ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

What Researchers Learned About Gun Violence Before Congress Killed Funding

We spoke with the scientist who led the government’s research on guns.

« Return to Story

Sort by: Oldest Newest  <  2 3 4 5 >

Albert

March 4, 2013, 12:25 a.m.

JHBl, John S. Obviousman, Thank you for your Stand. I would be very happy to be associated with anyone of you. May God keep you and the NRA. I will continue to follow and support you all where I can. You are all very passionate about your 2nd Amendment rights and are more articulate than I.
God Bless America, Gentlemen! God bless America!
In my opinion, the opposition doesn’t feel the same about America.
They certainly do not know how to access and correct problems.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 4, 2013, 8:10 p.m.

Albert, thanks.

Since the founding fathers did not intend for us to have the weapons we have now, I guess they did not intend for us to communicate freely with electronics either, so I guess this medium does not qualify as a “free press”.

!Erik Buck

March 4, 2013, 9:56 p.m.

I suspect that people who live in builgings with burglar larms are more likely to be victims of burglars We shold ‘’‘contol”  burglar alarms.

Michael Long

March 4, 2013, 10:48 p.m.

JHBL: If you’re going to hold forth on the Second Amendment as being solely against tyranny and aggression by our own government, then you should dig into your history books and see why there’s a major difference in the wording as originally written, and as opposed to the version finally ratified by the states.

The difference, in case you’re interested, was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states.

Unless changes were made to prevent the Federal government from acquiring and then disbanding militias, some states in general, and Virginia in particular, were not going to ratify the Bill of Rights. They wanted their slaves.

Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were pretty clear on that.

Finally, Sandy Hook might have been prevented if, say, safe storage and liability laws were in place. As is, Lanza was able to simply steal the guns from an unlocked and unsecured closet.

And I’ve already shown how universal checks and increased penalties against straw purchases could have made a difference in Aurora and Columbine.

Assuming that any law-abiding citizen who wants a gun can get one, why make it easy for criminals to obtain them too? Are you so itching to “stand your ground” that you actually look forward to shooting a felon?

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 4, 2013, 11:36 p.m.

Micheal, if I intend to take your life, do you think I care how many other laws I break?

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 4, 2013, 11:38 p.m.

Don’t pull out the race card, until you walk a mile in my mocassans.

John Smith

March 5, 2013, 10:14 a.m.

Micheal,

I’m not at all convinced it was “one of the rationales” for the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps it was one of the rationales for the clause in Article I Section 8 granting Congress authority to call up the militia to suppress insurrections. But then, Patrick Henry, the author of the main quote used by Hartmann to support that notion, supported the 2nd Amendment but thought slavery an abomination and opposed granting Congress power to call up the militia. Where does that leave Hartmann’s argument? What is the basis for saying that preserving slave-patrol militias was one of the rationales for the 2nd Amendment (as opposed to the Article I, Section 8 clause)?


Yeah sandy hook wouldn’t have been prevented by your proposal, neither would aurora or columbine. They are unpreventable outlier events.

Let’s stop being ridiculous and not buy into the media driven hype on these events, so we can focus on the issues that actually are preventable….like criminals getting guns and accidental shootings…let’s enforce the current gun laws with 0 tolerance policy…keep better tabs on criminals in general…and promote gun safety and awareness….anyone truly interested in curbing gun violence understands this. You just seem to be consuming the hype.

Obviousman

March 5, 2013, 2:10 p.m.

The whole “Second Amendment was written to protect slavery” is nothing more than the gun-grabbers newest bogus talking point.  Like Bellesiles’ book of “historical research” claiming that gun ownership was actually rare in historical America (the book that got him fired for academic fraud), it’s nothing more than propaganda manufactured towards a political end.

David Kopel’s 1998 article http://lawreview.byu.edu/archives/1998/4/kop.pdf , “The Second Amendment in the Nineteenth Century,” in 1998 BYU Law Review 1359 thoroughly rebutted Bogus’ theory before he even made it. The article is a long and thorough historical review. The material debunking Bogus’ theory starts at p. 1515 (fn. 647).

But nice try, gun-grabbers.  Next, I expect to be hearing that every Glock is manufactured with a clutch of poison spider eggs inside, or that the NRA has arranged for Mars to strike the Earth next October.

Albert

March 5, 2013, 4:18 p.m.

Michael Long… I don’t think anyone is say the sole intent of the 2nd amendment was to guard against government tyranny. Where did you get that piss poor assessment??? This is typical of the gun grabbers; you would love to put words in our month. Pretty transparent if you ask me!
It is my position that… it was written not only to guard against tyranny both “foreign and domestic” but people have the right to own and Bear arms in their own defense as stated by The Courts. It is as plain as the nose on anyone’s face. Stop confusing things, You are making this too easy for us! Ha!

Michael Long

March 5, 2013, 6:59 p.m.

JHBL: Your “intent” doesn’t matter, only your capabilities.

Which speaks to JS’s assertion that things like universal checks, enhanced liability, anti-trafficking laws, and so forth would not have stopped the “outliers”. (Which would also go a long way towards reducing traditional gun crime as well, but I digress.)

If you’re in a rage and you want to kill me and you have a gun and access, then I’m probably dead. Attack me without a gun, however, perhaps with the oft-mentioned and ever-deadly hammer, and there’s a pretty good chance you’re the one who’s going to be on the losing side.

Robyn Anderson, a friend of Klebold and Harris, bought three of the guns used at Columbine from The Tanner Gun Show in December of 1998 from unlicensed sellers. She told police investigators that she had refused to buy them from anyone else who might do a background check and leave her name on the paperwork. Another gun was purchased from a friend. (Background check, private sales, straw purchases.)

James Holmes was under psychiatric care, and told his doctor that he fantasized about killing lots of people. Had a mental health reporting system been in place, Holmes could have been reported as a concern and as such denied during the background check when he later legally purchased two firearms for use in the Aurora theater shooting. (Background check.)

So. Again. We have two major events that might have been prevented or ameliorated simply if we had adequate universal background checks.

NICS checks denied 78,211 transactions in 2011. What story might we be reading about today, had that system not been in place?

Michael Long

March 5, 2013, 7:07 p.m.

“This is typical of the gun grabbers; you would love to put words in our month. Pretty transparent if you ask me!”

And I’ve said I’m against the AWB, and that I’m a gun owner. Yet you call me a “gun grabber” at every opportunity. Who’s putting words in whose mouth?

And Oblivious, the BYU Law Review? Another student run journal? Please.

Obviousman

March 5, 2013, 7:59 p.m.

“NICS checks denied 78,211 transactions in 2011. What story might we be reading about today, had that system not been in place?”

The exact same story—because of those 78,000 transactions, fewer than NINETY were followed up by law enforcement.  The scenario where a criminal buyer is denied, then just goes somewhere else to obtain his gun is so well established that it has a name: “lie and try.”

Now, if you want something we can BOTH agree on, agree to make every failed attempt to purchase a firearm result in investigation by law enforcement and possible arrest and imprisonment, and I’ll second it.  But tell me the answer is that we need to generate MORE paperwork on even MORE transactions—the same paperwork that nobody is going to pursue any better than they do now—and I’ll ask you if I can have some of whatever you’re smoking.

Obviousman

March 5, 2013, 8:02 p.m.

“And Oblivious, the BYU Law Review? Another student run journal? Please.”

The paper on which YOU’RE basing the other side of the argument is from the UC Davis student law review.  Pot, meet kettle.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 5, 2013, 8:20 p.m.

Micheal, you haven’t spent much time is court as I have. Intent can be worth 10 to 20 years added to a sentence.

If I attack you without malice aforethought, it is anger, if I plan it out, that shows intent.

As you do, and I think most of the responders here do, I would like for people to be responsible owners of firearms. Lock them in a safe or gun cabinet when they leave home. Carry responsibly, if you don’t have the weapon on you, lock the vehicle and make sure the weapon is not in plain view. I don’t want anyone that does not practice these common sense rules to own a firearm. Even if you do lock up the weapons, others can still access them, just like the kid in Sandy Hook. This young man was troubled, and a resposible parent was not there for him, as I see it. If we could try him in court, we could show malice aforethought. This also shows some cognitive reasoning. So, did he know what he was doing was wrong when he pulled the trigger?

Micheal, you obviously have not spent any time in the Cradle of the Confederacy, either. Visit down here some time, I’ll be glad to take you sport shooting. I have my own private 100 yard firing range, and I also shoot clays. I have my own clay thrower. I don’t hunt, I’ve seen enough blood and lead flying to last me the rest of my life. I do fish in the local rivers.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 5, 2013, 8:43 p.m.

Micheal, what are your thoughts of the Fast and Furious operation by the ATF?

As I understand it, if it had not been for a responsible Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer reporting it, it would probably still be an ongoing operation. This firearms dealer was told to sell to certain buyers knowing that they were straw buyers. He was making mega bucks off of this operation. He also did the right thing by reporting it to someone who finally listened and took action on it. I am still trying to figure out what this has to do with “national security” besides the fact that these weapons were purposely sold to thugs to guard a drug trade and take the lives of the US Border Patrol Officers.

I also read where a drug dealer in custody in Chicago Federal lockup stated that Fast and Furious was an attempt to arm a certain drug cartel in Mexico. I wonder if he is still alive, or if he committed “suicide” in solitary confinement. Anyway, his days are certainly numbered.

carolyn

March 7, 2013, 2:06 p.m.

The role of the Senate Judiciary Committee is to discuss and determine which issues move beyond their screening process to allow full debate on the Senate floor. I watched and recorded the following session:

The House Judiciary Committee met this morning (02/07/2013) to discuss four gun control issues.
1. Expand Background checks
2. Ban assault weapons, ammunition clips exceeding 10 rounds (presented by Dianne Feinstein (D) California)
4. Make gun traffiking and straw purchases federal crimes
5. Provide more funding for schools via video equipment/other equipment.

The committee rather efficiently agreed to move issue number 4 into full debate. Feinstein then presented her argument for the assault weapons/extended clips bans. During her argument, Ted Cruz, (R) Texas, found a good opportunity to leave the room in search of refreshments. Following Feinstein’s presentation, the remainder of time was taken up primarily by John Cornyn (R) Texas, and Ted Cruz who offered opposition and several amendments to Feinstein’s proposal. One such amendment was voted down by the committee, but due to the declared lack of time to consider further amendments proposed by Cornyn/Cruz, Patrick Leahy (D) Vermont, who co-chaired the meeting with Chuck Grasslee (R) Iowa, determined that the debate would be put into recess, subject to the call of the chair.

Meeting duration: Just over an hour and a half.

Given public opinion, it would seem necessary that ALL of the issues under consideration should be moved to the Senate floor for full debate - the sooner, the better. The argument over the degree to which our second amendment rights apply shouldn’t supercede our first amendment rights to a full debate via our legislative process.

robertdickens

March 15, 2013, 1:40 p.m.

And I thought Gun Nuts only grew on gun stocks.Lets just get rid of our standing volunteer Army,and let the klan be the home guard militia or any other hate group.When you send your kid to school and they get killed we will see how you feel then.We already have enough guns on both sides to protect us from what each other..

Albert

March 15, 2013, 2:36 p.m.

robertdickens, you’re not living in the real world. Your view is short sighted.
All the recent assaults happened in gun free zones which I call deffenceless zones.
The criminals have no problem not following the law that says
NO GUNS HERE,
NO CLIPS MORE THAN 10 ROUNDS HERE,
NO ASSAULT WEAPONS HERE, ETC.
They will get the guns and kill the people that listen to the laws.
You are foolish! You are tying the hands of honest people.
In 2005 the supreme court found “it is not the duty of Police to protect the public.” It is our duty to protect ourselves. If you collect all the guns, criminals will make their own, then they will own you!
The problem is in the laws that don’t punish bad people good enough.
The problem is people don’t respect one another enough.
The problem is people are free to make violent video games for children.
The problem is human dignity is lost.
We abort millions more lives than are killed by guns.
If you want to fix this, we have to start showing our children lives are valuable.
Until then people, we reap what we sew and guns are needed to protect us against ourselves.
You see it is all in the hearts of people!
If you don’t change that you will change nothing.

Michael Long

March 15, 2013, 4 p.m.

JHBL : “Micheal, you obviously have not spent any time in the Cradle of the Confederacy, either. Visit down here some time.”

Obviously, except for the fact that I grew up in Indiana and that both my parents were from around Burkesville, KY and Dale Hollow. And that I spent a good portion of my summers visiting down there with my cousins and on my uncle’s farm.

We also spent quite a bit of time plinking with my dad’s Marlin .22LR. Soda pop cans down there still speak in hushed voices of the summer when my cousin and I decimated their ranks without mercy.

I also spent some time in the Army, qualified expert on rifle and grenades. And as mentioned earlier, I own a Glock, and in the last few elections I voted Democratic. I’m also pro-choice.

That’s the problem when each side paints the other as back and white. You resume to know their background and stance on everything.

As to Sandy Hook, from what I’ve found out the kid took the guns from an unsecured, unlocked closet. Where would we be today if they’d been in a safe with a combination known only to the mother?

Michael Long

March 15, 2013, 4:07 p.m.

As to F&F, I don’t have enough information on that to have an informed opinion. The ATF says that they were trying to trace weapons through the trafficking chain and I have no reason to doubt their claim.

Agencies setup operations like this all the time. So was F&F that different from the rest?

And as some tend to insist, “criminals” will obtain weapons no matter what measures we put in place. So if you agree with that stance, then it’s likely that those officers would still be dead today, with the only major difference being that they would have been shot with different guns, obtained from other sources.

carolyn

March 15, 2013, 5:07 p.m.

The U.S. Senate just took a big step toward reducing gun violence and making the country a safer place. This week, the Judiciary Committee voted to send to the Senate floor four different pieces of legislation that:

Require background checks for all gun sales;
Create new federal offenses for gun trafficking;
Ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and
Strengthen safety at schools.

As of today, there have been 2,693 or more gun deaths in this country since the Newtown massacre.

Albert

March 15, 2013, 5:43 p.m.

Hey Michael Long, Wouldn’t you agree since the ATF put the guns out there they are responsible? The same goes for the dead mother from Newtown, Conn.? If she lived she was responsible. She paid for her mistake, dearly. Certainly a civil suit against the estate should be brought.
As a supporter of Gun rights and the second amendment, I do have to say Gun owners are responsible for securing their weapons and substantial penalties should be applied when their gun is used illegally. After all along with being a tool of defense they are a tool of death as well. A strict liability status should be in place. If you can prove the gun was stolen and you reported it stolen before the crime, strict liability should be lifted but a civil case can still be brought for potential negligence that would be covered by the liability clause in a homeowners insurance. Guns require responsible ownership. Period!
In addition, there is nothing wrong with seriously mentally ill patients and criminals social security numbers being on a list that prohibits them from buying guns.
There should be no mental illness testing by law to purchase, that is too invasive, just a doctors report stating the present condition of their seriously ill mentally disabled patients by social security number. People fitting the description should be on a “Do Not Sell To” database. If your name is not on it you are clear to buy. If it is not then your out of luck. No gun show loop holes for gun purchases.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 15, 2013, 5:57 p.m.

Micheal, it doesn’t matter, the governement is about to spend TEN MILLION DOLLARS to justify what ever they are going to do next.

You know what, remember that oath you took upon induction? I swear to support and defend the Constitution of The United States of America? Why is this the FIRST LINE? If you blindly support your superiors, without question you are in violation of miltary code and conduct.

Go ahead on your merry way, and I do vote independant, but a secret ballot. (Or so I’m told)

I no longer trust my government, along with about 70% of the population.

Go ahead, drink the kool aide.

Prohobition created weath in the organized crime rackets beyond belief. The war on drugs rages on. Banning guns in this country works about as well.

Those that beat their swords into ploughshares will be ruled by those that do not.

Consider electronic media, the forefathers did not envision it either. So, does this mean that freedom of speech and freedom of the press does not apply here? No one has even touched that one. You won’t either.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 15, 2013, 6:03 p.m.

Albert, good points. I think you are getting the 10 ring there.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 15, 2013, 6:14 p.m.

As to F&F, I don’t have enough information on that to have an informed opinion. The ATF says that they were trying to trace weapons through the trafficking chain and I have no reason to doubt their claim.

Answer #1. A border patrol agent is dead to prove how damn stupid this was. Brian Terry was his name. How many others are dead due to our government incompetence at the highest levels? Why is this a matter of national security? Why?  I’ll tell you why, if you could really see and get the wanderdust out of your cognitive reasoning. The governement is shipping drugs into Chicago. Ever hear of Air America? Did you know that our troops bodies were used to ship drugs back into the good o’le USA from SE Asia?.........I wonder how far up the daisy chain that money went. You don’t want to know the truth. Maybe someone else that is a reader does.

Agencies setup operations like this all the time. So was F&F that different from the rest?

Answer #2. So why, with all the technology, didn’t these weapons have electronic transponders imbedded in them? Simple, easy to use. We have drones flying all over our borders and in other countries, why not in this instance.

And as some tend to insist, “criminals” will obtain weapons no matter what measures we put in place. So if you agree with that stance, then it’s likely that those officers would still be dead today, with the only major difference being that they would have been shot with different guns, obtained from other sources.

Answer #3. You are correct.

Michael Long

March 15, 2013, 7:31 p.m.

The problem with this site is that anyone can post under anyone else’s name here. JHBL has at least three different styles of writing, especially when you compare his March 5 posts with the ones that appear under his name today.

Paragraph length, style, sentence length, CAPS, word choice. Huh. Makes you wonder just how many NRA-types are trolling the sites and posting under the same set of names.

carolyn

March 15, 2013, 7:35 p.m.

John Henry Bicycle: “I no longer trust my government, along with about 70% of the population.”

Militia “patriot group” movements have exploded since Obama was first elected. 604 of these groups were identified in 2000. There are now more than 1200.

Google for reference: “For the third year in a row, the American radical right expands dramatically, led by the anti-government ‘Patriot’ movement”, an article published by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Among these are groups which claim they aren’t subject to federal or state laws, and hate groups which specialize in anti-gay, anti-Muslim, black separatists, and “Christian identity” groups which hold anti-Semitic and/or racist views. Others are dedicated to killing off government employees.

They are all well-armed.

None of us want to give up our rights, either 1st or 2nd; and it’s a real mess now, as you point out, with electronic media (the inner tubes) and the degree to which our federal government has rights of surveillance. Many of us who want sensible gun regulations also want to curb the ability of our government to surveil all of us at all times (look up CISPA). Our differences lie in our approach. Most of us want to fix it (curb abuses) using the tools of government, and many of you have declared you need to arm yourselves against a government you don’t deem “fixable”.

Your pointing out misbehavior of government employees seems to be your justification. Instead of finding the means to punish the behavior, you want to tear the entire house down.

Your approach in insisting on protecting your version of your unfettered rights, of course, aligns you with the rest of well-armed extremists. Without government, of course, our country will be reduced to roving bands of various militias “resolving” competing “causes” at the point of many guns. That inevitable scenario properly wears the label: “anarchy”.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 16, 2013, 12:52 a.m.

Carolyn, I know how Morris Dees is. I live in the same state he does.

I do not believe that our government is founded on corruption. It was founded to free us from tyranny and oppression. Free exchange of ideas is dangerous to the UN and all of those that would rule us with an iron fist.

I agree with you on many points, carolyn. There are many ideas that should be brought out and discussed in our country, and you will not hear them on the main stream media propanda channels. I had my cable cut off due to financial situation, I was paying to much for it for one.

Micheal, ok if you want me to be a troll, I’ll wait under the next bridge you cross.

One reason I post here is that people here are intelligent.

I’m JHBL, and I approve this message.

 

 

 

 

 


.

Albert

March 16, 2013, 10:14 a.m.

Just to clarify my opinion, should you be interested.
Don’t mess with my constitutional and God given rights.
The combination of the two is the only thing that makes the US better than the rest of the world governments.
The UN can take a Long walk off a short pier as far as I am concerned. They have effectively proven to be useless at key times! Let us not give them more credit than they have earned. Be fearful of one world leader standing over the UN. That is too must power for any human heart. We have faults in our nature. Whenever one person leads too long, corruption grows!
I am reasonably convinced a new World order is planned and the US Constitution is a threat to that plan. Be watchful!
Use the constitution as it was meant; to Arm yourself in defense for yourself, family and freedom. Be a responsible gun owner, Respect people as we are all in a learning process and be God fearing and just as best as humanly possible.
God fearing to me is having a sense of fairness and love for one another understanding God has final judgement of our actions. Respect His laws 1st as we were founded on them. If we do this we can be proud, life loving, world leading Americans again. Remember,1st things 1st, obey Gods laws, love and respect one another, respect our constitution as it was born of human oppression.
Be Blessed all!

carolyn

March 16, 2013, 11:28 a.m.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas and Albert: In my previous post listing groups which have increased in size after 2000, I failed to include a breakdown of some of those included in the “patriot” movement. One would be the “UN Conspiracy Movement” and another the “New World Order” movement - both of them causing in adherents a deep sense of alarm, impending doom, and a need to acquire arms and build bunkers to defend themselves against the “they” who are conspiring to take us over along with the rest of the world. Once we’re under their thumb, “they” will presumably rule us with “an iron fist”. Albert and JHBL have separated themselves into two different factions of the same underlying conspiracy beliefs. 

Cue in soundtrack music for “The Twilight Zone”.

Meanwhile back on planet earth: Number of gun deaths in the US since Newtown as of yesterday: 2728 or more.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 16, 2013, 3:27 p.m.

carolyn, hey, if Morris Dees wants to classify me into some hate group, I would glady face him in court at any time he chooses, in any county he chooses. Besides, of what ethnic background do you think I am, anyway?

Since he would “classify” any one into a crime group (hate crime) I would have him prove it before a magistrate. He would have to file suit, so let’s get it on the docket. I will stand on my record.

Albert, when the times roll on here, more and more will begin to believe, either one way or the other. You know what every tounge shall confess.

Ten thousand laws on the books, and no improvement on the Ten Commandments.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

March 16, 2013, 3:33 p.m.

Your pointing out misbehavior of government employees seems to be your justification. Instead of finding the means to punish the behavior, you want to tear the entire house down.

Answer #1 I am sorely in disapproval of our leaders using the term “misbehavior”. This is something a child does, Honey, there is a lot of diffrence between a crime and misbehavior.

 

 

 

 

 

.

Albert

March 17, 2013, 10:18 a.m.

1   It is well know that the UN Gun treaty is putting pressure on the US to give up its guns.
2 The subprime scandal brought the US to its knees and no one went to jail. Forcing us to borrow money from CHINA to save our banks. In relation to this Bill Maher himself said the US public is stupid.
3 Our debt is about to make China’s monetary system the world standard.
4 NAFTA and GATT has needlessly destroyed tens of millions of manufacturing jobs that made this country what it was!
5   China is buying up US interests. They already own us. They are building a very Competitive Military, Air Force, Navy and Missile System.
6 Europe has united.
IF you don’t think there is a new world order planned you are NAIVE to say the least.

carolyn

March 17, 2013, 12:05 p.m.

Albert, JHBL: If you take some time off from lining your well-armed bunkers with foil wrap, you might check out “New World Order (conspiracy theory)” which will lead you to a wiki which breaks down some of the vast numbers of conspiracies into loose categories, the entirety of which is laced with references.

The following quote pertinent to our disagreement is taken from the article’s introduction: “Prior to the early 1990s, New World Order conspiracism was limited to two American countercultures, primarily the militantly anti-government right, and secondarily fundamentalist Christians concerned with end-time emergence of the Antichrist.[7] Skeptics, such as Michael Barkun and Chip Berlet, have observed that right-wing populist conspiracy theories about a New World Order have now not only been embraced by many seekers of stigmatized knowledge but have seeped into popular culture, thereby inaugurating an unrivaled period of people actively preparing for apocalyptic millenarian scenarios in the United States of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.[3][5] These political scientists are concerned that this mass hysteria could have what they judge to be devastating effects on American political life, ranging from widespread political alienation to escalating lone-wolf terrorism.[3][5]”

Civilizations rise and fall. As a young person in the 60’s, I was perceptive enough to suspect Russia wouldn’t pan out as the threat it was perceived to be at the time - instead pondered on the sheer scale of the sleeping giant of China. Since then the giant has awakened, and thus far in our global battles for supremacy, (or for many just a piece of the action), we don’t appear to be imminently headed for mutual assured destruction.

So now we have you people, wrapped yourselves up in your version our flag and hating the government which owns it, cowering in your well-armed bunkers waiting to fight off the “impending” invasion. How sad. It would be much more helpful if you’d become real citizens and join the rest of us to fix what’s broken. (You listed a few among the many issues we face)

Gun deaths in the US since Newtown: 2728 or more. (Latest update not in yet)

Albert

March 17, 2013, 1:51 p.m.

C- You are too long winded for me.
I have no bunkers just good sense and It has served me well for many years. I live life with my eyes open. I don’t believe anything is going to happen all at once. I do believe it is a slow process and people like you are sheep. You can put a frog in hot water and he will jump out, but if you put him in warm water and turn the heat up slow, you will cook him.
If you don’t want to think NAFTA and GATT was planned and is not part of a new world order. Best of luck to you Froggy!

John Smith

March 18, 2013, 9:58 a.m.

Really Micheal? You really think a group of people is using one name to argue against random anonymous people online that effects nothing in the end?

carolyn is the real troll here, talking about conspiracy theories and foil lined bunkers? Blinded by her stereotypes, she argues with pro-gun people about anything, out of pure frustration and anger because she is in the shrinking minority in terms of opinions on guns.

Micheal usually brings valid arguments with good references and logic….carolyn just constantly brings stereotypes and transparently emotional driven arguments with hive logic.


Example that the majority don’t want additional gun regulations:

I live In Colorado (5 mins from the aurora theater in fact), several proposed bills have made it to the Gov’s desk.

- Universal Background checks ( The main issue I see with this, is if I buy a gun from a private party, they have to keep the 4473 I filled out with ALL my information on it…)

- $10 charge for background checks ( This will really help curb gun violence….)

- No online CCW courses ( this kinda makes sense - but what doesn’t, is that there isn’t any required curriculum for an instructor to teach in person)

- Ban on magazines over 15 rounds, or if they have removable base plate…(Knee jerks, over reaching, and hypocritical, because they are willing to amend the bill to allow manufacturing of standard capacity magazines in the state to keep Magpul jobs and money…)

Regarding the one specifically banning magazines holding over 15 rounds…

A recent poll done by the Denver Post shows that at least 70% of Colorado citizens who participated in that poll, showing the MAJORITY DO NOT wan’t this bill to pass.

Hickenlooper is being bombarded by the MAJORITY’S opinion on these regulations, Colorado citizens DO NOT want anymore gun regulations. Look up his facebook page, its almost comical how overwhelming the opinions are against these proposed bills…I’m almost willing to give one of you money for finding a comment that is actually FOR any of those bills.

When push comes to shove, I bet there will be similar results seen on a national level…if it evens gets that far…..

carolyn

March 18, 2013, 11:20 a.m.

John Smith: From Colorado?

First google “Coloradans Favor Stricter Gun Control Laws, New Polls Show”

Then google “Colorado Lawmakers Get Threatened Over Gun Control Legislation” This article, in addition to covering the threats, is also very comprehensive in providing updated information on CO gun control legislation.

Perhaps your wishes might be realized since your fellow gun nuts’ death threats might “persuade” elected reps re-consider voting as their constituents want - instead, for their own safety, change their “yeas” to “nays”.

Colorado: a state which has had two of the most horrific mass shootings in our country. The majority of residents there want to enact legislation which will curb the violence. The nutters, in response, have warned that bullets trump the power of votes.

Number of gun deaths in the US since the Newtown massacre: 2,763 or more.

Erik Buck

March 18, 2013, 1:09 p.m.

Prohibition didn’t stop drinking.  The war on drugs didn’t stop drug use.  Passing laws against guns won’t stop shootings.  Australia has very tough gun laws, yet it is extimated that there are more guns now in Australia (illegal, of course) tha there were when the laws were passed.  It is folly to think that simply passing a law will change human behavior.  Why not pass a law that all children should have an IQ of 200?  Oh, yes, no child left behind.  Now they are all above average.

John Smith

March 18, 2013, 1:20 p.m.

Cryolyn you are doubting where I claim to live? My cousins were inside columbine when the massacre happened.

They own guns (multiple ones, you don’t seem to understand that each gun has a specific purpose, thats why people often own more than one two or three.)

Only one idiot made a death threat. Like any extemist, the “gun nutters” are only a few, most gun owners are not extremists. Saying curse words are not death threats.

Google Denver post, click opinions, then polls from the drop down menu…it’s titled “Overturn gun bill?”

“Assuming state House Bill 1224, which limits gun magazines to 15 rounds, will become law, how would you vote on a 2014 ballot measure to overturn it?”

70% would vote to overturn it.

Polls don’t lie right? Lol

You are in denial. The majority of the USA loves guns, you are in the minority, and you are not morally superior to anyone that does love them no matter how many times you post your numbers of miscellaneous gun deaths.

You a pathetic example of a hypocrite who acts like they are some noble fighter for what is right, yet you stereotype just like a racist klan member. You are just as one sided as any “gun nutter” and stick to your script like any NRA blind follower. You see, in the end, people like you get forgotten because you are no different than any other extremist, you are just short of the idiots who threaten life’s of officials.

John Smith

March 18, 2013, 1:33 p.m.

BTW that poll I cited is much more recent ( a few days old ) than the article you referenced.

carolyn

March 18, 2013, 2:45 p.m.

John Smith has absolutely no clue about what legitimate polls are and how they’re conducted. His citing a web-page questionnaire as a poll is ridiculous.

Accurate polling data is achieved by questioning large sample groups through the process of reaching out (making calls) to potential respondents who accurately reflect the population group being polled in so far as race, gender, and income level is concerned. Then the questions being asked must be neutral enough in tone so as not to lead the responders into expressing opinions which don’t fully enough reflect views.

John Smiths “poll” leads us to a Denver Post web page which solicits opinions from those who’re either led to or happen to go to their site. The poll John refers to asks whether or not their readers favor overturning CO State House Bill 1224 which limits gun magazines to 15 rounds. (yes, no, undecided). Another “poll” on the same page has a push-poll (framing the question into an opinion) by asking for responses about the behavior of Democrats: whether or not they’re “overreaching”. Also included are polls on civil unions, soda ban appeal, pot clubs, obesity vs hunger, and fracking suits.

John Smith

March 19, 2013, 8:45 a.m.

Cryolyn assuming again….Did I go into explaining my understanding of polls? Silly goose.

Its funny that you think a “legitimate” poll even exists. It gives insight into your logic.

You really have no qualification to describe anything to anyone, you couldn’t even interpret or present simple statistics to me a couple months ago, now you are a poll expert!


“Carolyn: .....Thanks, by the way, for correcting the “nationmaster homicides by country” which I incorrectly provided…...”

You then went on to claim I used a weighted average to sway the results, but you didn’t even notice the website provided that on its own to show a more accurate representation, you refused to take that into account.


“Carolyn: ....I learned somewhere we managed to get rid of prohibition some time ago. I’m pretty happy about that since I enjoy the occasional Margarita….”

“Carolyn:  ...I think smoking dope is stupid….”

I find this hilarious….you think the drug proven to be less damaging to health and life is stupid, but you enjoy and support the prevalence of a drug that is proven to be responsible for millions of deaths and detrimental health effects.


Then there is the issue of excepting any information from someone who doesn’t even follow their own advice or thoughts..

“Carolyn: ....Continued arguments here are fruitless….”

So I ask, what is your goal with commenting at all here anymore?


Cryolyn supports the implementations that lead to headlines like we get from Chicago:

“Chicago baby killed with single gunshot”

Kory Hill

March 19, 2013, 8:46 a.m.

I think we should get off the band wagon of banning guns and jump on with banning Doctors. The recorded amount of accidental Doctor deaths for 2012 was around 195,000 considering the amount of gun owners per gun death is pretty low in comparison.

carolyn

March 19, 2013, 10:51 a.m.

John Smith: Thanks again for bringing up Nationmaster’s statistics. In the previous post you’re referring to I had incorrectly provided the link to TOTAL firearms deaths per country rather than this one:

“Crime Statistics > Gun violence > Homicides > Firearm homicide rate > per 100,000 pop. (most recent) by country” which clearly shows the US as ranking 8th in homicide by firearms rates in the total list of 32 countries, (3.6 per 100,000).

I will again state that your insistence on using the weighted average is an attempt to make our gun by homicide rate more palatable. After all, we have a rate of “only” 3.6 per 100,000 and the weighted average is 6.9. You only have to look at the graph to see how ridiculous your argument is. The rates of 5 countries: South Africa, Colombia, Thailand, Guatemala, and Paraguay, go from more than double our rates to (in the case of South Africa) 20.7 times our own rates. Looking at the same graph, we see that the 15 countries lowest in homicide by gun deaths barely register when figured into the “weighted average”.

I then provided this: “And finally, in comparing ourselves to the next 23 high income countries, we lead with 80% of all firearms deaths. google: ” Homicide, suicide, and unintentional firearm fatality: comparing the United States with other high-income countries, 2003. “

You obviously have no understanding of how polls work or you would not have included a “reader response questionaire” from the Denver Post as proof that Colorado is a bastion of NRA supporters. Legitimate polls tell us otherwise. Whether or not CO legislators have the guts to vote the will of their constituents is another matter altogether.

Brushing your snide comments aside, I am here because I care very deeply about the rate of gun deaths here in our country and have been active for over 20 years in the attempt to get guns out of the hands of criminals and insure they’re safely stored by responsible gun owners. Our death rate by guns here is unacceptable to me. 

Gun deaths in our country since the Newtown Massacre: 2793 or more.

John Smith

March 19, 2013, 12:23 p.m.

Cryolyn polls are a joke and you know it, wether they be “legitimate” or “questionnaire”. Don’t get so hung up on them. Everytime I see the image at the bottom of huffington of all those old ladies holding signs saying “let us live” I imagine one of them to be someone like you and can’t help but laugh. How sad to be controlled by the artificial fear of getting shot because of consuming too much mass media.

Fortunately, time is the best defense here….I’ve noticed like Obviousman said, it’s basically just an older generation crying for additional gun regulations on their way into senility.

As much as my younger generation consumes culture in the US, we also know how little to trust mass media. We can see the illogical decisions made and silly laws in place.  We are starting to change them. We think the United States you have “helped” to set up is far from anything to be proud of. It will be nothing but good for this country when your generation moves onto your next adventure.

carolyn

March 19, 2013, 2:51 p.m.

The preceding fact-free, stereotype laden, emotion-driven post, (courtesy of John Smith), was preceded by previous John Smith Comments, one of which contained the following observation: “...carolyn just constantly brings stereotypes and transparently emotional driven arguments with hive logic.”

Gun deaths in the US since the Newtown Massacre still at 2793 or more. Forty five of these were children under the age of 12. Stay tuned….

John Smith

March 19, 2013, 2:58 p.m.

Lol it’s not ok for me to stereotype but it is for you? I get it.

No one cares about your miscellaneous gun death obsession…..

carolyn

March 19, 2013, 4:37 p.m.

John Smith: Your statement, “No one cares about your miscellaneous gun death obsession…” is clearly incorrect. Polls and current legislative efforts/actions prove otherwise.

For the sake of accuracy, your statement should read: “I don’t care about your miscellaneous gun death obsession…”

And I’d generously add that you probably actually do have concerns about gun deaths here, but in weighing legislative action which may infringe on your perceived “freedoms” you’ve made the choice to continue sacrificing safety in favor of “business as usual”.

Thus in the paragraph below I’ll re-quote your quote from me when I responded to you earlier after a number of your previous closed thinking, circular arguments (to be found on an earlier ProPublica article on gun violence). Your unwillingness to learn from new data and adapt thinking accordingly reflects the uncritical thinking adhered to by those who begin and end with the same inflexible “belief” (circular thinking). This renders you incapable of weighing evidence to form/alter opinions, thus prevents any real discussion of evidence. Neither I nor anyone else can convince people who don’t care enough about our rate of gun violence here to actually become concerned and flexible enough to re-visit their views on what comprises their “freedoms”.

Do feel free to again (and again?) re-quote me on this.

“John Smith: “”....Continued arguments here are fruitless…””

John Smith

March 19, 2013, 5:42 p.m.

Oh yes, you just love your polls dont you? You do realize no one else is reading these comments? Its just you and me. I honestly don’t have much concern for gun deaths…I have only owned guns for a year….and I didn’t care about gun deaths for the 25 years before I owned guns. I’m not an over sensitive cry baby and I know the map is not the territory, I base my beliefs on what I experience, not numbers provided for me.

So you continue to argue when you know there will never be any different outcome, you have stated that twice now yet do nothing different yourself…..what was it that Einstein said about insanity? Oh yes..“doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

To set you straight, I dont view any of the proposed bills to be compromising MY freedoms, but they sure won’t save any lives or stop mass shootings either. I honestly don’t even care if they pass - blowing your assumption/stereotype out of the water. It’s just entertaining to get responses from the older generation people like you. You act like you are so noble and such a critical thinker, it cracks me up how you will just settle for and defend such weak solutuions to curb gun deaths you claim to be so passionate about.  I’m more for being efficient, you seem to be for whatever they will put infront of you because it’s “doing something”. Do you want to read my proposals again?

Albert

March 19, 2013, 7:07 p.m.

Here is the reality…
1   Guns are going no where…
2   Semi automatics are going no where..
3   Assault weapons require a special License already. They are fully automatic weapons.
4 the gun show loop hole will be fixed.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.
This article is part of an ongoing investigation:
Guns

Guns

We're probing the policy and politics of guns in America.

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional

Our Hottest Stories

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •