Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Feb. 8, 2013 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
On Jan. 10, at Taft High School in the small town of Taft, Calif., a high school student carrying a shotgun entered a classroom with 28 students and their teacher.
He shot and wounded two of the students. Neither student died.
The teacher urged the shooter to put down the shotgun, and he did.
Unlike other shootings, such as the one at the movie theater in Colorado, this shooter did not have high-powered weapons and body armor.
If he had, there probably would have been many dead students and a dead teacher.
I hope this lesson will not be lost on our lawmakers in Washington: no assault weapons, no body armor, no one killed.
Bob Mueller wrote "Unlike other shootings, such as the one at the movie theater in Colorado, this shooter did not have high-powered weapons and body armor.If he had, there probably would have been many dead students and a dead teacher."
Faulty causation Bob. Correlation does not imply causation. The absence of a high-powered weapon(definition?) and body armor did not lead to (cause)fewer student injuries/deaths. Bob fails to establish a causal connection(behavior and inaction) between his premise(absent high-powered weapon and body armor) and fewer students injured/deaths.
Tell me please what gun laws now, and to come, would prevent the current LA cop killer, and military trained soldier, from doing his evil deeds?
CarmineD
If the shooter had used a water pistol the author of this letter would have had an even greater field day promoting this phony argument for gun restrictions.
The gun violence problem does not have a singular cause. Multiple variables are in play here with weapon availability and type, mental health, and preventive security being mentioned most oftem. No solution ignoring one or two of these three variables can have optimum results
And while correlation does not prove causation it is empirical evidence and it doesn't disprove causation either.
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
Forget about the 300 million firearms, including countless assault weapons, that are tearing apart communities and filling morgues -- if loony Lapierre had his way, bazookas and surface-to-air missile launchers would also be covered by the 2nd amendment right to bear whatever arms the armsmakers make.
Because that's what the Founders intended. For our own self defense of course.
Freemans response needs to be filed under the category of "If you have nothing to support your case, baffle 'em with BS"
The answer to Carmine is that none of the current laws or pending laws will stop some of the people who have gone "tilt", that doesn't mean that customizing laws to reflect the newer realities of what and how guns and their accessories are evolving.
We can tell that many of you pro gun aficionados have got your personalities tied to your guns in various ways. My gun is always a few seconds away from me depending upon which room I'm in, and not one moment of any normal day do I even think about it.
Do you guys peer out your windows waiting for the bad guys or GI Joe to try to whack You?
We want to protect everyone's rights, but put the victims rights as a priority. They have earned it.
A way to report people who have gone off the grid and need help and their weapons put into a lockdown until they have been released will not stop all murderers in their tracks, but it should allow many targeted individuals time to relocate, and or arm themselves.
No one is leaving the womb with an automatic or single shot weapon. We have some time to do something.
Now is the time.
If Jesus appeared today do you think He would align Himself with whoever had allowed the misuse of the most deadly guns or with the victims of gun violence?
To sum it up, we don't want your guns, don't want to lose mine, and just want you to help us identify the insane and criminals among us and to realize that the abusive husband in a rage and the next crazy looking for fame need to lose their weapons on occasion without you guys wetting your pants.
"The answer to Carmine is that none of the current laws or pending laws will stop some of the people who have gone "tilt", that doesn't mean that customizing laws to reflect the newer realities of what and how guns and their accessories are evolving." Jeff
Thank you. You're absolutely right and the phenomena of spree killings like Va Tech in Virginia, the Aurora, Colorado Movie theater, Newtown, Connecticut grammar school, and LA Cop killer Chris Dornan all fit that description. Despite the 9000 gun laws already on the books that can't/won't stop any of these spree killings, anti-gun rights people want more. And they think the NRA is crazy!
Look at NY State. Governor Cuomo pushed through a gun control law in a knee jerk reaction, FORGOT TO EXEMPT cops, and his popularity dropped 15 points in a recent poll. 15 points. If you think Harry and the Senate aren't affected by this poll result, with 1/3 of the Senate coming up for reelection in 2014 mostly Democrats and NRA supporters, you don't know Harry Reid.
CarmineD
Carmine doing a victory lap in an auditorium of 1 person, himself says:
"Thank you. You're absolutely right and the phenomena of spree killings like Va Tech in Virginia, the Aurora, Colorado Movie theater, Newtown, Connecticut grammar school, and LA Cop killer Chris Dornan all fit that description. Despite the 9000 gun laws already on the books that can't/won't stop any of these spree killings, anti-gun rights people want more. And they think the NRA is crazy!"
I SAY:
You have just admitted that the crazy quilt of the ridiculously abused number of 9,000 gun laws do not work. And your solution is to praise the NRA. And just accept the occasional slaughter of people as the price children need to pay for living in America.
Do you own stock in a casket manufacturer?
Some think twice time, and a way to report erratic people is what is needed, not a cure all, not an attack on the rights of good Americans. Just like a kid breaking windows with a baseball bat, put him to the side and take away his bat until he learns that it is for baseball, not someones head or the school windows.
Why do you lunkheads have such a problem with common sense?
Jeff:
Those knowing and understanding the facts and truth about guns have a huge lead over the anti-gun rights people who don't. If that qualifies for a victory lap in your eyes, then as the saying goes: Gentlemen start your engines.
CarmineD
Jeff:
The reason we have 9000 laws on gun controls, which don't work, is simple. Everytime there is a catastrophy like the spree shooting/killings in Arizona 2 years ago, the first knee jerk reaction by anti-gun rights people is: "There Needs to be a Law!" New York and Governor Cuomo are a case in point. But, that kind of reaction is like wetting the bed. It feels good at first but afterwards you have a huge mess.
CarmineD
Right at the top RefNV (Re Freeman) criticizes the letter writer, saying "Faulty causation Bob. Correlation does not imply causation. The absence of a high-powered weapon(definition?) and body armor did not lead to (cause)fewer student injuries/deaths."
Wrong, Freeman. Mr Mueller's statement regarding the Taft shooter was that "IF he had <possessed a high-powered weapon>, there PROBABLY would have been many dead students and a dead teacher." (Emphasis added.) This is quite clearly NOT a statement of causation. It is simply Mr Mueller stating either a potential hypothesis or a personal opinion. In either case, prove it or disprove it on its own merits. Don't try to deny it by alleging a non-existent logical flaw.
Carmine, you are a prolific writer of fiction, you need a LOT of work on your non-fiction musings...
CarmineD (Carmine DiFazio): This time I'll neither agree nor disagree with your comment that "Everytime there is a catastrophy like the spree shooting/killings in Arizona 2 years ago, the first knee jerk reaction by anti-gun rights people is: 'There Needs to be a Law!'"
I'll simply note that the first knee-jerk reaction by pro-gun rights people is: "We refuse to discuss any possible legislative solution. To do so would violate the sanctity of the Second Amendment!"
Why is it that conservatives have no problem with minor restrictions on First Amendment rights (Don't cry "FIRE" in a crowed theater; get a permit to assemble before City Hall in protest; Christmas must be a NATIONAL holiday - not just a day for the religious to celebrate; you can't print that picture, it's pornography! etc. etc.)? Yet those very same conservatives are now arguing in favor of egregious violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments? Yet they continue to hold the Second to be totally sacrosanct despite 200+ years of cultural and technological change?
Excellent article Mr. Mueller!
It is clear to me that the point you made is to demonstrate that capability is related to gun and ammunition types, as demonstrated in the example you gave. Capability is related to how many lives are lost and how much damage is done.
The reality is that the only need people have for military style assault weapons and large magazine capacity is to fight a war on some level.
Isn't that the role of our National Guard and military, or the police in a much smaller situation? Have we reached the point that we have no confidence in any of these protectors of our rights and Constitution? If so, we are in big trouble.
Are the Taliguns coming? Are they already here?
It appears a flat earth mentality is tipping and falling off the edge by standing firm on a priority of defending Guns of Mass Destruction, rather than innocent people who are the potential victims of GMD's.
These weapons are not needed for personal protection or they would be licensed for carrying in public. Or is that the next plan of the GMD's cheering squad?
'"We [pro-gun rights] refuse to discuss any possible legislative solution. To do so would violate the sanctity of the Second Amendment!"' Robert Leavitt
Using NRA as ONE example of a pro-gun rights lobby, I have yet to hear it, or anyone associated with it, say it refuses to discuss/debate solutions, includng legislative, to spree killings. In fact, just the opposite. It is probably one of the most vocal proponents for solutions.
CarmineD
"Carmine, you are a prolific writer of fiction..."
Jeff
While I am a prolfic poster, I use words more sparsely than most here including you. Oftentimes, the excerpts I quote are longer than my comments to them. That's a fact.
CarmineD
Bob......GREAT LETTER, SPOT ON!
YES, your letter gives us another good reason
why we need a new ban on military style assault
weapons and mega clips.
We need to stop the mass murder from these assault
weapons, PERIOD!
The majority of Americans already say this.
And no amount of lies and BS from republican
defenders of these mass killing weapons will
matter.
republicans have no common sense and they prove
it here every single day.
They can't help it.
It's part of that extreme right-wing ideology.
Common sense will prevail.
There will be a new ban on military style assault
weapons and mega clips.
peacelily.....
Great comment.
YES, these military style assault weapons are not
needed for personal protection.
We need to stop this madness.
And those kids and teachers, back east, would be
alive today if the assault weapon ban was still
in place.
The mother of that killer would have never
bought that assault weapon, PERIOD!
It's interesting to note that Taft High School had already done just what the NRA was to later propose - put an armed guard on its staff. Problem - he was snowed in that day. Since they hired only ONE there was no backup. How many backups would be necessary? Impossible to say. How many simultaneous personal emergencies do you want to plan for? One guard? Snowed in. One back-up? Had an auto accident on the way to work. Two backups? The second one had the flu. Etc. Of course, each of those back-ups needs to be on your payroll or they'll go to someone else's payroll.
To make this statement, one must have an IV with superfortified Kool-Aid running through your veins.
"Using NRA as ONE example of a pro-gun rights lobby, I have yet to hear it, or anyone associated with it, say it refuses to discuss/debate solutions, including legislative, to spree killings. In fact, just the opposite. It is probably one of the most vocal proponents for solutions."
That is a delusional, sad statement.
"That is a delusional, sad statement." Jeff
Such are the facts and truth to those who refuse to understand and believe.
CarmineD
And here's your firearm's lesson for today...
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=8C-...
You're welcome.
: {
Carmine: So far the ONLY solution the NRA has proposed or supported was LaPierre's infamous "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" statement. I'd hardly call that as being willing to "... discuss/debate solutions, including legislative, to spree killings." It may be ONE possible solution. It is definitely not the ONLY solution.
Everything else the NRA has supported/proposed has been in the nature of easing restrictions they felt were inevitable.