Posts Tagged ‘Guns’

Diana Maldonado’s Killer Issue: Gun Control

Tuesday, October 26th, 2010

No, seriously.

I got a 4 panel flyer in the mail today slamming Larry Gonzales for supporting concealed carry on campus, as you can see from my picture of it below (click to embiggen):

Because, you know, one suicidal student firing an AK-47 (which was already illegal for him to bring on campus) into the ground before killing himself pretty much demands a knee-jerk call for stricter gun control laws.

Slamming Larry Gonzales for not being pro-gun control is a great tactic…if you’re running against him in the Democratic Primary. In Austin. In 1990. Unfortunately for Maldonado, she’s running in the general election in Williamson County in 2010.

And we all know what a bloodbath Texas has become since the state started issuing Concealed Handgun Licenses on January 1, 1996. Oh wait, no it hasn’t. Violent Crime numbers have been down to flat across the board even in absolute terms, and even more clearly down on a per capita basis in light of the state’s growing population.

Democrats at the national level learned that gun control was a losing issue in 1994. Evidently Maldonado didn’t get the memo. I suspect she’ll be getting a good, long vacation in the near future to contemplate that mistake at her leisure.

Washington Post Gun Article Followup

Tuesday, October 26th, 2010

Yesterday I mentioned what I thought was the largest problem in that David S. Fallis Washington Post article on Realco: The failure to mention that the shop is the one nearest the District of Columbia and located in an overwhelmingly black (and high crime) area.

However, reading through that article, I couldn’t help be struck by all the other information Fallis and the Post seemed uninterested in pursuing because they thought of this as a gun story rather than a crime story. Instead of spending all that time pouring through 35,000 gun traces, they could have taken the same 18-year period they traced 86 guns (i.e. roughly 4.8 guns a year involved in homicide) back to Realco, and looked at all (by my count) 4,911 homicides in the District of Columbia. They could have looked at each convicted offender (certainly less than the 4,911 number) and tried to find out:

  • Which had already committed felonies
  • Which already had a warrant out for their arrest at the time they murdered someone
  • Which were on probation at the time they murdered someone
  • What level of education they had obtained before committing their crime (how many were high school dropouts)
  • Which came from single-parent homes
  • Which came from homes where the primary source of income was government welfare
  • How many were involved in the illegal drug trade
  • The race of the murderer
  • The race of the victim
  • Sex of the murderer (almost certainly overwhelmingly male)
  • Sex of the victim (ditto, though I suspect less overwhelmingly)
  • If the murderer already knew their victim
  • Etc.

A comprehensive look at all those variables would have provided a valuable, multifaceted look at inner city crime in the DC area, and could have generated real insights into the problems and possible solutions to them.

Sadly, I suspect such a project would have seemed far less sexy to Washington Post editors than yet another “Guns are bad, mmmkay?” article to pander to their core liberal readership.

Shooting on UT Campus

Tuesday, September 28th, 2010

There’s been a shooting on UT campus in Austin. Details are sketchy, but:

This would be a good time to revisit Karl Rehn’s advice on what to do if faced with an “active shooter.”

Updated to add: Ironically, John Lott, the author of More Guns, Less Crime, was scheduled to speak on UT campus at 6 PM today. Probably just one of those strange coincidences the universe throws up from time to time…

Edited to add 2: Here’s a live update blog. I’d take everything you read there with a grain of salt, especially reports of a tank on campus and the shooter having an “AK-47.” Possible, but remember this handy chart:

Edited to add 3: KXAN is reporting that it was an AK-47, the shooter as a 6’2″, 200 pound guy wearing a suit and tie, and that witnesses report he didn’t seem to be shooting at people so much as firing into the ground.

Edited to add 4: Here’s the live Austin police radio feed. Prepare to be bored stiff…

Edited to add 5: UT has given the all-clear, but the campus is still closed for the day. As predicted, police don’t think there’s a second gunman.

Edited to add 6: Shooter has now been identified as 19-year old math major Colton Tooley.

1. Buy Booze, 2. Get Liquored Up, 3. Buy Gun While Drunk, 4. Pass Background Check, 5. ???

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

So the city council of Carrollton, TX, in their infinite wisdom, is trying to decide whether to ban gun stores within a certain distance of a liquor store.

Like many gun-grabber ordinances, this one has a certain facile logic working on it (liquor + firearms = BAD), but deeper consideration of the subject reveals how illogical and unnecessary such a law would be.

First, under Texas law, it is already illegal for consumers to even open an alcoholic beverage inside a liquor store, much less drink it. Those same stores are also prohibited from selling alcohol to obviously intoxicated patrons.

So, apparently the only people this law will actually target are:

  1. Entirely sober people who want to buy a gun in the same center that just happens to house a liquor store, or
  2. People who are buying booze, downing it in the parking lot, and then wandering over to the gun store to pick up some heat because it just seemed like a good idea.

Somehow, I’m not seeing the sort of person who shotguns a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 in a parking lot as being the same sort of person who has either a few hundred dollars burning a hole in their pocket, or a valid credit card. (The only possible exception I can think of, someone on the gang-banger/drug-dealer continuum, aren’t very likely to pass the automatic background check (or, for that matter, purchase firearms through a legal dealer), now are they?)

And that’s assuming the store is foolish enough to sell a gun to someone obviously intoxicated.

The ordinance as described doesn’t make a lick of sense, and should shelved.

(Hat tip: Alphecca.)

Man Confronts 20 Gang Members Outside Home with AK-47. Guess who gets arrested?

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

Right after one of the gang members said “Oh you’re dead. I’m gonna kill your family and your babies. You’re dead.”

If this was Texas, we’d be reading about how police arrested the gang members, or maybe how a grand jury no-billed the home owner after he ventilated the guy who just threatened to kill his family.

But since this took place on Long Island, New York, you know exactly how it turned out: Police arrested the man defending his home with “felony reckless endangerment” for firing four warning shots into the ground.

Went Over Like a Lead Balloon

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010

Dwight was one of many people to point out that the EPA’s plan to ban lead ammo appear to be dead for now. But the fact they even considered it says a great deal about the Obama Administration’s hostility to guns…

Because Obama just wasn’t unpopular enough among gun owners…

Wednesday, August 25th, 2010

…the EPA is considering banning lead ammunition. This would, in essence, kill off sport shooting entirely.

This is yet another example of why there’s really no such thing as a pro-gun Democrat. No matter how much they may personally swear up and down they respect the second amendment, the leadership they elect, the judges they appoint, and the bureaucrats they hire will inevitably tilt toward gun-grabbing causes far more than people chosen by Republicans. It’s simply their nature. After all, “clinging” to guns, like clinging to religion, is something those NASCAR retards do, not a fit preoccupation for fashionable liberal elites.

Between this and their refusal to enforce immigration laws, it’s almost like Obama and his minions want to turn off their few remaining supporters among moderate voters in advance of the November elections. Someone more prone to conspiracy theories than myself might surmise that Obama blames Reid and Pelosi for his unpopularity, and sees having them replaced by a Republican congress to run against (ala Bill Clinton in 1996) as the only way he can win reelection in 2012. But even I’m not quite that cynical.

Yet.

Nuevo Laredo Shootout Update

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

Warning: Graphic Material Contained in Links Below

Dwight linked to this after-action report on a two-hour gun-battle between the Mexican Army and members of drug cartel in Nuevo Laredo. (Warning: Includes some graphic images.)

Later, some people pointed out that at least one of the images looked strangely familiar. Some commentators doubted whether such a gun-battle had even taken place at all.

But there are many news bulletins about the battle itself. Also, the vast majority of those photos appear to be from that shootout, many of which are also shown here. (Again, remember that graphic clip warning. We’re talking serious, non-CGI exploded skulls here.) Of course, maybe that set of photos is from another shootout as well, but the photos do seem to be, at the very least, compatible with the (admittedly sketchy) news stories on the event.

On the other hand, those stories of drug gangs taking over ranches on this side of the border appear to be bunk.

It May Be Easier to Take the Money of the Clueless than the Guns of the Vigilant

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

Old and Busted: Sarah Brady trying to take your guns.

The New Hotness: Sarah Brady participating in multi-level marketing fraud.

(Actually, she probably still wants to take your guns…)

There’s No Such Thing as a “Pro-Gun Democrat” As Long As Nancy Pelosi is Speaker

Thursday, July 15th, 2010

All across the country, Democrats running for office “are embracing gun owners’ rights [and] winning favor from the National Rifle Association.”

Overall this is a good development, as it shows how unpopular gun control is outside of a few extremely liberal urban enclaves. However, voters should not mistake a politician taking the popular side of an issue with deeply held belief. As long as Nancy Pelosi remains Speaker of the House of Representatives, no House Democrat can be considered Pro-Second Amendment, stated positions and NRA endorsements not withstanding.

Every one of those “pro-gun Democrats” is probably just as committed to Second Amendment issues as Bart Stupak was to Pro-Life issues. Remember him? He was a hero to Pro-Life forces and was even going to receive a “Defender of Life Award” for refusing to cave in on including taxpayer-funded abortions for ObamaCare.

That is, right up until he folded-up like a three-card-monte table when Pelosi put the pressure on him. He was bought off for an empty promise and a handful of magic beans. But it wasn’t just Stupak who caved. There were ten other “staunch Pro-Life Democrats” who folded with him:

  • Rep. Jerry Costello of Illinois.
  • Rep. Joseph Donnelly of Indiana
  • Rep. Brad Ellsworth of Indiana
  • Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota
  • Rep. Steve Driehaus of Ohio
  • Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio
  • Rep. Charles Wilson of Ohio
  • Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania
  • Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania
  • Rep. Solomon Ortiz of Texas

(And all of whom just happened to have raked in huge earmarks after their vote.)

Look at all those “Pro-Life Democrats” willing to fund abortions with taxpayer money when Nancy Pelosi snapped her fingers. Now ask yourself: Were any of these Democrats any less “Pro-Life” than your Democratic congressman is “Pro-Second Amendment?”

Moreover, many of those “Pro-Gun Democrats” are the same “Pro-Life Democrats” who flipped for Pelosi. Take a look at their NRA ratings from 2008 (the NRA hasn’t released all their 2010 rankings yet):

  • Joseph Donnelly? A.
  • Brad Ellsworth? A.
  • Charles Wilson? A.
  • Paul Kanjorski? A.
  • Solomon Ortiz? A.

All of them betrayed their “deep beliefs” on abortion. There is absolutely no reason to believe they wouldn’t do the same thing on gun control.

The NRA can only rate votes and questionnaires, it can’t tell when someone is lying, or who will fold when enough pressure is applied. The Democratic nutroots, their funding sources, their staffers, and the entire media establishment is just as anti-gun as they are pro-abortion. That’s the “reality-based community” Democratic politicians live in. That’s the same community that will be lauding them for their “courage” when they betray voters’ trust to vote how Pelosi wants them to. It will also be the same community offering them cushy job opportunities should those same voters retire them in November. Democratic House members only have to face voters once every two years; they have to face liberal insiders every single working day.

If you don’t think Democrats would still love to ban guns, take a look at how Democratic Mayors like Richard Daley of Chicago and Michael Nutter of Philadelphia want to make an end-run around that whole pesky Constitution: “American gun manufacturers should be held responsible in the World Court, since American-made guns are used in violent crime elsewhere in the world.” I’m sure that a World Court ruling against gun ownership would provide Obama, Pelosi and Reid with just the political excuse they need to start “reluctantly” drafting gun control legislation. And Pelosi herself has made no secret of her own gun control agenda.

The only safe course of action is to assume that, should gun control make it back up to the top of the Democratic agenda, any “Pro-Gun Democrat” could flip their vote if that’s the one Pelosi needs to assure the bill’s passage. And they only way to prevent that from happening is to vote Pelosi’s Democrats out of power come November, no matter whether some of them have an “A” rating from the NRA or not.