Of the three network evening newscasts, ABC's World News, substitute hosted by Diane Sawyer, uniquely seemed to lament the lack of political interest in enacting new gun laws to combat what correspondent Dan Harris earlier called "a signature American disaster, a shooting rampage," referring to the shooting spree in Binghamton, New York.
Sawyer introduced a discussion with correspondent Pierre Thomas by reading a statement from the Brady Campaign complaining about the government's lack of interest in more gun control compared to "salmonella poisoning in peanut butter crackers," and then the two fretted over the large number of guns in circulation in America and the unlikely prospects of more gun laws being passed by Congress. Sawyer: "We keep hearing there is a gun for every man, woman and child in this country, and now they have gone up by that much more. But what about Congress? Is there any move in Congress to try to take some kind of action?"
Thomas responded: "Well, one of the reasons why you heard that frustration from the Brady group today is that there's not a lot of sense of urgency on gun control." After mentioning Attorney General Eric Holder's recent expression of interest in a new assault weapon ban, Thomas continued: "But since that time, no real urgency from the White House or from Congress to take any meaningful gun control legislation to fruition."
The show's first report featured Harris recounting details of the Binghamton murder spree, as he began his piece by coining the term "signature American disaster" to refer to mass shootings. Harris: "Most of the people who died in that building over there behind me today were immigrants. They came to this country to start a new life, and they ended up dying in what has become a signature American disaster, a shooting rampage."
As Sawyer set up a second story giving more details, she also used the term "signature crime" to refer to shooting sprees: "And Dan talked about this as a signature crime in America. This month, April, is a month of tragic anniversaries. The shootings at Virginia Tech, April, two years ago. At Columbine, April, 10 years ago. And add to them now, Binghamton. Here's Stephanie Sy."
After Sy filled in viewers on more details, Sawyer read a statement released by the Brady Campaign. Sawyer: "Well, in the two years since Virginia Tech, more than 50 multiple shootings taking a total of more than 200 lives. Today the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence called for action, saying, ‘We had nine people in this country presumed to have possibly died from salmonella poisoning in peanut butter crackers, and the government went into overdrive.'"
After bringing aboard Thomas, Sawyer asked if the Justice Department felt "compelled to do something," Thomas ominously passed on what he referred to as "serious facts" about the large number of guns in circulation. Thomas:
They're clearly very concerned about it, but I talked to a number of officials today, and they pointed out a couple of very serious facts. The fact is, there are more than 250 million guns already in circulation, they say, and what that means is when someone gets angry or when they snap, they are going to be able to have access to weapons. And the FBI says, in the two years since Columbine – excuse me – the Virginia Tech shooting, gun sale background checks went up by 14 percent. In fact, from 2007 to 2008, there were 1.5 million more gun sale background checks.
As neither Sawyer nor Thomas made any mention of the evidence that high rates of gun ownership can reduce crime rates while too much gun regulation can increase crime by shifting gun ownership away from the law-abiding so that criminals are disproportionately better armed, Sawyer responded by quoted the liberal talking point that "there is a gun for every man, woman and child in this country," and asked if there is "any move in Congress to try to take some kind of action?"
Thomas responded:
Well, one of the reasons why you heard that frustration from the Brady group today is that there's not a lot of sense of urgency on gun control. A couple of weeks ago, the Attorney General, Eric Holder, talked about the fact that he may wanted to, may have wanted to revisit the issue of the assault weapons ban, which was allowed to sunset. But since that time, no real urgency from the White House or from Congress to take any meaningful gun control legislation to fruition.
Before moving on to other news, the ABC anchor informed viewers that there would not only be more coverage of the shooting spree on tonight's 20/20, but that next Friday the network would air a special on the "epidemic of mass shootings in America." Sawyer: "And, also, a week from tonight, ABC News is going to bring you the results of a year-long exploration of this epidemic of mass shootings in America – why it is happening and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you, and that is one week from tonight."
Back in April of 2007 ABC also used a shooting tragedy to push its political agenda. A NewsBusters item at the time, "ABC Rues: 'Politicians & Gun Control: Why Aren't They Outraged?' recounted:
ABC's Good Morning America and World News on Friday displayed disappointment that liberals and Democrats have not pursued gun control in the wake of the mass murders at Virginia Tech. GMA's on-screen graphic for a 7am half hour story demanded, "Politicians and Gun Control: Why Aren't They Outraged?" Co-host Robin Roberts rued: "After every major shooting in the U.S., without fail, there has been a heated debate about gun control on Capitol Hill. But not this time. In fact, most politicians have been running away from the debate on guns. So, why is this happening?" Reporter Jake Tapper echoed the theme: "It was the worst school shooting in American history, and yet what some liberals are referring to as a deafening silence from Democrats on Capitol Hill. After reciting how Democrats fear the electoral impact of the agenda, Tapper concluded by relaying how "in the rest of the world, of course, gun rights in the United States are viewed somewhat oddly."
Just over 12 hours later, World News anchor Charles Gibson recalled how "when I spoke to President Bush at Virginia Tech, he told me he thought the killings at that college would spark new debate on gun laws. So far, it hasn't. The discussion, in fact, has been surprisingly muted." (Naturally, Gibson had prompted that answer: "After Columbine, there was ignited a national debate on guns. Do you think this is going to rekindle the national debate?") In Friday's story, Tapper highlighted how "for gun control activists...the Democrats' silence was deafening." He went on to explain that "many Democratic strategists think Al Gore's liberal gun control stance cost him key states like West Virginia and Tennessee in the 2000 election" and "Democrats recaptured the Congress last November partly because of pro-gun Democrats." Tapper showcased how "this weekend a TV ad campaign begins airing that faults the Democratic Congress for not backing a gun control measure."...
Below is a transcript of relevant portions of the Friday, April 3, World News with Charles Gibson on ABC:
DAN HARRIS: Most of the people who died in that building over there behind me today were immigrants. They came to this country to start a new life, and they ended up dying in what has become a signature American disaster, a shooting rampage.
...
DIANE SAWYER: And Dan talked about this as a signature crime in America. This month, April, is a month of tragic anniversaries. The shootings at Virginia Tech, April, two years ago. At Columbine, April, 10 years ago. And add to them now, Binghamton. Here's Stephanie Sy.
...
SAWYER: Binghamton adding to this roll call of violence in America, in addition to Virginia Tech and Columbine. Well, in the two years since Virginia Tech, more than 50 multiple shootings taking a total of more than 200 lives. Today the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence called for action, saying, "We had nine people in this country presumed to have possibly died from salmonella poisoning in peanut butter crackers, and the government went into overdrive."
We'll bring in now justice correspondent Pierre Thomas with us from Washington, and, Pierre, I'm trying to imagine what it is to be in the Justice Department and to get word of a shooting like this, do they feel compelled to do something?
PIERRE THOMAS: Well, there's a lot of frustration today, a lot of angst about this. They're clearly very concerned about it, but I talked to a number of officials today, and they pointed out a couple of very serious facts. The fact is, there are more than 250 million guns already in circulation, they say, and what that means is when someone gets angry or when they snap, they are going to be able to have access to weapons. And the FBI says, in the two years since Columbine – excuse me – the Virginia Tech shooting, gun sale background checks went up by 14 percent. In fact, from 2007 to 2008, there were 1.5 million more gun sale background checks.
SAWYER: Yes, we keep hearing there is a gun for every man, woman and child in this country, and now they have gone up by that much more. But what about Congress? Is there any move in Congress to try to take some kind of action?
PIERRE THOMAS: Well, one of the reasons why you heard that frustration from the Brady group today is that there's not a lot of sense of urgency on gun control. A couple of weeks ago, the Attorney General, Eric Holder, talked about the fact that he may wanted to, may have wanted to revisit the issue of the assault weapons ban, which was allowed to sunset. But since that time, no real urgency from the White House or from Congress to take any meaningful gun control legislation to fruition.
SAWYER: All right, Pierre, thanks to you. And one more note about what happened today. There will be more on this shooting later tonight on 20/20, what happened and why. And, also, a week from tonight, ABC News is going to bring you the results of a year-long exploration of this epidemic of mass shootings in America – why it is happening and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you, and that is one week from tonight.
—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Media the pinacle of stupid...
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:34 ET by ScrapironNot one of the media wonks considers the fact the if I want to kill 20-25 people and can't get a gun I'll build a bomb and kill a hundred or a thousand. Oklahoma city should still be remembered by a real news person. Actually a bomb may be easier to obtain/build today that getting a firearm. The net has all you need to know out there.
Old, Retired and glad of it.
Right Scrapiron,
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:39 ET by UpNorththere is no waiting period on either diesel oil or fertilizer. But, we always conveniently leave out McVeigh and Nichols when we discuss mass killings, unless to claim, with no evidence, that both were conservative/republican.
Excellent comment!
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:32 ET by MaximusBraveheartGreat point Scrapiron!
Gun "control" is BS as it only limits the good part of the population who SHOULD have a gun to put a damper on crime. If 10% death rate per crime for criminals, few would reach 15 crimes. Pretty soon no criminals. Problem solved. M-B
dangerous
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 00:14 ET by m1xramI think they are more dangerous than stupid. They know what will happen, just look at Britain. Their plan appears to be, to make sure only criminals have guns AND that citizens can not defend themselves. Guess ABC wants Americans dead. As far as I can tell, anybody that wants us dead is our enemy.
Sawyers evens cites the VT incident. That's the one where the guy with the CCW permit wasn't permitted to carry. Too bad, he might have been able to save lives.
And yet,
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:37 ET by UpNorthbecause no info has been released on the suspect, we don't know if he has a criminal background or not. If he was a convicted felon, he couldn't legally possess a firearm of any kind, but hey, let's just enact a whole bunch of laws forbidding law-abiding citizens from having a gun and being able to carry it for self-defense.
If one person in that building had had a concealed carry permit, who knows how this may have turned out? Maybe the receptionist at the front door could have shot this a$$ dead when he walked to the door?
Receptionists seem to have
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:41 ET by ChaitealoverReceptionists seem to have become the first line of defense in some places these days. I think they should all be armed, with the gun in plain sight.
Chai
“...Bury me on my face,” said Diogenes; and when he was asked why, he replied, “Because in a little while everything will be turned upside down.”
Chai,
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:43 ET by UpNorthI couldn't agree more. I'm sure there are a lot of veterans looking for jobs these days, who better? But, in looking at the front of that building, they've got to start putting real walls in the front of these places, not a glass wall.
The loons are loose!
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:44 ET by Jack Herman" Today the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence called for action, saying, ‘We had nine people in this country presumed to have possibly died from salmonella poisoning in peanut butter crackers, and the government went into overdrive.'"
And what was the potential if peanut butter was tainted? Probably a lot more than 200.
My condolences to the family members of those murdered. But the Brady groups' hysteria doesn't help anything. If one employee had CCW, this might not have happened either.
Talk about..
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:11 ET by HillbillyKingpiece of sh!t vultures. The @sshole Campaign doesn't even wait for the blood to dry to capitalize on someones pain and sufferin.
Man, that chair turned Brady into a pathetic piece of sh!t opportunist.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
Next thing you know,
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:40 ET by Jack Hermanthey'll want to make murder illegal. Oh, it already is? I guess a criminal would violate any law then.
guns aaren't banned already in New York ??
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 07:31 ET by 10ksnookerYou wonder why the Gov doesn't do anything? What could he do? He has already banned everything that even resembles a gun.
One thing for sure, if more victims are unarmed, makes for easy pickens.
Was Bush that good to have prevented terror attacks like this in the past?
Once again....
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:57 ET by HillbillyKingthe facts....( I know it's from Wiki, but it makes the point)
Notably large spree killings in history include:
people and wounded 31 others as part of a shooting rampage from the
observation deck of the University's 32-story administrative building.
He did this shortly after murdering his wife and mother. He was
eventually shot and killed by Austin police.
Shot and killed his grandfather and his grandfather's girlfriend, both
police officers. He then proceeded to a local high school and shot and
killed a security guard. Once inside the school Weise shot and killed
five students and a teacher before committing suicide. Weise killed 9 and injured 15.
and videotaping most murders. Two victims were murdered within minutes
of each other on June 25; two more on July 1st, three on July 7th, and
two each on the 14th, 15th and 16th July, 2007.
Anyone else notice that the highest death toll was in a country OTHER than the USA?
Oh and ol' Kato whacked 7 people with a truck and a sharp instrument and where are the cries "BAN ALL TRUCKS AND POINTY OBJECTS NOW!!!!!!" Anyone?
As any half ass sane person knows, people kill people, inanimate objects do not. I mean did those firearms just have to much to drink and whoops, shoot someone? NO, but we better get rid of em so people will resort to using motor vehicles, heavy equipment, and God knows what other kind of everyday objects to end another humans life. Geez.
At least some interesting info comes out of the whole gun brew-ha-ha:
Today's Weapon of Mass Destruction of choice - the AK-47
Oh and just to dispell this bullshit fearmongering that the manufactured opinion/propaganda outlets put out look at this:
Number of people killed in car crashes in the US
Number of people killed by firearms
Uh-Oh you got a waaaayyy better chance of dying from a car crash and a better chance of bein poisoned to death than bein shot. Better ban cars and anything that can poison people now. Along with guns of course.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
HB
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:28 ET by well99"Anyone else notice that the highest death toll was in a country OTHER than the USA?"
Were not suppose to know that.Excellant list.If I not mistaken alot of those countries have strict gun control.
Thanks well...
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:00 ET by HillbillyKingbeen a while bro hope y'all are doin OK.
Hell well ;-) , that ain't even a real comprehensive list. It just makes the point that crazy ass people have been goin crazy and killin innocents forever. They'll keep doin it regardless of the "weapon" at hand. You know I really don't want this to happen, but what if some maniac used a chainsaw to kill a bunch of people? Do you think there would be this sorta call for a ban on chainsaws? LOL
I do like the car statistic though, it really illustrates that given all the guns that are out there, (and I know there are more cars, BUT it's much easier to obtain a car and license) the number of people killed by guns is less than cars and poisonin. And, the gun numbers lie in a sense, cause that includes suicides. So the number of people killed by other gun wieldin folks is much lower.
I kinda understand the whole violence/fear/powertrip/powerlessness matrix that propels this sorta fearmongering, but it is really one of the most insane kinds of drivel that is out there in the media. I mean really, the solution to the problem is to become even MORE POWERLESS? Dude, your crack dealer is sellin you some bunk sh!t, cause that's freakin stupid. But that's what they think, so who knows.
As my kind say; "God created man. Samuel Colt made them equal."
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
HB
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:25 ET by well99It is just political.There is so much that can do so much damage.Chemicals mixed can do some nasty work on people.Well you have a good weekend.Good to see you back.
These spree killings
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 12:56 ET by ahusserIs the sort of 'crisis' that will be used to ban handguns in this country. In the last two days 2 people were killed in my county in separate auto crashes because they were driving like a$$holes and killed themselves (luckily they didn't kill any innocent bystanders) I am more fearful of driving on certain roads at certain times because my life is really in danger. I just wish the news wouldn't use the term accident because there are very few true accidents, most are caused by reckless, aggressive speeding by oblivious, selfish individuals. I am not in fear of the random spree whackjob killer because the odds are so low in confronting them that I would consider being killed by one as woefully unlucky as to be struck by human lightening. I recall in England a nutjob attacked a church congregation with a samurai sword killing several and wounding more. It would seem there is something in our culture where perpetually immature, selfish and narcissistic individuals blame all the ills that befall them on others who, for some strange reason, must pay with their lives.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
Makes you wonder how many
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:25 ET by liberal_bug_zapperMakes you wonder how many of those people would have died if most of them were armed. I bet the biggest number wouldn't even surpass 10 including the gunman and wounded might not even pass 10 either.
The antigunners are never going to listen to reason, and those fascists will continue blindly no matter how people try to reason with them. They think gun ownership and people who want it are all unreasonable and many of them think we're no better than a domestic terrorist.
Part of the reason why I open carry.
____________________________________________________
"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." ~ Ayn Rand
Remember the Long Island Railroad Massacre...
Sun, 04/05/2009 - 14:12 ET by Tailgunner...where Colin Ferguson killed six and wounded nineteen before he was tackled by several brave passengers.
What was liberals' response? They closed ranks, defending the murderer and attacking the gun.
While liberals immediately called for outlawing guns (Carolyn McCarthy, wife and mother of two victims, ran for Congress on a gun control platform), other liberals were creating a novel defense for Ferguson...'black rage'.
Notably absent was any liberal defense strategy or effort for the Second Amendment or the twenty-five shooting victims.
Never forget that statist liberals will cheerfully sentence innocents to death in favor of their collectivist political agenda, whether by abortion, incompetent and obscene socialized health care micromanagement, or by stripping law-abiding citizens of their constitutional rights.
NOLI PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE
Ah... isn't New York....
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 21:58 ET by SlyrrNew York is a liberal haven, right? Stuffed with liberals, socialists and communists from stem to stern - right? It's GOT gun control - just like the VA Tech college had.
Yet in this liberal mecca, a crazed gunman wrought havoc - well how could this be? /sarcasm
I bet if a responsible, law abiding citizen in that building had been carrying a gun, it would once again have been a different story. Once again, liberals who want to take everyone's 2nd amendment rights away did so in a little liberal microcosm, expecting nothing but love and peace and love and loving love and serenity.
And what they did was leave the innocent utterly defenseless when a crazed madman, who cared NOTHING about thier laws, came along and butchered the people they claim they want as their next big voting block....
'It's tough to be a helmsman on the Titanic, screaming about icebergs only to have Captain Obama lock the hoi-pelloi below decks and say nothing's wrong....'
Oh yeah...since this has
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:15 ET by bigtimerOh yeah...since this has happened I thought this would be on the evening news...I have also heard this subject brought up on Fox earlier too today...
Never takes them long now does it...a good crisis is a terrible thing to waste...just ask any leftist, especially Rahm Emanuel along with O of course...as Holder is saying come into my arms pretty mama.
Yep, I've posted about this happening myself, we all knew where this would head with the 2nd Amendment and the anti-gun lovers..with the msm being there blow-horn....as usual.
My heart and prayers to all those who lost someone they loved regarding this horrendous ordeal.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
NO!! It Cannot be True!!
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:18 ET by northoneThis sort of thing was NOT supposed to happen now that Obama is president. This type of violence only happens when there is a Republican president - when people feel alienated, disenfranchised, and put-upon. Obama was supposed to bring new hope, a new beginning to America. This sort of violence was never supposed to take place during his reign. He is the new hope. He is The Messiah! Change was coming to America. How can we possibly explain this tragic event under the reign of Obama?? [No doubt, it is George Bush's fault!]
Guns, guns, guns
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 22:33 ET by Joe Camel50 million plus dead by abortion. Drunk driving, driving under the influence of drugs, babies tossed into trash dumpsters; we have lost our souls, and...they worry about guns. In the end, we should wait till we have all the facts on the shooter, his firearms he used, procurred before they start shooting off their mouths, pun intended.
If they truly want to look at guns and who should have them, then an in depth look at "who" is killing who. They will find that some segments of our society continue to kill each other at a very high rate. Maybe we should take away their right to have guns, see how the crime rates would drop..But that would be racist. No, everyone has to suffer for some punks..sickens me to no end.
Irrational society.
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:02 ET by sevenIf we make guns illegal to stop killings, it will do as much good as doing away with spoons to eliminate obesity.
We all watch killing on tv. It seems before tv there was less massive slaughter.
Irrational media
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:46 ET by jazz_fanIt's clear that since the advent of tv there has been a lot more coverage of these heinous acts, but does that mean they've increased in number? If so, how much of that increase is due to the perpetrator wanting to get massive coverage and a hint of infamy in an otherwise empty and meaningless life? If they stop covering these incidents as they do, we'd almost certainly see a rapid decline. All you need to do is look at the report above, how many incidents occur in April and why would they choose the same month as other similar mass killings? For better media coverage?
I agree that a single person there with a concealed weapon could have ended this quickly and with fewer deaths. But we've always had disturbed people so blaming the gun instead of the maniac is stupid and totally unproductive. Would it be better if the Columbine kids hadn't had their guns and instead triggered all their pipe bombs? Killing with a bomb seems as permanent as with a gun as others have noted.
Of course none of the truly massive slaughters in history have been televised and many pre-date firearms. Your analogy to spoons is apt, now they want to make guns too expensive by requiring micro-stamping of each round fired. This would be ineffective in nearly every situation, even if you assume the perp is too stupid to pick up his spent casings after shooting. In cases like the above it is a moot point of course since he wanted to be known for his acts.
So simple..
Mon, 04/06/2009 - 06:28 ET by Sergeant ROCK.. that even a liberal might grasp the point. Well, maybe with the addition of pictures.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
IF YOU KEEP THE GUNS FROM
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:50 ET by Radar_OneIF YOU KEEP THE GUNS FROM THE PEOPLE THEN WHO BUT THE CRIMINALS WILL HAVE THE GUNS???
IF THERE WAS A PERSON IN THAT ESTABLISHMENT WITH A NY STATE PISTOL PERMIT...THIS HORRIBLE TRAGEDY WOULD HAVE BEEN FAR, FAR LESS THAT WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOCUMENTED!
Barack Obama= Half Honkey...ALL Donkey
Gun laws, meet
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:51 ET by CortillaenGun laws, meet Prohibition. Prohibition, gun laws. You two ought to get along great. Prohibition may be a little older than you're used to, but you certainly have lots in common.
In all seriousness, think about it. Alcohol, sold and owned throughout the nation, was banned, and what happened? Some amount of alcohol and alcohol-dependent businesses collapsed, but most of it simply went underground, serving to create a general disregard for federal law that has certainly damaged the national opinion of laws in general even today. In addition, organized crime really came into its own in many parts of the country through bootlegging and speakeasies. What, pray tell, do people expect to happen if guns, also sold and owned throughout the nation, are banned, in part or fully? For the obvious-impaired, we've already got an example from not-that-long-ago and right here in the US.
www.daybydaycartoon.com Proving that conservative comedy is very real.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
Yet you never hear about all the people who were
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 09:10 ET by thebutlerdiditkilled during Prohibition. From the mob-type deaths, to all the people who died from drinking booze make in bathtubs, stills, etc., that was pure poison. If you could ever get a true count of that, it would be pretty large, I think. Prohibition was one of the worst ideas, ever, and banning guns, of any type will be worse. It is like their new lie about how the South is funneling guns down to Mexico.
All a Democrat needs is the upper-story window of public attention and the chamber pot of rhetoric. How else to explain the rise of Joe Biden? P.J. O' Rourke
When are these nutcases ever
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:54 ET by EugeniaWhen are these nutcases ever going to learn that making something illegal doesn't make something go away. Criminals will always find a way to get the firearms they want.
Evening Eugenia... Oh the
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 00:09 ET by bigtimerEvening Eugenia...
Oh the so-called nutcases know this very well...it is the agenda to disarm the citizenry of the masses in this country...to have total power.
Any excuse will do to achieve it...especially like the death/tragedy today.
Fits these evil-doers to a Tee as Bush would have said long ago.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
hey bigtimer. I think
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 08:18 ET by Eugeniahey bigtimer.
I think you're half right. There definitely is an agenda with some in the anti-gun camp. For others -- and I think most -- I think they really are just pie-in-the-sky stupid people. Kind of like thinking that talking to radical Islamists will bring about peace.
Yes bt, this is part of their effort...
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 08:35 ET by ThalpyYes bt, this is part of their effort to impose massive gun restrictions, and perhaps other restrictions involving ammunition or safety considerations. Lost on them is the idea that their lame immigration policies and emphasis on rights rather than responsibility might factor into all of this. Sawyer's analysis of anything is almost always suspect because she looks for someone else to blame. Sawyer teased that, "ABC News is going to bring you the results of a year-long exploration of this epidemic of mass shootings in America – why it is happening and what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you, and that is one week from tonight." That one should be simple; "if it is happening to you," you may die. ABC's commitment to honesty precludes them from providing useful lessons for us. They will not discuss the real reasons for any of this--those reasons would conflict with their world view. It should be interesting to see if the streams of illegal immigrants crossing our borders every day, diluting our culture, and damaging our institutions will even warrant a mention. If the convoluted appeals process for deportation is even mentioned, I'd be surprised. Do you think that Barney Frank's "Family Reunification Act" will be part of the ABC program? No?
"what lessons there are
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 09:47 ET by Eugenia"what lessons there are about staying safe if it is happening to you"
I started laughing when I read Sawyer's quote in your post. See, that's part of what I mean. They're just dumb. They don't realize what's coming out of their mouths because it's just preprogrammed drivel. And I agree with you, they're in no way interested in the truth in matters because that would require thinking. And, hey, we can't hve any of that around here!
Yes. BAN ALL THE GUNS NOW!
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 01:15 ET by JWFIf guns were outlawed, we would not have this problem.
Also, the big problem here is that MURDER is legal. That is why the guy was able to kill so many people. He... Just a sec, I was just handed something.
Oh, murder is ILLEGAL already. Odd, murder being illegal did not deter this guy at all. I wonder if guns being illegal would have deterred him too.
Hmmmmm.
Carry on.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
We Live here
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 03:30 ET by jackssnAs one who lives in Pa about 30 miles from the killing site let me tell you folks that to get a right to carry in NY is all but impossible. Here in Pa it's very easy. If that wacko head was down here the question around here after they killed the person would be "dam what's the bag limit?"
gun control is sooooo yesterday ....
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 03:02 ET by Miss CheviousI guess Ms Sawyer missed the memos that "Michelle the Magnificent" has made the right to BARE ARMS oh so fashionably chic ...
Awesome!
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 15:16 ET by SickofLibsAwesome!
A Meaningful Compromise & Counterattack.......
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 05:28 ET by ConScottThe left's agenda towards gun ownership has always been clear, but rather than be honest about it, admit that they seek a complete ban on handguns and Euro-style restrictions on rifles & shotguns, they continue to hide behind verbal code. Anyone doubt the true meaning of "Meaningful Gun Control?"
Obviously, the only possible way to reduce gun crimes is to disarm every single individual residing within the U.S. No gun sales, door-to-door inspections, troops lining the borders and other stern measures will be needed to strip everyone from possessing. A new government agency enlisting thousands of undercover agents and hundreds of thousands of informants would be absolutely necessary. The goal of 100% compliance demands that no one person could trust their neighbor, fearful that the bounty offered for snitching would transcend friendship & loyalty. Well, at least it would provide jobs.
A good litmus test of the left's true agenda would be to offer a compromise that gives both sides of the issue many of the things they both claim they want. Give us, the gun owners, a federal carry permit good for life, a permiit that requires citizenship, a background check and a qualification test. In return, we'll back a ban on sales of handguns to the unlicensed. A federal permit would certainly ease the fears of states and local governments for it would require that the feds provide the liability insurance for any lawsuits stemming from an unlawful shooting. (If they can offer motor vehicle warranties........) Of course, any such offer would be roundly rejected thus demonstrating that the left seeks far more than just control.
Perhaps what is needed is a grassroots counterattack on the 1st Amendment, the rights the press hangs their collective hats on? The purveyor of deception, false information and blatent lies when reporting the facts as they apply to gun ownership, perhaps we need to launch an attack on their rights? Shouldn't all journalists, reporters, columnists & editors require a federal permit before being allowed to qualify for protected rights? Shouldn't shield laws be eliminated on the basis that lives are lost and crimes go unpunished when a journalist refuses to turn over information, turn over audio tapes & written notes? Where in the 1st Amendment does it prohibit a license for reporting? Indeed, taking from the left's method of attack on the 2nd Amendment, doesn't the mere fact that many law enforcment agencies require a press pass to cross police lines already demonstrate that permits to report do not violate the spirit of the 1st Amendment? Sound familiar?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of any more gun regulations nor do I seek to diminish the protections of our 1st Amendment as it applies to a free press. (I'd be cutting my own throat.) However, I do see some evil-hearted fun in an emotion-based, factless counterattack, using the logic of the left and the boilerplate tactics the media has embraced in their increasing effort to dumb-down the populace.
"A new government
Sun, 04/05/2009 - 14:20 ET by Tailgunner"A new government agency enlisting thousands of undercover agents and hundreds of thousands of informants would be absolutely necessary."
You mean, like a 'civilian national security force'?
If Obama fails to create a socialist police state, you can credit an armed, alert and aware citizenry.
And AIG should have driven home the point that any contract or bargain with the government, especially this government, is meaningless.
It's no different than an agreement with al-Qaeda. They want your liberty and scheme and plot ceaselessly to get it. Any 'agreement' is seen as a surrender.
There's a term for those who hold 'unlicensed' handguns... 'citizens'.
The Second Amendment. You don't know you need it until they come to take it away.
NOLI PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE
Criminal control
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 05:38 ET by bobwhiteGet your guns boys,they're robbing the bank! Those words echoed through the town of Northfield, Minnesota, Sep. 7 1876 when the James/Younger gang attempted a daring bank robbery. Had our silly liberals been around then to institute gun control, the gang would have gotten away with all of their loot. Instead, an armed citizenry rose up and came to the aid of their city, and shot their asses to pieces. In just a few minutes armed citizens put a stop to a rather serious problem. It worked then, and it will work now.
Criminal control, not gun control.
Seven thousand deaths in
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 06:47 ET by FranksamSeven thousand deaths in Mexico since January 2008, according to the AP. Some folks blame the guns from the USA for those deaths, as in "Drug cartels don't kill people, illegal guns from the evil imperialistic empire which stole our land in an unjust war more than a century ago kill people."
The claim that 90% of the guns used by the cartels came from the US has been discredited, but it is still possible that the knives used in decapitations have come from the USA.
I e-mailed Janet Napolitano and suggested that we could control the flow of guns and knives to Mexico if they would, in exchange, control the flow of Mexicans to the US. I haven't heard back yet, but you gotta have hope.
Gun control is hitting your target.
When was the last time you
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 06:58 ET by eaglewingz08When was the last time you heard Diane Sawyer say, twelve million illegal aliens streamed over the border into the US, where is the urgency in Congress to stench this flow and return them to their countries of origin.
I'm sorry, I don't remember
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 07:02 ET by FranksamI'm sorry, I don't remember the first time.
Haaaaaa! good one.
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 08:20 ET by EugeniaHaaaaaa! good one.
Liberal Pathology
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 09:57 ET by slickwillie2001Yet in spite of all his hooha, I'd wager that if you did a review of gun crimes in New York State you would find that there are existing gun laws that were not used to add to charges against criminals that had used gun in the commission of a crime. When those criminals are charged, the liberals are never in favor of minimum sentencing, or X-strikes laws, or mandatory prison time vs suspended sentence, and always in favor of parole.
Why are liberals slack on enforcing existing laws and sentencing , and prefer to think that simply putting another law on the books will prevent the breaking of the first law? It's because they don't believe in personal responsibility. It's what makes a liberal a liberal. People with AIDS aren't responsible for catching the disease, muslim terrorists aren't responsible for their terrorism, people on welfare aren't responsible for being on welfare, democratics that cheat on their taxes aren't responsible, and murderers aren't responsible for committing their crimes.
What is it in the liberal pathology that makes them like this?
Gun Control won't stop the Spree Killer
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 12:35 ET by allanfA few years back the term "going postal" was coined. Using Diane's logic, perhaps we should have advocated the closing of post offices.
Gun's are a convenient tool for a spree killer. But the assumption that a spree killer cannot kill without access to firearms is a canard. An angry and determined lunatic can rustle up many methods of mass mayhem.
One of the largest mass murders in the United States was the Happy Land incident where 87 people were killed. An incediary device was used.
Prepare for the Worst
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:16 ET by liberal_bug_zapperThis is why I just bought two lowers for AR15/M4 rifles and put a hold on a Springfield XD-45 Compact. I also just laid out 900 dollars on 2000 rounds of .223 ammo. If any of you want to be able to have weapons, you'd better buy now.
FYI: the lower receiver of an AR15/M4 is the only part you have to buy from a gun store, the rest of the parts can be purchased off the Internet directly from the manufacturers websites or from a gun store you trust.
You can buy a whole AR15/M4 if you want, but the one I can build for 900 dollars will be equivalent to a 1600 dollar rifle or almost half price. You can see AR15s for sale for around 800 dollars, but they're usually ones where you cannot remove the carrying handle, and the barrels are not top quality, and you don't have an ambi safety. Every part of the guns I am building are the best plus the lowers I bought are multi lower which means that they can be used on multiple different caliber weapons rather than just one caliber like .223.
As the Fascist Obama continues to be emboldened by our sycophantic press and continues to seize control of more businesses, our economy will continue to collapse. There will be a tipping point when unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid and social security payments overwhelm the system causing it to break. When that happens, you better be prepared because what happens when people start going hungry will not be a pretty sight. My wife and I have been buying 5 cans of food per week ever since Obama was elected, and one bag of vacuum sealed rice once a month. Each bag can last us one month for our little family. We now have six bags of vacuum sealed rice and several hundred cans of food including 30 cans of spam. We believe we have around six months of food that does not need refrigeration and can be quickly transported with us without fear of spoilage. We've got solar charging backpacks and a solar/hand crank radio/flashlight. We're not going to pull a Ruby Ridge kind of hideout, we're just prepared in case the worst happens which I think is becoming more of a possibility each and every day.
____________________________________________________
" A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson quote first printed in Poor Richards Almanac
Diane Sawyer: Stupid on a stick
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 16:52 ET by PeetI never pass up an opportunity to point out this quote:
"You know, I wanted to sit on a jury once and I was taken off the jury.
And the judge said to me, 'Can, you know, can you tell the truth and be
fair?' And I said, 'That's what journalists do.' And everybody in the
courtroom laughed. It was the most hurtful moment I think I've ever had."
- Diane Sawyer, Good Morning America, 7/12/07
There was a message in that "teachable moment" but it went right over her head.
Check it out, Hon; nobody trusts you "news reporters" any more. I'd still laugh in your face.
I wish
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 20:15 ET by UpNorthI had been in the court room, just so I could have fallen out of my chair, rolled on the floor, laughing and crying. Diane, you should remember that moment every waking day of your life, because that's what everyone knows about you and your co-workers, you wouldn't know the truth if it hit you between the eyes with a 2 x 4.
As long as there are
Sun, 04/05/2009 - 15:31 ET by RogerCfromSDAs long as there are restrictions on gun ownership (restrictions which infringe, and therefore, are unconstitutional), there will continue to be massacres.
Duh.
A nation cannot be free without a free, unbiased media. We are not free.
My gun has been sitting in
Mon, 04/06/2009 - 15:07 ET by rbosqueMy gun has been sitting in my drawer and has never walked and killed anyone by itself and I have never had the compunction to blast anyone. If ABC and the rest of the Marxists want my gun, they can come over to my house and try to take it and I guarantee I won't make it easy for them.