during the war. They risked their lives in the resistance for people they didn’t even know. It was th e right thing to do.My mother spied and counted men and materials for the preparation of D-day. Her older bother went north and were involved in sabotage. I’ve been there and walked the trails my mother walked. I stood on the spot my mother received the scars all over her body after being caught up in barbed wire escaping a German patrol. Been to the room that served as a “field hospitable” that her step father and other men held her down as het mother stitched her up without anesthetic. If have seen the burn scars on her neck from an artillery shell passing so closes to her it k locked her down and burned her in fight during the D-day invasion and the Germans started fighting with each other because many new it was the beginning of the end and many were not Nazis just people caught up in a very bad time for humanity. It is from this background that I refuse to allow the government disarm the law abiding people of America. You can call names and make innuendo about manhood and macho crap if you want but that changes nothing.

  75. The Warsaw Uprising
    August 1, 1944 – October 2, 1944
    by Łukasz Pajewski
    http://info-poland.buffalo.edu/classroom/pajak.html

    Excerpt:
    The Warsaw Uprising was probably the largest single operation organized and executed by a partisian organization in World War II. It lasted two months, and when it was over, 200 thousand people were dead, and the entire city was in ruins. In trying to achieve its goals, the uprising was a terrible failure. In showing the courage and the dedication of the Polish nation, it was a remarkable success.

    *****

    Warsaw Ghetto Uprising
    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005188

    Excerpt:
    Between July 22 and September 12, 1942, the German authorities deported or murdered around 300,000 Jews in the Warsaw ghetto. SS and police units deported 265,000 Jews to the Treblinka killing center and 11,580 to forced-labor camps. The Germans and their auxiliaries murdered more than 10,000 Jews in the Warsaw ghetto during the deportation operations. The German authorities granted only 35,000 Jews permission to remain in the ghetto, while more than 20,000 Jews remained in the ghetto in hiding. For the at least 55,000-60,000 Jews remaining in the Warsaw ghetto, deportation seemed inevitable.

    In response to the deportations, on July 28, 1942, several Jewish underground organizations created an armed self-defense unit known as the Jewish Combat Organization(Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa; ZOB). Rough estimates put the size of the ZOB at its formation at around 200 members. The Revisionist Party (right-wing Zionists known as the Betar) formed another resistance organization, the Jewish Military Union (Zydowski Zwiazek Wojskowy; ZZW). Although initially there was tension between the ZOB and the ZZW, both groups decided to work together to oppose German attempts to destroy the ghetto. At the time of the uprising, the ZOB had about 500 fighters in its ranks and the ZZW had about 250. While efforts to establish contact with the Polish military underground movement (Armia Krajowa, or Home Army) did not succeed during the summer of 1942, the ZOB established contact with the Home Army in October, and obtained a small number of weapons, mostly pistols and explosives, from Home Army contacts.

    In accordance with Reichsführer-SS (SS chief) Heinrich Himmler’s October 1942 order to liquidate the Warsaw ghetto and deport its able-bodied residents to forced labor camps in Lublin District of the Generalgouvernement, German SS and police units tried to resume mass deportations of Jews from Warsaw on January 18, 1943. A group of Jewish fighters, armed with pistols, infiltrated a column of Jews being forced to the Umschlagplatz (transfer point) and, at a prearranged signal, broke ranks and fought their German escorts. Most of these Jewish fighters died in the battle, but the attack sufficiently disoriented the Germans to allow the Jews arranged in columns at the Umschlagplatz a chance to disperse. After seizing 5,000-6,500 ghetto residents to be deported, the Germans suspended further deportations on January 21. Encouraged by the apparent success of the resistance, which they believed may have halted deportations, members of the ghetto population began to construct subterranean bunkers and shelters in preparation for an uprising should the Germans attempt a final deportation of all remaining Jews in the reduced ghetto.

  76. As much as I think Dancin Dave deserves to be in the big house I don’t think this is the crime that should get him there. His obsequious fawning over GOP mouth pieces and strong support for beltway conventional ‘wisdom’ has made Press the Meat more useless than even little Timmeh did.

    I’m sure John McCain will be on next Sunday since he wasn’t on this Sunday. Maybe he can help get Dave out of this.

  77. Of course we are talking about worse case here. The truth is I seldom fire my guns any more. I grew up in the country and still live in the country and honestly don’t think much about firearms until people that have armed guards protecting them want to take them away from us. A comment was made by idealist 707 that someone my loose their cool and nut up, that is true of law enforcement too. We call the police when criminals attack because they have guns, not because they have nice uniforms. When criminals attack the police are seldom there. However the victim always is. Empower the victim. The UK doesn’t have the extreme gang problem and fatherless children we have. It is getting worse though.

  78. Quit watching the show when Gregory took over. If I watch a Sunday morning talk show while exercising or reading the Sunday NYT, it is “Up with Chris” or the Melisa Perry show. Both shows have had some very productive discussions on gun restrictions.

  79. Fabien P, you seem to be doing three things in your most recent post.

    [Here, let me say thanks to Darren for clarifying your position and I’m really glad you did. I have had exactly two experiences with an unholstered handgun, and in both of them, the person who had the handgun was a loose canon who should not have been armed and only luck made it come out all right.]

    back to Fabien:

    1. You seem to be establishing yourself as the authoritarian gun-slinger who tells me that I should not have made up my mind that George Zimmerman used a gun (WITH HOLLOWPOINT BULLETS, FABIEN) wrongly on 2/26/2012, to which I say HA HA HA now and more later;

    2. You seem to be reinforcing without logic the idea that my take on the proliferation of weapons of “many-murders’-worth-of-bullets” (WMMWBs) is so faulty that it will lead to the destruction of democracy in a storm of innocent deaths and that we should all be grateful to you for standing ready to stop it; and

    3. You seem to be bragging about the bona fides your mother and other relatives have given you to set yourself up as the authority on what the Jews of Shoah should have done to be more like heroes (like yourself and George Zimmerman) and less like victims (for whom your mom and others had to risk their lives).

    Let me take #3 first and only in passing. I know a woman who told me, since 1988 when I met her, that her father spent the war years saving Jews and that even after he emigrated to Chicago from Germany he ran a kind of secret arm of heroic help into Germany to provide food for the hungry. I never met her father, who died years before these stories started. During the 1990s I helped her clean her basement and we discovered a valuable piece of original art work that had come from Germany. It turned out that her father’s business was not sending in food, but bringing out art work. That particular piece could not be sold to museums (although 70 others like it had already been sold to museums all over this country) because of the beginnings of the search for the lost artwork of the Berlin Jews. So whereas there are all sorts of stories of heroism from Europe relating to WWII and Shoah, I generally tend to go about my business and form my opinions from current observations rather than claims of past glory.

    On to #2. I support rational weapons control. I would support a bill that said no individual could own or use hollowpoint bullets, period. I never even HEARD of hollowpoint bullets until George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin with one. There is, in my opinion, no excuse for anybody using a hollowpoint bullet for anything. There are probably plenty of other things I’d regulate about weaponry if I studied up on it; as it is, I am content to rely upon my elected representatives to take a position on it, reveal that position, and do the close work later. It is not the ownership of personal weaponry, but the ability to organize, that will ever, or can ever, defend us against tyranny. We do not have that, so a stockpile of guns filled with hollowpoint bullets will not achieve that. All that will achieve is a dangerous increase in the personal dangerousness presented by every individual angry disappointed person in our midst.

    And that brings me to #1. People who say, “We should not decide about George Zimmerman because we don’t have all the facts and we should wait until all the information is in,” are embarrassed because they used to say, “George Zimmerman was right to kill that thug,” and then they got smacked down by the facts that WERE revealed in the various evidence dumps. Yes I have decided that GZ is guilty of murder. Since I am not a Floridian and will never serve on his jury, I’m entitled to that opinion. Furthermore, that opinion is the only logical take on the facts that we already know, for the following reasons:
    =========================
    A. There is undeniable evidence that GZ saw Trayvon Martin walking along and decided that he, GZ, should interfere with Trayvon Martin’s walking along.

    B. GZ referred to Trayvon Martin with curses and with words showing ovious malice, before getting out of his car. (“These a55holes, they always get away”; “phucking punks [coons]”; “up to no good”; “sh1t, he’s running”; etc.)

    C. GZ followed Trayvon Martin and admitted he was doing so.

    D. GZ did not return to his vehicle after the dispatcher told him his following Trayvon Martin was not “needed.”

    E. GZ did not sustain injuries “coincident with” the beating he describes having endured.

    F. His bullet entered Trayvon Martin’s chest at no angle, straight front to back, at intermediate range, although in contact with the hoodie at the time.

    G. Trayvon’s body was found face down with his hands underneath him.

    ==========================

    So from that, I do not find myself confused about the matter at all. I think GZ kept guns because he, like many people who love guns, felt that he needed to be ready at all times to kill somebody who was going to be threatening HIS rights and HIS freedom and HIS this and HIS that. And I think he killed somebody he imagined was threatening HIS this and HIS that. Mostly, HIS right to control and dominate the neighborhood.

    That’s pretty much what the Nazis were doing. If you don’t like the way I characterize it, so be it. The American NRA types running around seeing bad guys to shoot behind every non-existent bush are more dangerous than we imagine. AND they will not be defending the victimized against the tyrannical any day soon. They line up, nearly every time, against the weak and the peaceable and the unarmed and the young and especially against those who are not expecting an armed attack.

    If government is worth anything, it should be regulating guns more credibly than it is regulating marijuana.

  80. David Gregory, Scofflaw
    By Charles P. Pierce
    12/26/12
    http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/David_Gregory_Fought_The_Law_

    My granting of the Christmas truce to the gobshites this week precluded me from commenting on the Dancin’ Master’s conversation with Wayne (Bats Flying Out Of Both Ears) LaPierre on Disco Dave’s Disco Dance Party this weekend. However, it seems that the Dancin’ Master used some visual aids, and may have broken the law and, as a result, all of the bats in the belfry are singing in harmony.

    (And, by the way, in answer to the wisecrack there from Jubilation T. Cornpone, Professor Of Law, Tom Mauser also sent his son, Daniel, to a school with armed security guards. It was called Columbine High School. Professor JTC remains the worst waste of money in Tennessee higher education since they hired Phil Fulmer)

    There’s only one thing for Gregory to do, if he’s half the journalist people on NBC keep saying he is. Go to court. Face the charges. Make your case and, if necessary, take your punishment. Demonstrate the absurdity of the attempts at misdirection and distraction that are the sum total of how the gun industry is trying to defuse the rising public revulsion against its efforts to profit from arming crazy people and criminals, of which this preposterous stunt would be a part.

  81. The law is unconstitutional, so he shouldn’t be prosecuted, in a more perfect world.

    In a slightly more perfect world, he would have handed it to Wayne LaPierre, and they would be in the doc together — and the reporters and pundits would be in a quandary.

    In the world that we have, I’d recommend the maximum fine and a suspended sentence on the year imprisonment, provided he takes and passes a gun safety course.

    And speaking of other worlds …

    Meanwhile, in a parallel universe, numerous journalists and pundits are calling for the prosecution of Wayne LaPierre for bringing an empty 30-round magazine to NBC’s Meet The Press.

  82. Malisha-
    “I support rational weapons control. I would support a bill that said no individual could own or use hollowpoint bullets, period.”

    Do you know why police (and non) use hollow points? They serve two purposes. One is indeed greater lethality. In the very unlikely event that I have to use a firearm in self defense, I want to have the best chance to stop the threat as quickly as possible.

    However, the other, believe it or not, is safety. Ball ammo will punch straight through just about anything it hits, including a person, and continue to travel with plenty of energy to spare. Which means even if you are accurate, you can still easily hit an innocent person. The same goes for if you miss and hit a wall. Ball ammo will go through many layers of dry wall. Hollow points expand upon impact, greatly slowing them and expending most of their energy on whatever they hit first.

  83. The Travon Martins of the world need to be shot. Ask Martin Niemoeller.
    In this situation with the “clip”. If they dont have it right after Dick Gregory had it then they cant say that it was complete and therefore illegal. If it is just a case without the insides then its a look-alike. And David Gregory does not look like Dick Gregory. Go to Hong Kong and buy one of those wallets which humans employ to store money, credit cards and hookers phone numbers. They are meant to look like a clip. But they are plastic and just contain the essential that we need to carry. If the wallet is in your coat pocket then its a concealed carry. And Dick Gregory is not brain dead. And the use of the words “liberal” and “conservative” on this topic is myopic if not gropic. If I believe in a constitutional provision like the First Amendment you call me a liberal. If I believe in the Second Amendment you call me a conservative. If I say I believe in the 26th Amendment you all say: Whats that? If someone says Never Again on this blog you all get curious. When the Koch Brothers quit trying to buy elections and just buy the cops with the guns and take over then you will want your own assault rifle. The Second Amendment was not just intended to deal with that fruity tutey kraut King and his lords and lassies back in 1776 and 1789. A well armed militia can not exist if its members dont have arms. And a militia might go home at night instead of to some army barracks. And the right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with bears. And if you are gonna be a bear be a grizzly and get an automatice weapon. And dont name your newborn kid “Adam”.

  84. BarkinDog, you do love to flaunt your little thing dontcha. “The Travon Martins of the world need to be shot. Ask Martin Niemoeller.” If in fact the Travon Martins of this world (who are they exactly, how many of them are there exactly, and please provide their names and addresses so they can be shot) need to be shot, I wonder how come you (a) have never shot any of them but keep flapping your jaw about what they need; and (b) have never even tried to bite them, but growl so much before you tuck tail where it fits so good and run squealing behind the poopdump.

    Get out there, big dog, and kill your own “Trayvon Martin of the world.”

    You called me out on purpose. You sitting there licking something you can reach because you finally got a response out of a b1tch when usually you can’t? Here’s the part that comforts me, BarkinDog: If and when somebody shoots you dead with a hollowpoint bullet, you won’t be able to raise a crowd of 2,000,000 to bark up a storm about it. They’ll dump you in a hole and cover you up and ItchinBay will whine a bit and then let dead dogs lie.

    As they so often do.

  85. Professor Turley, I address you directly right now. You can ban me if you don’t like it; otherwise I respect you for not doing so. I think BarkinDog’s having boldly said: “The Trayvon Martins of this world need to be shot” is a direct result of your having given permission for such an outrage by your somewhat sophisticated but nevertheless inappropriate ueberdefense of Zimmerman. YOU came out showing a picture of his noggin with a few insignificant capillary-type lacerations on it with the headline announcing “SERIOUS INJURY.” It was not serious injury. Had there been serious injury, you know as a lawyer that the photograph was not evidence of serious injury. YOU came out blaring that Zimmerman had “passed a lie detector test” when you know full well (and have been to conferences where it has been discussed by experts) that a voice stress test is not a “lie detector test” and furthermore that the phrase “lie detector test” is itself a misnomer. You have been with the “excuses excuses” team behind a man who profiled and unnecessarily killed a kid who then was slandered post-mortem (yes I know it is not the technical definition of “slander” but I will use it and stand corrected; we all know what happened) liberally all over the web for something that no law says he ever did.

    When you give permission for people to behave like this, there will always be a dog or two who will say “shit” while he has a mouth full of it. I hope this goes through the moderator and if not, I hope you get what I’m saying.

    BarkinDog has earned my contempt and disdain. I don’t often attack other bloggers ad hominem, and certainly not until after they have attacked me ad hominem. The exception I make this time is that I am a mother; Trayvon Martin was not my son but in some way they are all my sons. I would never shoot a hollowpoint bullet into BarkinDog. But I regret that he feels so free to emit such vile and reprehensible talk on your blog, to approve of someone shooting a hollowpoint bullet into a kid named Trayvon Martin whom BarkinDog never met.

    I read it here. I’m going to take anti-nausea medication now.

  86. NRA-Backed Law Spells Out When Indianans May Open Fire on Police
    By Mark Niquette – Jun 5, 2012
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-05/nra-backed-law-spells-out-when-indianans-may-open-fire-on-police.html

    Excerpt:
    Every time police Sergeant Joseph Hubbard stops a speeder or serves a search warrant, he says he worries suspects assume they can open fire — without breaking the law.

    Hubbard, a 17-year veteran of the police department in Jeffersonville, Indiana, says his apprehension stems from a state law approved this year that allows residents to use deadly force in response to the “unlawful intrusion” by a “public servant” to protect themselves and others, or their property.

    “If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he’s going to say, ‘Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property,’” said Hubbard, 40, who is president of Jeffersonville Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 100. “Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law.”

  87. The NRA and Gun Companies Stand to Profit From Newtown Tragedy
    Lee Fang on December 24, 2012
    http://www.thenation.com/blog/171913/nra-and-gun-companies-stand-profit-newtown-tragedy

    Excerpt:
    Last year, shortly after the shooting of then-Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, a financial analyst asked Mike Fifer—CEO of one of the largest gun companies in America—if the incident would lead to a wave of new gun sales. “The commentary from the NRA that President Obama might be coming out with some sort of speech on some sort of gun control,” asked the analyst, “has that stirred gun owners and prospective gun owners to go visit the stores?”

    Gun companies, like almost any profit-driven enterprise, must keep pace with investor demands. Unlike most consumer businesses, however, people generally only need to buy their product once. Guns are very durable, and a well-maintained one can last a lifetime.

    That’s where the National Rifle Association comes in.

    NRA-stoked fear about the government coming to seize America’s guns has been a useful marketing tool to the gun industry, which must continually encourage gun-owners to buy more and more weapons.

    This dynamic drives rather macabre incentives. Horrific gun violence leads to calls for gun control, which in turn leads to NRA-organized fear-mongering and conspiracy theories that inevitably results in more gun sales. What the financial analyst pondered last year with the Giffords shooting is playing out with Newtown—and the NRA and the gun industry is earning what is likely to be an unprecedented fortune.

    While pundits and politicians debate the possibility of new gun restrictions in the wake of the Newtown massacre, the NRA is playing it’s now-familiar role spreading paranoia, and Americans are flocking to stores to stock up on weapons—lots of them.

  88. Here is what we know: He showed what looked like a working “high-capacity” clip. Perhaps is was a non-working replica, or was a real clip that had been damaged in a way it was unusable after the D.C. authorities said they would not (not could not, but would not) allow him to posses it to confront someone as part of a media presentation.

    If it wasn’t usable, then it wasn’t a violation of anything. No where in D.C., or for that matter in any law in the U.S., it is a violation of law to have a replica or non-usable part or complete firearm or even artillery or any other kind of weapon (yes, even a fake nuclear weapon). Done in fiction and documentaries all the time all over the country.

    Sounds to me like certain people of a certain political side are trying to go after a certain journalist for doing his job. And, btw, I’ve been a member of the NRA since I was 13.. makes it 14 years now. Hard questions are *always* good in politics. And the NRA is a political organization – that’s why it’s a nonprofit that can’t qualify, and has never applied for, tax-exempt status.

  89. First of all I have not read everything you wrote. However. I don’t think is a hero! I dont know!! Do you??! I have NEVER said “he was right to kill the thug” I don’t know!!! Apparently YOU do!! There is NO evidence he sad”coons”! That was the media speculating on a muffled sound they later backed off on. And YES there is evidence of a struggle. Pictures ju st released in the last two weeks shows him with a blooded and beaten face. Some have said he was never arrested. Yes he was and then let go!!! Why not hang him now??! Who needs a open viewing of evidence??! Kill him!I don’t claim to be a “gun slinging expert”. Again you are simply trying to marginalize me. The experience of my family is only to put into context that the horrors of government out of control is real. Governments have murdered FAR more people than street crimes EVER H more ignorance.AVE. In fact governments have murdered more people than all the wars we have fought have killed people. Hollow points are designed to do what they do. Transfer energy to the target and not travel through it into unintended targets. I would use NOTHING BUT hollow points when I had carry permit.

  90. ElaineM. Diane Feinstein is now openly talking about a FORCED buy back of guns. Is that the NRA “stocking paranoia” about gun confiscation?????

  91. BTW Americans now buying LOTS AND LOTS of guns is the unintended consequences of fools. I had not bought a gun in 18 years. Just bought a Stainless steal Mini 14 . Beautiful rifle. I have had a blued one for 31 years. It has never drawn blood on anyone. It MUST be defective. I did run off a burglar onetime in 1987 with it though. I very loudly chambered a round he jumped through the window he had pried open.never fired a shot. That is how people defend themselves 99% of the time with a gun. I have no desire to hurt anyone.

  92. Fabien,

    Ohmigod! Let’s get the NRA hit squad after that woman for talking openly about a gun buyback! Obama and the Democrats are making plans to take all your guns away! Better buy as many as you can right now and hide them in an underground bunker where the feds won’t be able to find them.

  93. The truth is you won’t disarm us. We are not the Brits. We are not the Australians or Canadians. You are just all blowing smoke dreaming of a utopia. We are Americans and we will bury them deep. We will not be disarmed the same as I will not be silenced. Its a freedom thang.

  94. Thousands Of L.A. Citizens Choose Groceries Over Handguns
    By Hayes Brown on Dec 27, 2012
    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/27/1377731/butter-not-guns/

    Excerpt:
    Thousands of Los Angeles’ citizens lined parking lots yesterday in a chance to exchange their guns for groceries in a city-organized buyback program. The event, normally an annual Mother’s Day event, was pushed up to Wednesday by L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa in the aftermath of the tragic shooting in Newtown, CT.

    City officials offered up to $100 in gift cards to a local grocery chain for rifles, handguns, and shotguns, with assault weapons fetching more, up to $200 in cards. Despite moving the date, turnout was extremely high, with the two parking lots where the buybacks took place finding themselves overcrowded at times by eager sellers. In fact, the city found itself surpassing last year’s total of 1,673 guns by yesterday afternoon:

    Many came bearing more than one gun. They pulled 22 pistols from the trunk of one white Honda, a haul that earned the driver $1,000.

    Two men in a pickup truck with two children in the back seat handed over a rifle, a pistol and a MAC-12, altered with a silence

  95. Of course I’m a very fun loving guy.Im 52 years old I’ve never had a traffic ticket. I drive 100,000 miles a year in a big rig for the past 32 years

  96. I actually have a very good sense of humor. I’ve been smiling through this whole conversation. I only think people are wrong the disagree with me I don’t think the evil. Please excuse the voice activated texting

  97. Elaine,
    Those buyback programs are a fraud and just a feel-good gesture. No one in their right mind is going to turn in a $900 Smith & Wesson revolver, or a $1,200 rifle. The guns they collect, such as those .22 pistols, are “Saturday Night Specials,” most of which are more dangerous to the shooter than the shot at. Cheap and made of pot metal for the most part. Or some rusty old gun that won’t fire.

    There are about 330 million firearms out there in the US, and those are just those we know about. I am pretty sure my Kentucky pistol, 1896 Winchester 30-30, .50 caliber Hawken rifle, and two shotguns that are more than a hundred years old have no paperwork anywhere.

    In my county, I do not know anyone who does not own at least one firearm of some kind. That includes the parish priest, the superintendent of schools, all the teachers, the janitor and the clerks at the supermarket. Just an educated guess, but I estimate there are about 2 1/2 firearms for every man, woman and child in the county.

    I live in an area where black bear have been found in back yards inside the city limits. What would you do if you looked out in your back yard and saw a bear or coyote between you and your grandchild? Not long ago, I was driving down one of our mountainsides at night when a pretty kitty crossed the road just in front of me. It took a moment for it to register that the “kitty” was about seven feet from nose to tail. Anyone who goes for a hike in the hills unarmed is taking their life in their hands. When my son lived in Alaska, he would no more have considered going salmon fishing without his rifle than he would have left his shoes at home.

  98. Otteray,

    “What would you do if you looked out in your back yard and saw a bear or coyote between you and your grandchild?’

    If I lived in an area where bears and/or coyotes prowled around people’s back yards–even within city limits–you can count on the fact that I would never leave my grandchild unattended. Do you think it’s a good idea to shoot off guns in densely populated areas?

    BTW, we recently bought a house situated on over three acres in a town with lots of wooded areas. The previous owners told us there were coyotes and fisher cats in the area. Still, my husband, daughter, son-in-law, and I don’t plan on getting guns to shoot varmints in the neighborhood.

  99. Elaine,
    When we first moved to the mountains, my youngest was in second grade. One of the first things we taught her was to always look around the yard and make sure there were no predators, especially black bears. We also have deer, but we all give them a wide berth too, as a deer, especially a doe with a fawn, can lay an old fashioned country whuppin’ on you with those sharp hooves.

    As for your grandchild, let’s move forward a few years and suppose she is seven or eight years old and can be left unattended in the yard. Then what? As for shooting a bear in my back yard that was threatening my kid or me, you betcha I would be reaching for my 30-30 unless it was up in a tree and I had time to call 911. I have had a police officer kill a wild animal in my yard with a 12 gauge shotgun in the middle of the night. I held the flashlight on his front sight so he could see to aim. Woke the neighbors up. Not long ago, I found a huge boar raccoon in the back of my pickup truck rummaging around in the trash. When I went outside, he dove out of the truck and started toward me. Discretion being the better part of valor, I went back inside. A day or two later, I found him dead in the road where someone had run over him. He was huge. A lot of people don’t realize it because they are “cute” but a full grown raccoon is a nasty animal that can kill a large dog, and are known to carry rabies.

    I think a large part of the problem with any discussion of “gun control” has many regional and cultural variations that preclude any “one size fits all” solution.

  100. Fabien P, your evidence that you have a good sense of humor is that YOU are laughing at stuff; usually a good sense of humor indicates that others are finding your jokes and intended humorous comments funny. But hey, that’s not a real problem. With or without a sense of humor, you’re entitled to your opinions.

    Here’s my comment on what you have said:

    You say there was no evidence GZ said “coons”; I gave two versions, however, alternating “coons” or “punks” and it really doesn’t matter which one was said. He ADMITTED to saying “punks” and Corey claimed he said “punks” because he admitted that. But the word, whether it was “coons” or “punks” was preceded by the work “phucking.” That does display ill will, animosity, whatever you want to call it. I don’t refer to you as a “phucking blogger” or a “phucking truck driver.” To do so would be to show animus. By the way, there IS evidence that GZ said “coons” and that evidence is contested. There is also controverting evidence that what he really said was “punks.” That doesn’t mean that there is “NO evidence” that he said “coons” — it simply means that there are two versions.

    Is there evidence of serious injury? Not according to Detective Serino. Not according to the EMTs on the scene. Not according to the PA who saw GZ the following day.

    Is there evidence of a struggle? Sure. Does it prove that GZ was assaulted? No it does not. It could very well prove that Trayvon Martin did not agree to being killed.

    Is there evidence that GZ had blood on his face on 2/26/2012 after killing GTrayvon Martin? Sure. Is there proof that it was GZ’s own blood on his face? No there is not.

    Is there evidence that GZ profiled, followed and confronted Trayvon Martin, thereafter killing him with a direct shot into his heart?

    Yes there is.

    Will GZ be convicted? I don’t know. I do know that Trayovn Martin would have had a much better chance of living until his 18th birthday if GZ were not in possession of a gun loaded with hollow-point bullets that night. And in my opinion, gun regulations should be in place preventing a person who has assaulted a law enforcement officer and a fiancee in the past from carrying such a lethal weapon until or unless he can show that he is mature enough and responsible enough not to kill somebody he identifies as “suspicious” while he’s on the way to the store for groceries.

  101. Malisha-
    What is your obsession with hollow point bullets? You know that non-hollow points are pretty good at wrecking human bodies too, right? Did you read what I said about their purpose?

  102. I agree if somebody has a history of assault there is an issue but again that is a separate issue for overall gun control. People need to be held accountable for their actions. But I don’t know and you don’t know what truly happen at night. The news media will lie to you continuously to Advance an agenda. Why else would they doctor audio recording. They made it look like he’s sad the guy looks suspicious he is black. That is not what happened. He said the guy looks suspicious, they asked if he was black white or Hispanic. He said he looks black. He was answering a specific question that was asked of him by the police dispatcher. The story the news media wanted to run with was that Zimmerman was a racist that hunted down a young black man. Hey doctor the audio recording to Advance tbat story

  103. By the way even if he had fired in self defense truly, he is no hero..A hero is someone that risk their own your own life or safety so others may live. Self defense is just natural law No hero in that.

  104. Here is an FYI factoid. Hollow point bullets and wadcutters are a lot safer to use in urban environments for two reasons.

    First of all, they tend to shatter on impact instead of passing through the target. A full metal jacket bullet will go through somebody and then through a couple of sheet rock walls. If I shoot somebody, it is going to be for effect and the whole idea is to take them out….permanently. The whole purpose of deadly force is to be deadly.

    The second thing, if they hit something like pavement or a signpost, they will shatter and ricochets will be at a minimum.

  105. The news will lie to you continuously. Just like they put explosive inside of watermelons to make them blow up when they were shooting semi automatic rifles at them. They have also shown automatic rifles be fired while speaking about semi automatic rifles needing to be banned

  106. They have put explosives inside the gas tank of pickup trucks to make them i blow up when they turned over on their side to advance an agenda. There a Genda is more gun control. They will lie lie lie to advance that a Genda

  107. NRA Blames Everything Except Guns: Outdated Video Games, Hurricanes, And Corporate Media Led To Newtown
    By Igor Volsky on Dec 21, 2012
    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/21/1371711/nra-blames-everything-except-guns-outdated-video-games-hurricanes-and-corporate-media-led-to-newtown/

    The National Rifle Association, the nation’s largest gun advocates lobby, attributed the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, to “school free zones,” arguing that “genuine monsters” are attracted to schools because its administrators and teachers are not armed. “Politicians pass laws for gun free school zones, they issue press releases bragging about them,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said. “And, in doing so, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are the safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.”

    “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre declared and urged Congress to “act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation.” The lobby will create a “National School Shield Program” that will help schools respond to attacks, led by former Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR).

    In a news conference repeatedly interrupted by protesters blaming the NRA for “killing our kids,” LaPierre shoveled out blame far and wide, going after reporters for glorifying killers like Adam Lanza, violent movies, video games, and music videos. He tore into gun safety advocates for exploiting the tragedy for “political gain,” targeted President Obama for underfunding police initiatives in schools, and said that the media demonized “local gun owners” and spread “misinformation and dishonest thinking that only delay meaningful action and all but guarantee that the next violence is a new cycle away.” “Add another hurricane, terrorist attack, or some other natural of man-made disaster, and you’ve got a recipe for a national nightmare of violence and victimization,” he said.

    Only gun owners and gun lobbyists — who have spent years easing gun regulations across the country — were spared any responsibility.

  108. Yes.. as it should be. Just like we don’t blame cars for drunk divers that’ll more than 10,000 each year. You can’t argue a single one is justified. Many of the deaths from firearms each year are justifiable homicides by police and law abiding citizens defending themselves and others. Many of the rest are bad guys killing each other.

  109. Elaine,
    Remember my history. I have seen enough dead bodies to understand bullet and shotgun effects. One of the first things that officers are taught is to never unholster a firearm unless you are ready and willing to use deadly force. Stopping power is important. There was an instance some years ago where officers shot a perp more than a dozen times using 9mm full metal jacket ammunition. He kept coming and kept shooting at the officers. The rounds went clear through the bad guy and kept going. It is a wonder innocent bystanders were not killed or injured. The whole purpose of a self defense weapon used in extremis is stopping power. I would not want to empty my revolver into a bad guy only to have him continue to shoot at me.

  110. Pruett,

    “A comment was made by idealist 707 that someone my loose their cool and nut up, that is true of law enforcement too. ”
    Please go and read my comments again.

    Just for the record after reading Elaine’s second source on the uprising in Warsaw, I begin to see some light in your reasoning. But if light arms, and assault rifles are light arms, what is the solution against martial force?

    Bravery and suicide by military are neither a good choice.

    BTW, have you tried smuggling in anti-tank weapons. A FA piece or some explosives. It would require defenses against gas. Have you bought and tested a mask yet?

    Democracy, if we can recapture it is the only effective defense for us. And the only one that they will not attack now. Future? Who knows.

    Your mother’s and family’s experiences are amirable. But without D-Day and the Americans, what would have been the ultimate outcome?

  111. The vast amount of violent crime in this country is from repeat offenders as was the shooting of the Firemen a few days ago. I have NO tolerance for people that victimize other people. That man should have never been back on the streets. Here in Ca. they voted to start letting out some three strikers. I dont get it but I must live with the will of the people sense its not a constitutional issue. Once my mother passes on I will leave Ca. Probably go to Arizona. Still be close to my friends. The Leftist that call themselves “liberals”have destroyed this state. There is NOTHING liberal about a leftist.

  112. Jason, you can easily claim that I have an “obsession” with hollow-point bullets without any proof, so that’s what your challenging question is worth. I don’t have any obsession with ANY weapons. I do know, however, that the idea of self-defense for most people does not entail their need to use more destructive weapons than those commonly allowed in the US Military. If a soldier in the US Military can defend himself adequately without hollow-point bullets, why can’t a 28-year-old living in a gated community in Florida? The idea that they’re safer because they only kill the person they are aimed to kill is meaningless to me. You can stop an aggressor in your house or at your car with a BB gun, so why have overkill on your right hip when you go to the grocery store? If the police use them because they won’t hit miscellaneous bystanders, then consider the fact that the police are trained and regulated, and if a police man DOES shoot someone, he has to answer for it and there is a full investigation of the circumstances.

    NONE OF THE WEAPONS used by police are unregulated. Police are required to report every time they shoot their weapons. In fact, the weapons used by the military and the police are strictly regulated and we all know that and the soldiers and cops expect that, which is as it should be.

    I don’t know which kinds of guns are the perfect kinds of guns for which uses; that has never interested me, much less obsessed me. So I’m one of those people that Fabien might think is negligent because I’m not arming myself so that I can protect my and his freedom. But that’s not the life I choose for myself; I am not a soldier and never hoped to be one. When you read a bit about the killing of Trayvon Martin, though, something becomes perfectly obvious: even if Zimmerman chose to profile him, chose to follow him, and chose to shoot him, he might have had a chance to survive if that bullet were not a hollow-point bullet. And about the chance of hitting an innocent bystander?

    Trayvon Martin WAS an innocent by-stander.

    It was only George Zimmerman who turned him into a combatant, by making him fight for his life, unsuccessfully. And why unsuccessfully? Because of the hollow-point bullet that was sold to a guy who did not have the good sense to check out the scene before assaulting a Law Enforcement Officer years before.

  113. Re Malisha’s take on Barkin’ Dog:

    Who am I to call for a ban of a commenter here, having passed so many lines.

    However, this line should be considered for enforcing in the future.
    People who call for “elimination, extinction, murder, or use of lethal force on others”, deter others from exercising their free speech. Neither groups nor persons or organizations should be subject to threats nor calls for violence.

    I feel that Barkin’ Dog is but an analogue of all use of verbal intimidation from time immmemorable. With new examples from above, via the media, and from your government every day. Here the tyranny is oligarchal, but equally lethal to free speech.

    Try reading Tony Morrisons speech upon receiving the Nobel Prize in Litterature for a better take. She is currently the latest American to receive the prize. Has science replaced our souls. I fear yes.

    See Wiki if nothing else.

    PS Violating one of my own rules again. Getting involved in a two-person fight.

  114. The following link takes you to a study in the clinical aspect of selecting a firearm and bullet to go in it. The writer is Massad Ayoob, former police Captain, firearms instructor and a leading authority on use of weapons and deadly force under stress. As a lawman and instructor, he is far more knowledgeable about firearms and their use than even the average law enforcement officer.

    http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob93.html

  115. OS,

    I don’t like asking for info from you as you seldom respond.
    But my interest in the climate change’s effect on animal migration is a subject that I follow.

    Your and Elaine’s dialogue were in her case enlivened by referrals to coyotes. Your’s notably to me, the large “kitty”, what in FL might be called a cougar. I think that we called them mountain lions in Raleigh. I have seen only tracks in AZ. But there in the Huachuca Mountains there was plenty of deer to keep them fed. He/she had used the same lookout point that I did later, deer hunting both of us.

    So Elaine lives in Massachusetts. Which mountains do you live in? State?

  116. Re Grandma shooting:

    Sounded like automatic fire to me. Legal?
    Grandma in her first salvo got off at least two rounds pointed highet than the backstop.

    Why do an oppressed people seek guns as comfort? Because they get screwed in the rest of their lives. And venting is healthier, but can train up insppropriate responses.

  117. Otteray,

    I’m sixty-six years old and have never felt the need to purchase a firearm–neither has my husband. No crazed individual has ever attacked either one of us. Neither have we been attacked by vicious predatory animals.

    One of my husband’s childhood friends was killed by his brother when he was playing with a gun.

    *****

    Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study
    American College of Epidemiology
    http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

    Abstract
    Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6). Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.

  118. Gun Control Issues, Public Health, and Safety
    http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html

    Gunshot wounds impact severely on the criminal justice as well as health care systems. Some basic statistics are important in understanding the magnitude and severity of the social and economic burden to the U.S. The subject remains contentious. (Glantz and Annas, 2009)

    In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600. This makes firearms injuries one of the top ten causes of death in the U.S. The number of firearms-related injuries in the U.S., both fatal and non-fatal, increased through 1993, declined to 1999, and has remained relatively constant since. However, firearms injuries remain a leading cause of death in the U.S., particularly among youth (CDC, 2001) (Sherry et al, 2012).

    The rates of firearms deaths in the U.S. vary significantly by race and sex. The U.S. national average was 10.2 deaths per 100,000 population in 2009. The highest rate was 28.4/100,000 for African-American males, more than quadruple the rate of 6.3/100,000 for white males. (CDC, 2009)

    The number of non-fatal injuries is considerable–over 200,000 per year in the U.S. Many of these injuries require hospitalization and trauma care. A 1994 study revealed the cost per injury requiring admission to a trauma center was over $14,000. The cumulative lifetime cost in 1985 for gunshot wounds was estimated to be $911 million, with $13.4 billion in lost productivity. (Mock et al, 1994) The cost of the improper use of firearms in Canada was estimated at $6.6 billion per year. (Chapdelaine and Maurice, 1996)

    A study of firearm deaths in high income countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom (England and Wales), United Kingdom (Northern Ireland), United Kingdom (Scotland), and the United States) was conducted with data from the World Health Organization assembled by the WHO from the official national statistics of each individual country from 2003 (Richardson and Hemenway, 2011). The total population for the United States for 2003 was 290.8 million while the combined population for the other 22 countries was 563.5 million. There were 29,771 firearm deaths in the US and 7,653 firearm deaths in the 22 other countries. Of all the firearm deaths in these 23 high-income countries in 2003, 80% occurred in the US. In the US the overall firearm death rate was 10.2 per 100,000, the overall firearm homicide rate 4.1 per 100,000, and the overall homicide rate 6.0 per 100,000, with firearm homicide rates highest persons 15 to 24 years of age. For the US the overall suicide rate was 10.8 per 100,000, and slightly over half of these deaths were firearm suicide (5.8 per 100,000). Firearm suicides rates increased with age. In the other high income countries 2003 the overall firearm death rate was 1.4 per 100,000, the overall firearm homicide rate 0.2 per 100,000, and the overall homicide rate 0.9 per 100,000. Firearm homicide rates were highest in the 25 year old to 34 year old age group. The overal suicide rate was 14.9 per 100,000 with a overall firearm suicide rate of 1.0 per 100,000.

  119. The press conference by the hollow point ammo mfr and the dissatisfied customer were quite illuminating as to their viewpoints.
    Particularly the customer’s desire to shoot with gruesome results of the mfr reps was a case against gun ownership.

    The WHO study shows that one can committ suicide without risk to others. Pill overdose is guaranteed not to harm others physically. Guns are not.

  120. Malisha. You have already determined that it was GZ that turned it into combat??? Were you there???? How do you know this???????? We dnot know if TM swung on him or if GZ grabbed him and started the fight. Do you????? You automatically assume the TM “was an innocent bystander” You can’t know that. As far as firearms deaths you assume none are justified. You also don’t take into consideration how many are bad guys killed ng bad guys. Also there are more ways to kill people than just guns. 1% of murders are commented with”assault rifles” 5% with hands and feet. 6% with blunt objects.
    The murder by governments still FAR exceeds the deaths from all the wars we have fought or any street crimes. You still don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to hollow points. They do what they are designed to do. Lethal force is lethal force. They are designed to stop the target and not penetrate beyond it. I guess you think we need safer bullets.

  121. Malisha-
    Our soldiers aren’t *allowed* to use hollow points. They aren’t allowed under the Hague Convention. You might not think it’s important to limit the risk to innocent life when defending yourself, but I take the responsibility seriously. And yes, I want the ammo to give the best chance of ending the threat. If there was a weapon that instantly stunned them like a Star Trek phaser, I’d gladly carry that instead.

    “I don’t know which kinds of guns are the perfect kinds of guns for which uses; that has never interested me”

    If you have the honesty to admit that, please don’t follow it up with:

    “You can stop an aggressor in your house or at your car with a BB gun, so why have overkill on your right hip when you go to the grocery store?”

    Good god.

  122. idealist- I don’t know if you’re familiar with the Onion News Network. It’s humor is parody and satire, sometimes funny but often directed against conservative issues and politics.

  123. Fabien, your cover is blown. You like Zimmerman because you’d like to do what he did. But I’ll answer your questions anyway. (I won’t put the same number of exclamation points after each sentence to match the number of question marks you use; to do so would seem ignorant and emotional.)

    OK, here goes. “You have already determined that it was GZ that turned it into combat???”

    Yes, I have come to the conclusion that it was GZ who turned “it” [which was actually “nothing” before it became combat] into combat. Here is my reason: George noticed Trayvon, according to his NEN call. Shortly after noticing Trayvon he said, among other things: “These a55holes, they always get away”; and “F*cking punks” [according to his own admission, although “F*cking coons” is also a possible interpretation of his exasperated expletive expression]; and “he looks like he’s up to no good”; and “He looks like he’s on drugs or something”; and “Sh*t, he’s running”; and “there’s a real suspicious guy.” These comments show animus on George’s part, against Trayvon. Yet when he is asked what is so suspicious about Trayvon, he gives, over the course of several days, various explanations that are at best vague and foolish. Essentially, what happened was that George saw Trayvon and didn’t like him. At the same time, George told the dispatcher twice that Trayvon had fled from him, after noticing him watching. So I naturally assume that if George is telling NEN the truth, he sees Trayvon, Trayvon sees him, and Trayvon runs away. Once George is out of his truck and following Trayvon, which he admits three times in the course of the next few days and then one more time on Hannity, the dispatcher asks if he is following Trayvon and he says, “Yeah.” At this point, he has shown malice and he has followed Trayvon. In return, Trayvon has seen him and run away. This places clearly in my mind the rebuttable presumption that George was the aggressor. When there is combat and one person is the aggressor and the other is not the aggressor, it is safe to assume that the one who has expressed animus and chased after the other is the aggressor. It is not rocket science, even for us ignorant, emotional girls.

    Were you there????

    No, and I didn’t need to be there to make the deductions and form the conclusions that I set forth above. I read George’s written statements in which he refers to Trayvon Martin as “the suspect” even though he was “the suspect” at the time that he was writing the statement, and Trayvon was “the deceased” or “the victim.” I listened to the NEN call and the interviews by Singleton, Serino, and both Singleton and Serino together. I watched the video re-enactment. I had sufficient data to come to my conclusions with the knowledge gained from these sources, analyzing them with my own intellect.

    How do you know this????????

    “We” do not know this, Fabien. “I” believe this to be true and “you” apparently do not or, at the least, do not want to. But I think if someone you did not know was following you in the dark and would not give you a good reason for doing so, and if they followed you first in a car and then on foot, when you were not doing anything to give them cause to want to accost you, you might very well feel threatened and even cornered. I will bet that if you were carrying, your gun would be out of the holster already as you defended your freedom.

    We dnot know if TM swung on him or if GZ grabbed him and started the fight.

    Actually, “We” do know. If I may take “we” to mean Detective Christopher Serino, Doris Singleton, most rational people, most people who care more about the rights of ordinary individuals to not get killed than the rights of wannabe-cop gunslingers to kill at will, and the forensic scientists who found no trace of Zimmerman’s DNA on Trayvon Martin’s hands, knuckles, shirt, hoodie sleeves or cuffs. To us, if Trayvon had “swung on” George, he would have connected, and if he connected, he would have carried away a wee bit of George’s DNA and/or blood, etc. in the process. Furthermore, “we” believe that even if he had “swung on George first,” it would have been in self-defense once he realized that George was intending to unlawfully restrain, harm or kill him, which would not have been a wild guess by the time the two were in contact.

    Do you?????

    Yes. I do, to the extent that this knowledge is now or ever will be in the future available to me, a jury, a judge, or anyone else. To the extent that this is a knowable thing, I “know” it. To the extent that this is NOT a knowable thing, it will never be known, but neither will it be known that any potential killer of any other potential person was the aggressor, in which case we should not bother to have these laws at all, and we should just admit that anybody who wants to kill anybody else, go for it. Everybody arm up and be prepared. If someone wants to kill you, you shoot first. And that, Fabien, is what Trayvon Martin could have done that night if he had been armed and of age to carry his weapon to the 7-11 and back. Is that where you want to live? Where you have to carry your sidearm to go to the corner store and you have to be ready to kill on the way home or be killed because someone who sees you doesn’t think YOU look right? Is that your vision of America? Oh — I mean: Is that your vision of America?????

    Here’s what I know, Fabien: If you give a loaded gun to someone like George and he feels threatened, or he feels irritated, or he feels low, or high, or wrong, or wronged, or off, or resentful, or upset, or creeped out, or emotional, or insulted, or disrespected, or ignored, or dissed, or whatever, he might profile somebody, chase them down, and kill them, and then make up a bunch of stupid excuses which others who sometimes feel as he felt will support with all the energy they can muster.

    I also know that our society can ill afford to let this become more common than it already is.

  124. Jason,
    That is why the single best home defense weapon is a shotgun, preferably a pump action. In the wee hours of the morning, in a dark house, there is no more distinctive sound than a shell being racked into a pump gun. That is usually enough to make anyone but the most determined competitor for a Darwin Award to make a hasty exit. If is does have to be used, the end is quick and permanent, albeit messy. And you do not accidentally shoot grandma sleeping in the next room.

  125. Jason, don’t get all thrilled with yourself to the point that you can tell me what to opine on and what not to opine on. You imagine that people who vote for the president understand the office, understand constitutional law, understand the functions of the state department, understand government finance? GET REAL. If you don’t think you can protect your home without hollow-point bullets, oppose gun control if it seems that hollow-point bullets are essential to your mental health so you won’t stay up all night worried about a home invader whom you can’t effectively oppose without them. But if you think you can set yourself up as the decider of what opinions I can form with limited knowledge of a KILLING TECHNOLOGY when I have spent my life studying CHILD PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY (and protecting them from a brutal and destructive social problem, not protecting them from Lanza, Zimmerman, et al.) I’m here to tell you to step the Hell down.

    I support rational gun control; I believe that includes not only either banning hollow-point bullets or making it so hard to get them that only those people who have a real, non-paranoid need for them can get them, and then have to report on their use, that is what I will back and support and advocate. I will write to my elected officials and speak about that. If they have arguments they believe are important to show me that my position should change, or if they vote in a way other than I advocate and they want to write to me to explain why they did so (and that has happened in several cases already), fine, but not one of them is going to try to tell me, “Malisha, you’re no weapons expert and you don’t know how to kill anybody so stop telling me what you think is right and wrong.” See, and neither are you. Here’s what I think about your strenuous defense of your strong attachment to hollow-point bullets: Ugh, creepy.

    A hollow-point was undoubtedly the best way to kill a kid in a residential neighborhood on a drizzly evening on 2/26/2012 in Sanford? You can probably prove to me that yes, it was indeed the best way to kill that kid in that neighborhood that night. Indeed, the gunman (who undoubtedly knew more than me about hollow-point bullets) chatted with a neighbor after the fact, about what kind of bullet he used to “bring down” his dangerous assailant/alias “the kid.” So these two upstanding citizens knew a lot more about hollow-point bullets than I know, so their superior knowledge should win the day, right?

    One of them is a gunman, a killer, and an accused murderer. The other is, I believe, a witness who changed his story three times and has yet to be placed under oath to try to explain himself. They know a lot about those bullets, even chit-chatted about them over the bleeding corpse of “the suspect” who had done no threatening of anyone, and who is still being preached against as if he was the devil incarnate by the likes of BarkinDog and various others who value their weapons more than the remnants of their social responsibility.

    So I say get used to ignorant people like me telling you what I think of your need for hollow-point bullets. If you think my ignorance of the killing technology should dissuade me from expressing myself at least this well or, I hope, much better, think again. I’ll take my ignorance, see you your macho know-more intimate knowledge of bullets and raise you 25 I.Q. points, and yes I will express my opinion that our citizenry can damn well do without hollow-point bullets even if it makes folks like you and Fabien really really mad.

    Do I think “sensible gun control” and limitations on the use and ownership of hollow-point bullets will win in this political, social, and economic climate? Frankly, no I do not. I think the gun-ho-gung-and-dung-gang has a lot more voting power than the “cease fire” crowd any day. Fortunately, I won’t live long enough to see where all this ends up in another 40 years because it’s already so nauseating to me that I over-use some generic medications. But I will certainly express my ignorant and emotional opinions at every opportunity and blog them whenever I feel like it.

    I have noticed that weaponry really attracts a certain kind of pre-insulted, pre-assaulted, overly defensive types. I think Zimmerman was one. I’m not speculating on how he got that way but I have seen him do what would be a parody of that kind of person if there was a really good, subtle comedy writer behind his rap. That case has a lot to tell us about our culture, and even more to tell us about how we have responded to it, and it is the case that keeps on giving.

    If Zimmerman didn’t have a hollow-point bullet in that gun, it might have been a very interesting, uplifting heart transplant story, the kind they show on made-for-TV movies. Instead, the narrative of our descent.

  126. OS-
    I’ve seen some evidence that the more devastating loads will over penetrate pretty badly. There’s certainly no denying that if you hit someone with a shotgun, they are probably going to be in bad shape. However, shotguns are generally much longer and heavier than an AR/M4 clone, and to be honest, I don’t like the idea of having to rack a slide for potential follow-up shots (not to mention the more severe recoil making re-acquisition of the target slower and more difficult.

    All of this is academic for the time being. I don’t have an AR and now is the worst time to buy. So my carry gun doubles as my HD gun.

  127. “How to Kill the guy who endangers you, in seven million easy lessons.”

    Wow. It’s something you’d think every old woman would have learned long ago.

  128. Jason,
    Correct on the more devastating loads, such as 00 buckshot or slugs. My preference for home defense in the middle of the night is a Mossberg 500 with a short barrel and loaded with goose shot. No need for buckshot at close range and goose shot will not go through most sheet-rock walls. As for target reacquisition, with the 20″ barrel and no choke, there is usually no need for a second round according to the ones I am personally familiar with. Might wake up the neighbors. Heh!

    We had two (2) such incidents in the past year here in our county. Both involved elderly gentlemen in their 80s versus twenty-something methhead home invaders. Both homeowners were armed with 12 gauge shotguns.

    In the first instance, the home invader tried to attack the octogenarian homeowner only to be met with a single round of buckshot to the middle of his chest, with the inevitable result.

    The second incident is much more interesting, in that the home invader lived to tell the tale, not that he will want to. The older of my two daughters is handicapped and fell. She was taken to the local Level I trauma ER by ambulance, and called me to tell me where she was. While on the phone, she said she did not know what was going on, but the corridor outside her exam room was full of police officers, and somebody in the exam room next door was hollering a lot. There was a long pause, and then she said, “Oh. My. God.” Seems a nurse came out into the corridor to show the police Lieutenant a major piece of evidence. Nurse was holding up a pair of trousers covered with blood, and with the whole crotch missing. Seems the elderly homeowner took care of the Darwin Award matter by removing the guy from the gene pool without killing him.

  129. Hi, Jonathan-

    The police will be wasting their time to seek a prosecution so long as those at NBC refuse to talk with the police and so long as the magazine is not recovered. Of course, nobody at NBC may advise anyone not to talk, lest the adviser get charged with obstruction of justice.

    Unless the police recover the magazine displayed by Gregory, who is to know whether this was but a replica magazine that cannot even hold bullets, thus falling outside the DC criminal law’s magazine definition.

    Be well.

  130. Jon,
    Correct on obstruction unless the NBC lawyers tell them to STFU. Like Sgt. Shultz, their best defense is, “I know nothing, Nothing, I tell you.”

  131. Malisha-
    “How to Kill the guy who endangers you, in seven million easy lessons.”

    Please don’t mistake discussion about selecting a tool and the best way to use it with a desire to kill or a cavalier attitude toward life. I know that people who kill in self defense, rare as it is, usually suffer emotional scars for the rest of their lives. I don’t think I would be any different, particularly if it was a relatively young person who might still have time to get his life back on track. Thankfully, the odds are excellent that my gun will never put holes in anything other than paper, and that is comforting. But the stakes are too great to not plan for this unlikely event (and you get a fun hobby out of it as a side effect). We all take many precautions for events that are unlikely to happen.

  132. The real lesson in David Gregory’s gun incident
    Gun laws are so easy to break — and such a state-by-state mess — that it’s hard for any jurisdiction to get tough
    BY ALEX SEITZ-WALD
    12/28/12
    http://www.salon.com/2012/12/28/the_real_lesson_in_david_gregorys_gun_incident/

    “Meet the Press” host David Gregory is in hot water after brandishing a 30-round magazine for an assault rifle on national TV last Sunday while interviewing NRA head Wayne LaPierre, apparently unaware that the District of Columbia, where he filmed the segment, bans such equipment. Other journalists have scoffed at the controversy and even the NRA has dismissed it as “silly”, but D.C. police are apparently taking the matter seriously, saying they are investigating the incident.

    “I really think what David Gregory did while he was inadvertently flouting the law was illustrating in a very graphic, perhaps not intentionally, but in a graphic way just how silly some of these laws are,” NRA President David Keene said yesterday. We don’t often say this, but the NRA is absolutely right.

    The Gregory case incident highlights the problem with the country’s gun laws, a patchwork of state, local and federal regulations that make it almost impossible for a jurisdictions that wants to enact stricter regulations to do so with any kind of effectiveness.

    Gun advocates often point to crime rates in Chicago, Washington and New York City — which have some of the country’s most robust gun control laws — as evidence that gun restrictions don’t work to deter crime. But the problem is that, in the absence of a robust national law like the Assault Weapons Ban, it’s incredibly easy for someone to simply go to the next jurisdiction over to buy a gun or ammunition banned in their hometown.

    While it would have been impossible for Gregory and his staff to purchase the magazine he used in the District of Columbia, they could have easily visited one of the many stores ringing the city in its Virginia or Maryland suburbs, all within just a few miles of their studio. Or you can simply order high capacity magazines like the one Gregory used on eBay or off a dozen other websites.

    “Don’t wave Chicago because where are Chicago’s guns coming from? We trace the weapons that come into my city. They’re not coming from [Chicago],” Newark Mayor Cory Booker said on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday after Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan raised this exact point. “They’re coming from places that have free secondary markets where criminals and gun runners can easily buy weapons and pump them into community like mine, where it is easy for a person who is a criminal to get their hand on a gun.”

    And as Gregory’s predicament demonstrates, the laws are so weak that you don’t even have to be some kind of master criminal bent on breaking the law to do so. The problem is that it’s so easy to flout them, that Gregory and his team at “Meet the Press” may have done. He was just unfortunate enough to display it on national TV, something most people will never do with their illegal guns.

  133. Otteray Scribe-

    If NBC’s lawyers tell any NBC employees to not speak with the police, that would run afoul of the conflict of interest rules of professional conduct, seeing that their client is NBC, not its employees.

    NBC is of course free to refer inquiring employees to other lawyers for advice, and even to pay such lawyers so long as the employees get to choose any lawyer they wish.

  134. Jon,
    My guess is that Mr. Gregory and his staff are already lawyered up. Anyone in his income bracket probably has a whole law firm on retainer anyway.

  135. OS – But will other reporters be chasing him down the street for a comment, as they would do with someone who is not a member of the media. Probably not; professional courtesy, you know…

  136. Jshamus,
    Maybe he will be like the “Most Interesting Man in the World.” If you recall, in the ads, mosquitoes do not bite him out of respect.

  137. Fabian wrote: Germany, 1928 law required all firearms to be registered and firearms dealers to be licenced. Mandatory prison time for all professionally transferred firearms without proper clearance from government
    1931 law enabled police to confiscate any weapon and ammunition and put it in police custody. Even stabbing weapons.
    1933 Jews lost all civil rights and government jobs.
    Nov. 11 1938 new law Barred Jews from owning firearms.
    Soon after the murders began.
    You say “they didn’t see their government as their enemy”. I think by 1933 they had clue.
    At what point should they have gotten together and decided to shoot and at whom should they have decided to shoot? Armchair theorizing is all well and good but visualize yourself with your neighbors, some of whom will agree with you to become violent and assertive/maybe aggressive, some who will not, and a few of whom might be nazi sympathizers or informers.
    Seeing the government as the enemy, when their neighbors were often also the enemy, makes it hard to figure out if and when you should pick up a weapon.

  138. LeeJCarol, what you are saying is exactly what I am talking about with people who feel justified in opining on what Jews “should have done” to prevent Shoah. The answer is, was, will always be: THE JEWS were not responsible to prevent Shoah; the GERMANS were. But let’s just examine your comment in light of the 20/20 hindsight we have now, with all our hubris intact.

    You say “they didn’t see their government as their enemy”. I think by 1933 they had clue.
    At what point should they have gotten together and decided to shoot and at whom should they have decided to shoot? Armchair theorizing is all well and good but visualize yourself with your neighbors, some of whom will agree with you to become violent and assertive/maybe aggressive, some who will not, and a few of whom might be nazi sympathizers or informers.
    Seeing the government as the enemy, when their neighbors were often also the enemy, makes it hard to figure out if and when you should pick up a weapon.

    Be one person when you think about what you “should have done” had you been one Jew in Germany in 1933. Should you have stockpiled weapons and begin attending military training in the neighbor’s basement? Or should you have participated in the political process that was needed to reverse the wrongful things that had taken place. Well, how do you decide? FIrst of all, who ARE you? If you’re the daughter of a man who served in the German Army in WWI, for instance, you might decide to go into some military training. So you perhaps ask your dad for one or more of his guns. He doesn’t go along with your idea and calls you paranoid. Then…then, actually, blah blah blah. And this blah blah blah is part of the human life and daily experience of each and every “one person” in that situation in 1933. Einstein’s relatives. The unknown Mrs. Goldman’s relatives too. Some of Vladimir Nabokov’s relatives, obviously. None of them being able to imagine what actually took place. None of them thinking they had to second-guess their own Jewish leadership. None of them imagining that Jews in other countries all over Europe and all over the world would be unable to convince their OWN governments to make credible threats to Germany’s renegade “government” to deter it from destroying a well integrated minority within their borders.

    None of this is in the least way analogous to the decision of an American living in the suburbs to purchase, use, and supply with magazines filled with 30 bullets each a semiautomatic that can kill 20 children in a few minutes’ time. It has, in fact, nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.

    Five and a half million Jews (conservative estimate) and about ten million other people lost their lives in WWII in situations that people now liberally misinterpret to bolster their arguments about policies that are inapposite to what took place during Shoah. It is as if Shoah has become a useful all-purpose Hallmark Card example (“The Jews should have…”) of how to substantiate any kind of hostile, blustering, self-aggrandizing example of what any particular self-appointed super-hero feels should be his thrilling self-defensive invulnerability. Even the TV guys who go in with guns blazing can be shot in the head from behind; happens every day. And no particular number of well-armed Jews in Europe could have done more than what various particular numbers of well-armed Jews of Europe DID DO. Ever hear of the underground? It prevented a world disgrace from being a worse world disgrace, and it wasn’t easy. And it was an integrated underground. So what the Jews should have done, Jews AND OTHERS actually did. More people should have helped them do it.

  139. Malisha I was responding to Fabian,(I should have been more clear that the first sentence was a quote from his post, way up above) I do not think that they should have taken up arms, I do not know what they should have, or more to the point even could have done. Taking up arms, as Fabian posits, sounds better when he can say it from the safety of his armchair.

  140. Jason, you sound like a reasonable and rational person. My son owns guns and he will probably never try to shoot a human being — I hope not! In fact, he “lost” a deer because just at the moment when he had it in his sites, he reported thinking, “Wow, gorgeous!” and he lost concentration and didn’t take his shot! It reminded me of a time when he was 3, sitting in the “child seat” part of a shopping cart and we were in the supermarket. He could read then, by the way. As I strolled past the meat counter, he read, “FRESH RABBIT.” He brightened and looked up at me and said, “Oh Neat-O!” But then a realization hit him quickly and he dropped his eyes and grimaced, declaring, “Oh Boo-HOO!” So we turned left, down the pasta and rice and beans lane.

    Anyway, I told my kid I would ask my legislators to promote more and better gun control and he actually agreed with me. He says guns should be controlled more than cars and there should be laws in place to deal with operator standards. He does not have or want a CCW license. He says he might agree or disagree with me about hollow-point bullets but would like to know more about what’s influencing my thinking.

    See, that’s how I think a society should go about figuring out how it wants to govern itself. You’d listen to people like me (intelligent but not infallible) speak about things I have no expertise in (hollow-point bullets) and things I do have expertise in (the details of the evidence released so far in the Trayvon Martin killing) and things I actually have lots and LOTS of expertise in (mothers’ rights, child welfare and the public health system, and the vicissitudes of the state social services agencies in the US) and you’d make decisions, often tough ones, sometimes flawed ones, after such listening.

    And you’d hope that the mistakes would be few and would not lead to horrible irreversible tragedies such as the death of Trayvon Martin.

  141. [My apologies, this turned into a general rant]

    Malisha-
    I agree with all of that. Here’s the issue. Imagine if someone began a discussion regarding mothers’ rights, proposing very specific reforms that would have a big (negative) effect on mothers. Worse still, it becomes obvious that the person does not merely disagree with you on the best way to do positive things for mothers, but that they don’t have command of the most basic facts. They operate from a position of such ignorance that you spend your time trying to get them to understand that they are making proposals that will affect a great many people on the basis of flat out wrong information.

    If I were to discuss with you the three issues you cited, issues that I know relatively little about, my half of the dialogue would mostly be questions rather than game changing proposals. That’s not what happens on the gun issue. People like myself spend a great deal of time trying to talk about the serious part of the issue while swatting down:

    *They aren’t “clips”, they are magazines.
    *”Assault weapon” is a made up term while “assault rifle” means something specific and is not the type of gun that is being used in these mass attacks.
    *Legally owned machine guns, aka fully automatic guns, are not being used in these attacks, are strictly regulated, and have been used in something like two crimes in over 60 years.
    *The guns being used in these crimes aren’t “high powered” (in some states you aren’t allowed to hunt deer with .223 or 5.56 because it is considered not powerful enough).
    *The type of guns being used in these crimes are used in less than 5% of all gun murders; more people are murdered with bare hands.
    *Hollow points have a safety purpose, and whether you carry a gun or not, you should want everyone, police or civilian, to use them.
    *Things are not worse than they’ve ever been. Gun homicides have been in free fall for twenty years; the gun murder rate is the lowest it’s been since 1963 and the raw number of gun murders is at its lowest since 1968, despite there being 111 million more people.

    And on and on and on.

    The result is the extremists on the issue dig in and no one from either side addresses the disease, just symptoms. Go after types of guns/give teachers guns, high capacity magazines/video games, etc. We hear no discussion from policy makers about ending the drug war, which probably drives more crime of all types than any single factor. We hear no talk about a public education system that punishes kids for being born to poor parents in an area with shitty property values. We don’t hear about a penal system that puts non-violent offenders behind bars for extended stays but lets a man who beat his grandmother to death with a hammer out after 17 years. We already know what inane crap is coming from the NRA, and I guarantee you we won’t hear anything deeper from the Biden Commission (or whatever it’s called).

    And it’s not as if there are no gun specific policy changes that could help. Why aren’t we putting enforcement emphasis on illegal gun sales? On straw purchases? On gun theft? These are the means criminals use to get guns. If we put the same resources busting illegal gun dealers
    \we put into going after pot dealers that we do on , there might actually be an impact.

  142. Jason, first of all, I have been in the mothers’ rights thing practically all alone and using money out of my own pocket and without any back-up for 35 years and all the things you are suggesting about ignorant people coming in with game-changing stuff is ALL I EVER SEE and the people who know the least get the most out of the legislative, judicial AND executive branches of government and always did and always WILL. And I never “put the emphasis” on one thing over another. And I don’t need to BE an expert in anything to be intelligently bringing up my issues to intelligent people who are paid to evaluate them. I don’t have to do the big studies to get all the answers before I pose the questions that make it obvious that we need the funding to do the research and we need the attention to solve the problems. But let me go right through your rant (and by the way I love rants if they stay smart and if they are not misogynist or racist tantrums so don’t take it as a negative) and answer direct points with my own valuable opinions:

    Here’s the issue. Imagine if someone began a discussion regarding mothers’ rights, proposing very specific reforms that would have a big (negative) effect on mothers. Worse still, it becomes obvious that the person does not merely disagree with you on the best way to do positive things for mothers, but that they don’t have command of the most basic facts. They operate from a position of such ignorance that you spend your time trying to get them to understand that they are making proposals that will affect a great many people on the basis of flat out wrong information.

    That is what happened, Jason. Pompous fools and actual abusers flooded into the legislatures of every single state and the feds as well and stood up saying just anything and they had the floor and they got respect and they got legislation all over the place that put mothers and children in danger and got a lot of mothers and children KILLED and I saw it go down. They knew NOTHING. meanwhile the Public Health Service was riding me all over the mid-Atlantic States to talk to providers about issues they wanted to know about and I would do a three-day conference in which I spent 19 hours of every single day WITH FOLKS doing either workshops, private debriefings or planning sessions, focus groups you name it and it all came to nothing because those folks were doctors, nurses, psychologists, cops, teachers, day-care operators and social workers and they were doing work, not wielding influence, and they were without funds and power to get stuff done in Congress or any of the state legislatures OR the military or even the Public Health Service itself. So I feel perfectly fine taking the liberty to express my opinions where I think my opinion can add something positive to the mix and anyone who opposes it can come in and testify to whatever they want when my three minutes are up.

    If I were to discuss with you the three issues you cited, issues that I know relatively little about, my half of the dialogue would mostly be questions rather than game changing proposals. That’s not what happens on the gun issue. People like myself spend a great deal of time trying to talk about the serious part of the issue while swatting down:

    Well I’m not trying to take away from you any of the excellent testimony you want to give or the absolutely correct opinion you want to express. I know a little something about a little something and as ignorant as you think I am, maybe a lawmaker SHOULD hear that I think it inappropriate that a George Zimmerman was able to legally tote around a gun filled with hollow-point bullets AFTER he had done enough wrong in the public world to be coming up on the radar screen with a big OOPS on his name. Maybe I think there should BE some attention paid to policy-making that addresses the issue of the Zimmerman Factor with respect to deadly but casual weapons because as wonderful as the policy is that supported Zimmerman in his possession and use of that hollow-point bullet, it is a little less wonderful in effect on the still-beating hearts of Trayvon Martin’s parents.
    xxx

    *They aren’t “clips”, they are magazines.

    This makes a big difference in determining what is a rational policy for the arming or regulation of Americans?

    *”Assault weapon” is a made up term while “assault rifle” means something specific and is not the type of gun that is being used in these mass attacks.

    So what prevents a munitions expert from informing the committee (whichever committee hears the public concerns expressed) on that technical information? Why does Malisha have to know that in order for Malisha to express her concerns?

    *Legally owned machine guns, aka fully automatic guns, are not being used in these attacks, are strictly regulated, and have been used in something like two crimes in over 60 years.

    So I have the “naming of parts” wrong so because I called something a machine gun instead of whatever the hell it was those 20 or those 35 or those 14 people are not really dead? Who cares what nomenclature I butchered if I am expressing a concern that can be understood? Ever see the comedy routine of Lenny Bruce where he asks, “Have you ever blah-ed a blah blah?”

    *The guns being used in these crimes aren’t “high powered” (in some states you aren’t allowed to hunt deer with .223 or 5.56 because it is considered not powerful enough).

    OK. Other than showing me how much I don’t know about guns, why would that mean to my elected official that my opinion about the craziness of the GUN CULTURE is invalid?

    *The type of guns being used in these crimes are used in less than 5% of all gun murders; more people are murdered with bare hands.

    It may surprise you to learn that I have testified in cases that have to do with the murder-by-bare-hands issue, Jason. Many many times. The murder of the adopted child in New York by Joel Steinberg, for instance. And probably three dozen more like it. I have been all over the country on Greyhound buses speaking to policy-makers about safety from those who are obviously being empowered BY OUR GOVERNMENT to kill with their bare hands. I think it’s one of the biggest problems we face and I have never been silent about it.

    *Hollow points have a safety purpose, and whether you carry a gun or not, you should want everyone, police or civilian, to use them.

    Please don’t tell me what I should want. I do NOT want everyone, “police or civilian,” to use them. YOU can go testify that YOU want everyone, “police and civilian,” to use them, OK? If I try to convince a legislator that they shouldn’t be used and you go and convince that same legislator that they should, you and I have both done our work as citizens. Don’t restrict yourself and don’t instruct me on where I stand on that issue.

    *Things are not worse than they’ve ever been. Gun homicides have been in free fall for twenty years; the gun murder rate is the lowest it’s been since 1963 and the raw number of gun murders is at its lowest since 1968, despite there being 111 million more people.

    I am not satisfied with the gun murder rate here, now. Not at all. If it had dropped another percentage point the day before Trayvon Martin was killed, and that statistic had prevented his murder, well, that would impress me. But as it is now, that statistic leaves me very cold indeed.

    And on and on and on.
    I’ll go with this, Jason. You can go on and on and on, and I can, and we would be on two different sides, respectfully, on this issue. You might know a lot more about the particular guns and the particular uses and you might even know more about the social engineering (I don’t know) but you wouldn’t know more about what my reasoning is until after you heard my views. And I don’t need a certain degree before I’m going to feel free to express them.

    The result is the extremists on the issue dig in and no one from either side addresses the disease, just symptoms. Go after types of guns/give teachers guns, high capacity magazines/video games, etc.

    At no time at all did I ever suggest, nor would I ever suggest, that there is only one way to address any of our problems and although I don’t consider myself an extremist (because I can see various sides of lots of issues), if I fit into that category in some respect that is also OK because I’m not killing anybody about my extreme views; I’m just expressing them, and trying to persuade folks to my views.

    We hear no discussion from policy makers about ending the drug war, which probably drives more crime of all types than any single factor.

    I have in fact lectured on this very topic although it is not my forte. I have said that the operations of the drug war have become a war on the poor, on mothers and children, and on the most vulnerable. I have woven that very issue into probably 100 different presentations. And get this: I don’t know heroin from Ecstasy. So there’s another example where someone could come in and say “Malisha is profoundly ignorant and should not be allowed to express her position on the drug war.”

    We hear no talk about a public education system that punishes kids for being born to poor parents in an area with shitty property values.

    I have not only spoken on this issue, written on this issue, and worked hard on this issue since 1992, but I have used my time and money to write, produce and direct plays that are performed in inner INNER INNER city schools to improve education and understanding — at the grassroots level — of the meaning of the life interest and the history of our nation and our US Supreme Court with respect to the life interest. And as an example, a student who played Dred Scott in my play in Merritt Elementary in Washington DC went on to graduate on full scholarship from the most exclusive and expensive private high school in DC and went on, again on full scholarship, to Harvard. His parents were both in prison when he starred in his first performance as Dred Scott and he workshopped the part like a pro.

    We don’t hear about a penal system that puts non-violent offenders behind bars for extended stays but lets a man who beat his grandmother to death with a hammer out after 17 years.

    I’ve been there too. I have written clemency petitions for innocent men on death row who have now already been killed. I have written to parole boards and to wardens and to legislators and I have visited prisoners and sent cards and money into jails and prisons and accepted collect calls. And I have done research that has been incorporated into amicus briefs on plenty of these issues and I am on a list-serve called Patrick Crusade that deals with all of this as well. I have blogged about it extensively.

    We already know what inane crap is coming from the NRA, and I guarantee you we won’t hear anything deeper from the Biden Commission (or whatever it’s called).

    I agree with you 100%.

    And it’s not as if there are no gun specific policy changes that could help. Why aren’t we putting enforcement emphasis on illegal gun sales? On straw purchases? On gun theft? These are the means criminals use to get guns. If we put the same resources busting illegal gun dealers we put into going after pot dealers that we do on , there might actually be an impact.

    I agree with you 100% here too. I was discussing these things today with my son, who owns guns. I asked him if he wanted to grab a screen name and blog in here and he said he would if I wanted him to, but then I dropped it because it’s not about what I want. I can speak for myself. If he wanted to he would do it without asking for my vote.

    So that’s where I’m coming from, Jason. I appreciate your rant. I said either upthread here or somewhere else that one purpose of legislation is simply to speak to the people about what is the society’s expectation, what is the society’s belief, the society’s approval and disapproval. I used the example of one of the Scandinavian countries where spanking was declared illegal. There was no punishment provided for spanking; it was simply forbidden. So the society was saying: “We do not approve of grown-ups hitting children.” It was not saying, “We will punish grown-ups who hit children.” But it was a very important and valuable thing.

    If perhaps there were enough meaningful regulation of guns that people who bought them were given to understand what a heavy responsibility they carried when they carried, if the laws actually said, “this kind of behavior is respectable and that kind of behavior is NOT,” if a guy who witnessed an armed man shoot an unarmed kid registered by his word and deed an intense feeling of horror and condemnation instead of a chatty “Hey what kinda bullets didja use to bag that guy?” demeanor, we would have taken a step — perhaps a baby step, but whatever — toward getting control of something that is presently out of control in a very negative way. And who knows? If George Zimmerman thought he would LOSE people’s respect if they knew he carried a loaded gun, rather than GAINING their respect, would that evening had come out differently?

    I don’t know. But it’s worth discussing. And I’m worth discussing it.

  143. Malisha-
    I can answer most of your reply with an apology — those points were not all aimed directly at you and I should have been more clear about that. That’s why it turned into a rant. I started off with an issue with one little piece attached to you and went running wild with my problems with the entire debate. All of the things that you mentioned doing were in reference to hearing what *policy makers* say, not poor schmucks like me and you. I know people here and elsewhere try to get real change done. It’s the idiots with real power and the interests that prop them up that are the problem.

  144. Well, you guys have convinced me. Prosecuting David Gregory is stupid, wasteful, and wrong. Those magazines are not dangerous unless loaded with ammunition, and attached to a gun, and the gun is in the hands of someone who is (or is about to) commit a crime.

    Clearly, the law should be repealed.

    Thanks for the assist.

  145. Missed this the first time around: “I honestly believe that Gregory is not blameful and that the law should have some flexibility for news or artistic speech when the clip is empty of rounds. What do you think?”

    I think I don’t know what “not blameful” means. Is it legal jargon, meaning something like “someone who violated the law but shouldn’t be punished because the law was stupid in situations like this”?

    If you’re willing to throw in “or other legitimate purposes” and throw out the “when the clip is empty of rounds”, sure, I’ll go for it. Bank robbery would not be considered a legitimate purpose, but shooting home intruders would be.

Comments are closed.