Friday, July 29, 2011

U.S. Gun Regulation & the Norway Terrorist Massacre

11 comments:

  1. Sickening that McCarthy would use those dead children to push her political nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm sure you'd like to spin it that way FWM, spin it until you get so dizzy you puke.

    McCarthy is striving to make sure there are fewer children who are killed by firearms in this country, and that we don't contribute to those deaths in other countries.

    So, this is another instance where the Breivik bought equipment here, that he could't get there because of their more stringent gun laws.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So banning something here that shares the same technology as a PEZ candy dispenser would have saved those children in Oslo?

    Get real.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If we are going to sell expanded capacity magazines to Norway which only work with PEZ candy, then I have no problems with that.

    When you sell something which, unlike PEZ candy, fires deadly projectiles, the similarity to a PEZ dispenser is so very different as to make this analogy ludicrous.

    If this typifies your thinking, then clearly when you cross the road, it resembles the 'why did the chicken cross the road' jokes.

    Because, using what passes for logic with you, they're the same.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "When you sell something which, unlike PEZ candy, fires deadly projectiles, the similarity to a PEZ dispenser is so very different as to make this analogy ludicrous."

    A magazine, much like a PEZ dispenser, doesn't fire any deadly projectiles. They are both just a box with a spring in them--not exactly a leap of technology between the two. Not exactly "ludicrous" at all.

    However, all that aside. So what if the killer had 5 round or 10 round or 30 round magazines? What difference would it make? He had more than sufficient time to reload as often as he wished.

    The police took over an hour to respond. He shot until he knew it was time to surrender. Banning a standard capacity magazine for a Ruger Mini-14 in the United States would not have saved one child in Oslo. However, a faster response by the local police would have. If they would have arrived sooner, the nut would have surrendered sooner.

    Using this tragedy to push a ban on bronze-age technology is the ludicrous part. McCarthy is a hag that would crawl over any corpse to push her political agenda--a magazine ban is just politics, nothing more.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is illegal for an out of state seller to sell me one of these magazine, so I am pretty the law was broken in this case as well.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "We’re sending a death warrant to other parts of the world."

    Much like the death warrant gun owners have sent HR 308.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The large-capacity magazine argument was better represented by Loughner than this Norwegian nut. But, you know how I feel about it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Having to stop and reload could have allowed more kids to escape this guy. It is, along with banning guns which would have executed kids more efficiently, one more technology that contributed to those deaths.

    If it did not help him to kill people better, faster, etc., why do you think this guy bothered with it, since he was quite clear about being frugal in expending his limited funds on, if you'll pardon the expression, quite literally the biggest bang for his buck/euro?

    Arguing that the technology has something in common with a candy device is the same thing as saying if you get struck by a car in a hit and run it's a joke, it's funny, nothing serious, regardless of your injuries; because it resembles 'why did the chicken cross the road' humor.

    The two situations are significantly different, just like the pez dispenser and the expanded capacity magazine.

    The similarity is superficial and specious for purposes of argument, or comparison / contrast.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Arguing that the technology has something in common with a candy device is the same thing as saying if you get struck by a car in a hit and run it's a joke, it's funny, nothing serious, regardless of your injuries; because it resembles 'why did the chicken cross the road' humor.

    The two situations are significantly different, just like the pez dispenser and the expanded capacity magazine."


    No. A magazine and a PEZ dispenser are not technologically different at all. They are both a box with a spring with a follower made to hold and dispense a small object one at a time.

    Why do you think your favorite gun control countries in Europe along with Australia and New Zealand and probably others do not worry about accessories like magazines, adjustable stocks, "shoulder things that go up" or even silencers? They know that controlling the guns is the goal and if they do that they do not worry about a box with a spring in it.

    While MikeB would be happy to support any gun control initiative, even he will tell you that banning a box with a spring in it is not an answer to gun violence.

    Such a ban has never proven to be a deterrent or have any significant impact on curbing gun violence.

    Now, if you want to use a car analogy, then banning a 6 passenger minivan over a 5 passenger model because one more person could possibly get hurt if it was mis used would be a better comparative of your silly box-with-a-spring ban.

    ReplyDelete
  11. So, this is another instance where the Breivik bought equipment here, that he could't get there because of their more stringent gun laws.

    Actually that is not true, he bought a couple of magazines for the rifle because they are cheaper. He bought the guns and everything else in Norway. Otherwise, a Norwegian customs agent needs to be called on the carpet. Here is a question. I have a early 1980s German made pistol (the shooter's pistol was Austrian). I bought two spare magazines for it from a supplier in Canada. Is Canada responsible for anything I do? It is the same logic.

    ReplyDelete