Excellent article on how firearms technology enables mass killing which takes it beyond the “cosmetic features” talk. I strongly suggest that anyone involved in this issue read this article.
The Physics Of Mass Killing.
One trivial criticism the P228 comes with a 13 round magazine, but accepts larger.
Take an old movie serial, add a new voice over by the Firesign Theatre and you have some very funny stuff. In this case, the gun loon’s nightmare: Big Brother’s henchmen come for the last handgun on earth.
“To think people used to sleep with these things under their pillows.”
Prof. Simon Chapman’s Over Our Dead Bodies: Port Arthur and the Fight for Gun Control – Australia’s last gun massacre is now a free E-book and available at the following link:
I strongly suggest that anyone who is involved in the US gun violence/gun control movement read this book. Australia’s political climate surrounding this issue at the time of the Port Arthur Massacre was eerily similar to that of the US, yet the Australians were able to cut through the non-sense and enact serious and effective gun control laws.
This is a valuable lesson for people who want to see similar laws in the US.
This book is really about the workings of the media, the use of lobbying, and the skills of advocacy. So pick a day when you are tired of dealing with the aftermath of ignored public health issues and read this ripping yarn, arm yourself with the tools it offers, and be ready to go into battle.
require mandatory liability insurance be carried by every gun owner for every firearm they own, lease, or use. Once the cost of the liability gets involved, change will happen. Require gun insurance just like car insurance!
And there is yet another mass shooting in the US. ‘Seven killed’ in Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting!
Maybe gun control won’t stop mass killings, but not having gun control definitely doesn’t stop them! In fact, looking at the past 230 odd years of the US being an indepndent country, we have seen that it is a highly violent and blood thirsty country.
WhoWhatWhy has an interesting piece about mass shootings:
One of the most striking things about shooting incidents in America…is how common they are. Another striking thing is how often the media fails to note the previous point, or to explore what that means—or what might be done about it.
Late last night, a gunman walked into a movie theater in a Denver suburb, killed 12 and injured 50. Two days earlier a gunman opened fire outside a bar in Tuscaloosa, Alabama in an incident in which at least 17 were hurt. These were not really so exceptional. Every year, about 100,000 Americans are victims of gun violence, and every week, people calmly enter our schools, our workplaces, our leisure gathering spots and open fire on innocent bystanders.
Whenever we tweet or post about these, often the only people we hear from are those who say we need more guns not less. “If I had been there with my gun….” The problem, of course, is the public at large is being asked to arm everyone and trust that, while the rest of us cower, “the right people” will quickly dispatch “the wrong people” in the modern equivalent of the Shootout at the OK Corral. No mention of whether the teacher is supposed to be armed…when a nut walks into a preschool and starts firing away.
Given that there have been 125 Mass Killings since Columbine, you think some serious solutions would be mentioned, yet it seems that there is the consistent response of inaction, or worse, the loosening of restrictions which make it easier for these incidents to happen.
Unfortunately, a realistic discussion of this aspect of US life never happens while the bodycount keeps rising. Instead, we keep hearing that the US needs more guns, but that is the cause of the problem.
This is a graphic of the gear that, James Holmes, the Aurora, Colorado shooter had on him during his shooting spree:
This graphic can be found at: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/25/graphic-james-holmes-was-a-man-with-a-plan/
If you consider that at least three of the last big mass shooting incidents were done by someone who bought his gun LEGALLY (Virginia Tech’s Seung-Hui Cho, Tucson’s Jared Laughner, and Aurora’s James Holmes), you would think that some alarms would be going off in people’s heads in the US. Yet, the usual reaction of “oh, there’s nothing that can be done about this sort of thing” is once again to be heard.
Sure, there will be some people talking about actually doing something about firearms, but it will once again go quiet once all the outrage dies out. That is quite a difference from how these incidents are handled in other parts of the world–especially one’s that share a heritage with the US. Hugerford saw a tightening of UK gun laws, Dunblane led to pretty much all handguns being taken from private possession in the UK, And The Port Arthur incident saw Australia’s gun laws tighten up intensely in less than a year. But, the US averages 20 mass shootings a year. The Brady Campaign has a tally of these since 2005.
Mother Jones has an interactive map of mass shootings in the US since 1982. Some estimate the figure to have been 125 Mass Killings since Columbine: I don’tthink the number is that low. Mother Jones found that out of the 132 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally. The arsenal included dozens of assault weapons and high-powered handguns. (See charts below.) Just as Jeffrey Weise used a .40-caliber Glock to massacre students in Red Lake, Minnesota, in 2005, so too did James Holmes when blasting away at his victims in a darkened movie theater. Mother Jones also found that half of the cases involved school or workplace shootings (11 and 17, respectively); the other 28 cases took place in locations including shopping malls, restaurants, government buildings, and military bases. Only one of the killers was a woman. (See Goleta, Calif., in 2006.)
Of course, that is a limited guide to mass shootings since very few people have an accurate grasp on how much firearms harm society, and that’s the way the gun lobby would like it. Like the climate denial crowd, they want to flood the marketplace of ideas with shit science. The fact that the NRA is so terrified of correct and accurate numbers being collected that they obstruct any legislative attempt to do so is as clear a red flag that they know an informed public will not follow, support or agree with them as you could ask for as an indicator of a serious problem. But, like climate change, the truth is out there (I give a pitch for this blog) if one is willing to sift through an internet filled with loads of bullshit.
Fact is, the carnage has been going on at least since the 1978, but probably much longer, yet no one wants to do anything about it. There is too much fantasy out there about people being able to outshoot the gunman, which is total crap in this case since they would have had to do it through a haze of tear gas. Unfortunately, it is the fantasy which will win out in all this as it always has seemed to have done in recent years.
But, as the graphic says: “By looking closely at Holmes’ ammunition and equipment, it becomes clear the attack at the movie theatre could have been much worse.” The question is when will it be so bad that people in the US will finally feel some outrage at the carnage happening around them and say enough?
It was made up by Jeff Cooper who gave us the four rules of gun safety and the combat mindset. So, is he saying that we shouldn’t be concerned if we see someone carrying a firearm? I think this goes to point of VPC’s study Unintended Consequences where Pro-Handgun Experts Prove That Handguns Are a Dangerous Choice for Self-defence. In other words, the candid voices of pro-handgun experts and exposes through expert opinion the gun industry’s lies about the illusory benefits of handguns for self-defence.
First off, this “condition is not recognised in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (AKA DSM). It is probably unlikely to be recognised as a condition as well, despite the efforts of the people who like to use this terms efforts to get it in there. This would be due to the fact that most of the medical community is aware that the risk of harm from pistols and revolvers that is demonstrated year after year in America’s unparalleled handgun death and injury rates.
Irrational Fear? This term came from Jeff Cooper the person who gave us the four rules of gun safety and the colour coded combat mindset. The first two rules of gun safety are:
- All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
- Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
Rule number 2 is the most important for this critique since it concedes that guns are destructive devices. Unfortunately, the fact that guns when used properly can cause serious injury or death is one of the things the folk who tend to use this term would prefer to neglect—in particular, the person who created the term.
Is he saying that we see someone we don’t know carrying a firearm and not see the possibility of a threat? Is he saying that guns don’t deserve at least a shred of respect for their capacity to cause injury or death?
Spot the inconsistency!
Before I leave this, I should say that no one has addressed Cooper’s inconsistencies in that he has his little colour coded combat mindset and points out that guns are indeed lethal, or at least destructive with his four rules of gun safety.
He would call people who are concerned about those who would carry firearm in a civilian setting hoplophobes.
Instead he wants people to walk around in condition white about someone who is carrying a deadly weapon:
“Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be “Oh my God! This can’t be happening to me.”
But the ultimate absurdity is that Cooper taught COMBAT firearms use. In fact, the colour coded mindset was expounded upon in a book called Principles of Personal Defense and refers to the states of awareness in combat, or the combat mindset
People who have served in the military, especially in combat arms and are quite used to the presence of weapons know the difference between war zones and civilian life. Being in the military is different from being in a civilian population. And that is a rational consideration, not mental illness. The civilian environment does not have life threatening danger around every corner. It is not a combat zone.
Civilian life is not combat. You would have thought a battle hardened marine like Cooper would have caught on to that fact. One usually does not encounter weapons in a Civil Society which is at peace.
So,which is it, are you tryiing to create a society where it is considered normal to be in a combat state of awareness?
Or do you live in a society where there is peace and laws?