That’s just a fact that liberals have to accept. Just like we will never get rid of the Electoral College. There will be much flailing of hands and demands for action when things go bad (mass shootings, Democrats winning the popular vote and having to watch their opposition be sworn in) and yet nothing will ever be done to change the problem, and the cause for the consternation will eventually slip away into the news cycle.
The people in Vegas have suffered terribly, just as the parents of the slaughtered school children in Sandy Hook did. And the students and parents of Columbine High School, and all the way back to the victims and relatives of the first lone wolf shooter in New Jersey, in 1949, who shot thirteen people dead and wounded three more. The fact is that between mass shootings, individual shootings, and suicides, more Americans have died than all Americans in every war that we have fought combined.
And it’s not going to change, because politicians are too afraid of the NRA to stand up to them. Either you have to swear that you’re not coming after people’s guns, as Clinton did, or you have to waver or flip flop on your stand, as Trump did. (He used to call for assault rifle bans and praised Obama’s attempts to introduce gun control after Newtown, CT; both positions went away when he ran for president.).
Making life easier for shooters, that they can do, which is why they are currently working to allow silencers. Because they’re so worried about shooters’ hearing. My attitude is simple: let them lose their hearing. They’re deaf to complaints anyway, so what use is hearing to them?
Nancy Pelosi even wasted her time sending a letter to Paul Ryan asking for, at minimum, a bi-partisan committee be formed to investigate what would be done to curb gun violence. Ryan’s response was that there was no need to institute laws about gun control as, say, Australia had done, which caused their mass gun slaughter incidents to drop to zero and cut in half all other gun violence. Instead Ryan insists that we must focus on mental health care…which I would believe actually meant something if he hadn’t been trying to do away with the ACA for seven years so no one could have money for seeing a psychiatrist.
Unfortunately I’ve resigned myself to the fact that gun legislation will never change as long as politicians remain afraid of the NRA. Not ever. Not as long as politicians and conservative news pundits declare that a mass shooting is not the time to discuss it, even though that’s a stipulation never made in association with any other disaster or attempted murder. One guy unsuccessfully tried to sneak a bomb through the TSA in his shoes and immediately we all had to take our shoes off going through the airport. No one said, “This isn’t the time to talk about shoe bombs” without presenting a time it would be. But as long as the NRA is around there will never be a time to discuss guns.
I would love to be wrong about that, but I’m pretty sure I’m not.
PAD
• 
Absolutely. If they were at all honest, they’d be willing to consider the ultimatum:
“Okay, if you say that mental health is the issue, then provide for full universal health care including psychiatric. If not, then you admit that guns are the problem, so let’s pass a full Constitutional Amendment that does unto the Second Amendment (which long ago outlived its original purpose as stated within its own text as well as the debates by the Framers) as the Twenty-First did unto the Eighteenth (Prohibition). Full. Repeal.
“Full universal health care coverage including psychiatric, or full repeal of the Second Amendment by a new Amendment. You must choose one or the other. Pick one.”
The NRA doesn’t exist. It hasn’t since their 1977 Convention in Cincinnati, when hardliner Harlan Buford Carter (who’d previously headed up then then-relatively-new NRA-ILA [Institutes for Legislative Action], the NRA’s first venture into outright lobbying, originally with the intent of passing common-sense gun control, but which Carter had already corrupted and turned into lobbying on behalf of the firearms industry) a
Thing is, I would have said the exact same thing about cigarettes 30 years ago. The tobacco lobby was as powerful as the NRA for many many years. And yet, enough people were being harmed that things changed to the point where cigarettes could no longer advertise, and then you couldn’t smoke inside as much, and now it’s dámņ near impossible to smoke anywhere indoors at all. And that despite a powerful lobby pushing Congress to leave them alone.
So it CAN happen. WILL it happen? I dunno, since Sandy Hook proved that the one thing Americans fetishize more than their children is their guns. Sigh.
—KRAD
Several people have brought up cigarette smokers. Here’s the problem: no one is afraid of cigarette smokers. No one is worried that outraged smokers are going to stick their cigarette butts into their face. On the other hand, the NRA represents plenty of people who we’re all afraid will start shooting if things don’t go their way. Not all gun owners, but really, it only took one to kill five dozen people in Vegas a few days ago.
.
PAD
I was an assistant DA in Brooklyn during the Crack Crisis in the early 90’s. We had running gun battles on the streets of Brooklyn. Kings County Hospital even had gunshot ward. Illegal guns were flooding NY from down south where the laws are much, much looser. People died, both criminals and more often innocent bystanders. Nothing was done. It only slowed when the crack crisis burned out. The NRA has Republican politicians crouching in terror. They are more worried about getting re-elected then the horror of a life cut short.
I’m going to be one of those people. I’m going to say something as an absolute blanket statement because, if the election of Donald Trump taught me nothing else, I’ve been long overestimating the intelligence of the majority of the conservative voter base and politically active conservative base out there.
.
We will never have a meaningful and/or productive discussion about gun control in this country because that same base is simply too stupid and intellectually dishonest to have such a conversation with. But since they’re the ones that are needed as the other half of the discussion, that presents a bit of a problem.
.
Or they’re people like Caleb Keeter. They’re fine with other people dying. They’re more than happy to watch people’s bodies carried out under blood covered sheets and still regurgitate nonsense about their cold dead hands. They’re thrilled to go on Fox News and burble on about how it’s they’re right to that own things are not there for hunting, not there for home defense, not there for recreational shooting, but rather there to make it easier to kill large amounts of people as quickly, easily, and indiscriminately as possible.
.
Until it happens to them that is.
.
Unfortunately, we can’t count on it happening to every one of them, and wishing it would is both foolish and cruel.
Yeah – but then they’re dead, and dead people don’t vote.
It’s like a fried was saying recently – he wasn’t sure if he could collect on his burial insurance.
I said “Of course you can’t – somebody wiil but not you>”
I’d argue in favor for a ban on automatic and semi-automatic firearms. The sole purpose of these weapons is to spray massive amounts of bullets in a disturbingly short time. They’re not used for target practice. They’re not used for hunting (unless the goal is to shred the animal). And the Las Vegas shooting showed what just one person can do with these guns.
I’d say they’re less “afraid” and more, as Keith Laumer’s Retief once said
Dammit.
Pressed “Send” before i finished.
What else i was going to add is “They’re aware of who pays their real salaries.”
Peter, maybe you should read Reuters. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CA0X6
I’m quite tired of constant attempts to paint all conservatives as heartless, evil people. We see the same problems but have different ideas on solutions. It’s wrong to suggest conservative are happy about Las Vegas, or that we’re heartless because we want to change the ACA. Yeah, I have insurance but there are fewer doctors where I live than there were pre-ACA. Insurance is worthless if you can’t get care. Taking an entire day off work to drive 1-3 hours for basic care & labwork isn’t sustainable.
I have an even better idea. Why don’t you actually read what I posted and find where I said “all conservatives are heartless, evil people.” Go on. Take a look. I’ll wait.
.
Done? Notice I never said that? Not anything like it? Good.
.
I swear, I am so sick of conservatives painting themselves as victims. There’s a war on guns and the liberals want to take them all! No, we don’t. There’s a war on Christmas! No, there isn’t. There’s a war on religion! No, there’s not.
.
I’m aware of polls and statistics. I’m aware that a majority of gun owners actually favor a number of the things that liberals do when it comes to gun regulations, and that it is squarely the NRA and their hold on politicians that prevents anything being done. School children are getting slaughtered, music lovers are being blown away, and what happens? I complain about the NRA and the result hurts your feelings, and your response is to “repeat” things that I didn’t say and attack those.
.
It’s an old saying, but it’s true: if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. The only difficulty with that here is that I’m saying there is no solution because of the NRA, its grip on politicians, and conservative pundits who keep declaring that mass slaughter is not the time to talk about gun control, because to them there is no time to talk about it. You want to transform that into the idea that I’m slamming all conservatives? Go ahead. It’s not what I said, but if it feeds into the victim complex that many conservatives embrace, feel free.
.
PAD
Except… that is just The Free Market at work. Something constantly touted as the “Conservative” solution. The number of doctors and hospitals has been dropping since the 80s, as HMOs take over and consolidate.
.
The simple fact is that, like airports and the Internet, some places don’t “deserve” health care because of population density. While I live in walking distance of not only a hospital, but three Urgent Care Centers, and uncountable medical service franchises, because it is profitable if not practical.
.
As long as The Market decides – be it on Guns or Butter – then there will always be winners and losers. “Everyone wins” is an unsteady state that must constantly be strived for.
Erin wrote “Taking an entire day off work to drive 1-3 hours for basic care & labwork isn’t sustainable.”
So, maybe you “conservatives” will back the hëll off women who find themselves faced with an unwanted pregnancy but find themselves facing a MINIMUM of “1-3 hours” just to find an abortion provider and then, in many MANY states, also face up to 72 HOURS before they can actually HAVE the abortion. Just think how much fun it must be to need an entire WEEKEND (at the very least) just to get an abortion (a medical procedure that the Supreme Court ruled was LEGAL).
I’ve literally got no time for “conservatives” like you. You whine about taking time off from your job. What? Your employer doesn’t provide with paid sick leave? Maybe you’re focusing on the wrong dámņëd thing, Erin.
As I’ve stated elsewhere, though I personally agree with the analogy, the reason for the difference is we don’t have a “right” to wear shoes, it’s a “privilege”. 🙂
Minor point – gun control “discussion” is happening all the time.
.
Gun control legislation is what’s never gonna happen
.
==========
.
Someone on Georgia Public Radio (i forget whether it was a local or national commentator) pointed out that, after almost every well-publicised mass shooting there has, historically, been gun legislation in many States – designed to make it easier to get guns to protect ourselves.
.
From the people who already have guns.
.
Who have them because it was fairly easy to get guns.
.
To protect ourselves from …
The mental health dodge is frustrating because it assumes the shooter *is* mentally ill (a psychological and legal distinction that a politician isn’t qualified to make within a day of a mass shooting).
Our prison system is *filled* with psychopathic killers who are perfectly sane — just evil and twisted. Prior to committing a crime, there’d be no reason they couldn’t pass a background check. Do you think if O.J. had wanted to arm up back in 1994, he would have been prevented by our gun laws? (I don’t think he was ever *convicted* of domestic abuse previously)
It just seems appallingly laughable to me that politicians suggest basically curing evil and psychosis as more practical routes than limiting access to weapons designed solely to kill — both efficiently and in mass numbers. And where are the “Originalists” on the Constitution when it comes to the 2nd Amendment, which clearly doesn’t cover weapons that were more than a hundred years away when the document was written. No mass shooting could have been conducted with 18th century weapons. Frankly, equating a musket to a modern assault rifle is like saying the Enterprise and the Jolly Roger are roughly the same because they are both “ships.”
We are told the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Are you telling me that at a country music event in Nevada no one had guns and returned fire? I haven’t seen anything on this, and I’m genuinely curious.
Nothing man-portable and that wouldn’t instantly get you stopped by the first cop who saw you carrying it would have done a bit of good from down on the ground against a gunman on the 32nd floor.
Did you see the cell phone video of the shooting? The camera was pointed at Mandalay Bay, you can hear the gun fire, but even knowing where it was coming from after the fact, you couldn’t see that it was coming from hundreds of yards away and several hundred feet up….
…and, of course, he had the advantage that he didn’t need to aim at a target – he was simply firing into the brown.
.
I don’t know how much area the crowd covered, but i know that it was so dense that any shot that went into the area was going to hit SOMEONE – if he was using military hardball ammo, quite probably SEVERAL someones.
.
But, even if you knew precisely what window he was firing from, hitting him shooting from the ground at that range and angle, even for a trained marksman with a highly accurate rifle would have been problematic.
.
The best you could have realistically hoped for would be suppressing fire – making him keep his head down so he couldn’t shoot anyone else till the SWAT team got to him.
.
Now, an RPG or other rocket-propelled ordnance might have done the job – but see my first reply to Tom.
“Are you telling me that at a country music event in Nevada no one had guns”
.
I don’t recall which it was, but one of the performers said several people in his crew/band/whatever had guns but wouldn’t bring them out because they knew all it would do was make the cops think they were the bad guys.
.
Yet another nail in the coffin of the idea that “good guys” with guns solve all our problems.
I think the worst part is, gun control has happened… and worked.
In all honesty, certain type of guns have been band, most notably the Tommy Gun. It was actually an effective tool in fighting crime. criminals could still get them, but wouldn’t risk going to jail.
Liberals say they “don’t want to return to the Old west” or that we are “stuck in the old west.”
In reality the Old west had strict (for the time) gun laws, and low gun crime… even for the era. And these were guns that were functional as tools for the time.
The NRA even started out pushing gun laws and restriction… until they morphed into their current state. I believe it was the 70s. Maybe the 60s.
And don’t take my word for it. look it up. All public knowledge.
And of course most NRA members support common sense gun laws, according to polls. I believe the lowest was 75%.
But I disagree. I think it WILL happen. it will just be after something (somehow) worse happens.
You said it perfectly, it wont happen as long as politicians are afraid of the NRA. The day will come when the people (including NRA donors, I know a few who feel this way) rise up and become scarier at the ballots.
Like I said though, it will be a said roadto that point.
I would just recommend people actually look into the history of gun control in the US. it has existed, there are precedents. Banning ALL gun: Unconstitutional. Saying limits on numbers, qualifying what is reasonable, and creating “no gun areas”; Historical FACT with over 150 years of tradition.
Let’s just hope we don’t get too numb in the mean time.
P.S., on a happier note, your Captain Marvel run is amazin. I know it is over a decade late. Still.