Can We Now Admit The "Good Guy With A Gun Offing The Bad Guy" Is A Myth?

Richard Gary Black, shot dead by cops in Aurora, Colorado, in the course of protecting his 11 year old grandson from a crazed lunatic who barged into the family home and took the boy captive.


One of the favorite tropes of the NRA and gun nuts is:  "A good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun."  But a series of recent high profile incidents in which good guys with guns have been blown away by  other "good guys" (cops) puts the lie to this twaddle.   It also verifies once more that in the most realistic situations, i.e.  where good guys with guns face off with bad guys in conditions of chaos, there will be too much confusion to come away unscathed.

One of the most notorious recent incidents involved good guy Emantic Bradford Jr., 21,  at the Riverside Galleria Mall in Hoover, AL,  protecting shoppers on Thanksgiving. Initially, Hoover police identified Bradford as the suspect in the incident which left two people with gunshot wounds. Then they took back that story. A week after the shooting, a suspect was arrested in Georgia.

Let us process that Bradford, who had a concealed carry permit for his weapon, was trying to wave people away from the scene  while alert for the actual murderer, Erron Brown.  The problem is that in any realistic scenario especially involving a crowd, chaos reigns and identities are hard to pin down. In this case the cop that arrived on the scene was unable to differentiate good guy from bad guy - and while Brown escaped (headed to GA) the cop who shot Bradford Jr., took him for the perp.

Conclusion? It's damned dangerous to whip out a weapon to save others in any situation marked by confusion.

 Last week  the Bradford family released the results of an independent autopsy. It showed unequivocally that Bradford Jr was shot in the back and died from a gunshot wound in the head. This would be 'good guy' suffered the ultimate sanction for trying to be a good guy.  What else could he have done? Tried to protect the people and not shown a weapon?  He'd have ended up like most other wannabe good guys trying to do combat with no weapon, shot dead by the perp.

Earlier, as if to accentuate this point, security guard Jemel Roberson was gunned down in cold blood by a cop at a Robbins, IL bar while holding the actual perp (who had engaged in a shooting inside) at gunpoint. While Roberson was ordered to drop his weapon, he himself may not have believed that to be a very wise play given the hostile perp - the actual shooter- was only being prevented from further havoc by his gun - trained on him.

Again, the theme bears repeating: Generally in too many shooting scenes, the degree of confusion - especially in terms of who has weapons and which are real good guys -  neutralizes the ability of the good guy to act uniquely,  without penalty. These situations include the good guy not hearing any cop orders to put down his gun, or cops not identifying themselves in the midst of a dark room, or home.

The last and perhaps most tragic example concerns a decorated, 73-year old Vietnam Vet named, Richard Gary Black - a  white guy (unlike Bradford Jr. and Roberson) shot and killed by an Aurora, CO cop (Drew Limbaugh)  in his own home.  This was while Black  was holding his own weapon on a crazed, meth head intruder (Dajon Harper)  who had burst into his home in the middle of the night and was throttling (and drowning) his 11 -year old son in a bath tub. Gary Black shot the assailant dead, and then the cop -  responding to a 911 call- barged in and shot him dead on the spot.

Aurora police officers heard Black’s gunfire and, as they approached the house, saw Black turn a corner holding a gun and a flashlight. Officers yelled for Black to drop the gun but never identified themselves as police. When Black did not drop his gun, Limbaugh  fired four shots, killing Black. Interestingly,  he'd been involved in a shooting the previous month and had been back on the job for just over two weeks.  One wonders again if Limbaugh had sufficient training to handle the situation, or if he returned to duty too soon.

The scene has been described by Dept, Chief Nick Metz as "violent and chaotic". The intruder Harper had been at a party across the street, and a crowd, which included his mother,  chased him into the Black family home. There was screaming and yelling from the party-goers and the child who was being attacked.

Accounts in The Denver Post in the wake of the incident noted there were up to 11 people in the Black home at the time, it was mostly pitch black, and assorted screaming punctuated the night.  Mr. Black himself was hard of hearing - from war impacts-    and never heard police commands to drop his gun. He was then executed  on the spot.

So much for the vaunted "good guy with a gun".   It sounds good in fiction but in reality doesn't play out because it takes so little account of messy  reality.  That is, in real situations the good guy will often be mistaken for the bad guy when the law arrives on the scene and especially aren't trained to handle such complex shooter situations.

Blogger Kali Holloway has also noted other incidents where putative good guys, mainly educators,  mishandled weapons to their detriment. This is the lot who the NRA and Trump claim can be the main line of defense against school shooters.. As she writes:

"Numerous educators have mishandled guns and shot themselves, often while classes are in session, over the last few years. That includes the Idaho State University chemistry professor who shot himself in the foot, the Utah elementary school teacher who shot herself in the leg and the Long Island University professor (and ex-cop) who also shot himself in the leg. An Atlanta high school teacher intentionally shot himself in the face last year, and since studies show the presence of a gun increases the chances of suicide, that’s something to consider when you start suggesting schools stockpile weapons.

But these teachers will be trained—we’ll just take the money out of children’s health insurance or something, some partisan hack is yelling at this very moment. That will ensure they’ll avoid those kinds of sloppy mistakes! First of all, an NRA employee accidentally shot himself at the group’s headquarters last year, and once you get past the staggering irony of the story, you note that training is no guarantee against mistakes. (Or fear: Recall that four sheriff's deputies cowered in the parking lot as the Parkland shooting went on.) A 2008 Rand Corporation study of New York City police officers found their “average hit rate in situations in which fire was not returned was 30 percent.”

All of which bears consideration the next time you hear someone advocating more "good guys with guns". 

The 2nd Amendment Isn't "A National Suicide Pact" - What Gun-tards Get Wrong

After more than a thousand attended a vigil in Parkland, Florida  last night for those slain by Nicholas Cruz, we have learned the names and hackgrounds of many. So many promising lives taken too young, and many of these same students now tired of hearing the usual "let's pray" platitudes from the likes of GOOPs, Doturd, and Paul "Munster" Ryan.

As one of the students interviewed this morning put it: "No one should ever have to go through this again, ever. This could have been prevented if that kid didn't get that gun" 

But that "never" depends on this nation getting its collective head back into sane gear - starting with its maniacal gun laws. As I noted in a footnote in yesterday's post, a study in the journal Health Affairs concluded that the United States has become “the most dangerous of wealthy nations for a child to be born into.”   According to the Health Affairs study. the homicide rate in this country is 49 times higher than in other rich countries.  It doesn't take a Mensa level IQ to grasp this ratio cannot be solely from the U.S. having more crazies on the loose. It must be another factor, and that other factor points to the sheer volume of military style assault weapons owned and bought each year.  Let's examine this further.

First, in the interest of full and open disclosure let me make it clear I'm no "lily-livered lib" who's scared of guns or rifles (because I served in the Peace Corps). I know how to use them and can fire a rifle with sharpshooter accuracy using only a mechanical, e.g. "bridge" -sighting mechanical mount. 

But my rifles,  for target practice, some hunting, and testing the Warren Commission "jet effect" hokum,  never included the use of AR-15s or other high powered rifles, e.g. like the Bushmaster .223. I believed then, and still do, that a real man doesn't need such fare. You don't need a military assault weapon for "protection"  or for hunting.   These assault weapons - which is what they are, let's not split definitional hairs between "automatics" and "semi-automatics" - are strictly for the purpose of mass killing. As, for example, in a war theater.  No upstanding citizen in these United States "needs" such a weapon.

Now,  I call "Gun -tards" all those - primarily of the Reeptard tribe - who sincerely believe any person in the U.S. is entitled by the 2nd amendment to own any gun or rifle he wants short of a .50 mm anti-aircraft gun.. And, by George, if a state law is passed that asserts you can own such, or buy such, then by god you can damned well do it!  In this regard let us note also that AR-15 style weapons are sold at the rate of 1.5 million a freaking year.  That is one fourth the number of autos sold each year.

Further, as an NBC News report explains, Americans own an estimated 15 million AR-15s. One in five guns sold in the United States is an AR-15-style weapon.

This is freaking insane and I will now proceed to show how the gun nuts who defend this insanity are basically chewing acid (LSD) drops  - that's how deranged and bereft of reason they are.   Let me, for perspective, interject the quote of former ATF agent Jim Cavanagh that: "The second amendment cannot be a national suicide pact or invitation to mass slaughter".  But that is effectively what the NRA gun lobby, the politicians they have in thrall, and gun-tards have made it.

Let's go through the seminal points beginning with whether any 18 year old in any state ought to be able to purchase an AR-15:

1) AR-15 purchase rights:

The gun -tards claim that the fault was in the mental health system (never mind Repukes have basically cut 13 million off Medicaid rolls in need of such help,  by gutting the ACA) not Florida's lax gun laws. These allow any person 18 or over to buy an AR-15. I call horse shit on that baloney for the simple reason - leaving out mental issues - that at the age of 18 the brain is still being formed. Don't take my word, look it up, e.g, Google!  The prefrontal cortex and its judgment centers are still in the process of growth and will be until the age of 22-23. That means any late teen who buys a gun isn't in full possession of his rational or judgmental faculties. (Why do you think so many are engaged in the idiotic "Tide Pod Challenge" or who like racing cars at 90-100 mph?) 

It follows that any state law that would allow such purchase is itself insane, i,e, that law is an ass. It was also likely voted on by ass lawmakers, e.g. NRA slaves who need their money for re-election. Such is the case in FLA.

2) Lax gun laws can't  become the standards for the nation:

This is just a matter of common sense.  It would be roughly analogous to crazy state reg that allows driving at 100 mph in certain cities at night being mandated for every city in the country.  In fact, NO city should be allowing 100 mph driving even at night. In the same way, NO city or state should be allowing the purchase of ownership of a military style assault weapon that unleashed 30 rounds in seconds - unless one is headed to Afghanistan in the military.  As CBS co-host Gayle King phrased it - after watching a video from the anguished mother of one of the Parkland victims, screaming at Trump to do something: "No one should be able to own one of those assault weapons unless he wears a uniform"  Bingo!

Bottom line:  the lax and crazy state gun laws in Florida, cannot and must not be made a standard or desired ideal, for the nation.

3) The stringent state laws ought to be the ones made national:

If the arguments in (1) and (2) are valid, and they are -  unless one is a gun-tard -  then it follows that if any state laws are to be made national they must be from states like Massachusetts - which require not only passing a state -approved gun safety course first, but also being licensed - as one would if getting a car - as well as fingerprinted. (For details see my previous post).  The proof is in the pudding, as the old cliche goes, and we know the rate of gun deaths in Massachusetts is more than 6 times lower than in the lax NRA -- governed state of Florida.

4) If you make mental illness the culprit you lose if you cut funding for health care.

Trump's bloviations yesterday, "we're 'committed to working with our states and schools to tackle the difficult issue of mental health" - intended to soothe angst in Florida and the nation, merely enraged most sentient citizens.  That's because it was pure  PR and deflection, avoiding mention of the assault weapon at the center of the Parkland carnage in favor of empty bromides about "mental health".  Sorry, but you don't get to spout bollocks like this given your party is effectively planning to cut $1 trillion from Medicaid (to help offset revenue loss from the ill advised tax cuts). And those cuts are expected to affect nearly 13 million suffering with addictions and mental health problems like bipolar disorder.

5) The Second Amendment was written as a collective - not individual right.

I've gone through this before but let's do so again for the re-education mainly of the gun-tards who might be reading this.   The Second Amendment to the Constitution states:

"A self-Regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now, one must understand and comprehend the era and period in which this was written. At that time muskets were the primary weapon, and no major organized standing army existed such as we have today. Indeed, the Continental Army of Washington, though it prevailed over the British, had massive war debts to pay off. There was no way to keep thousands of men under arms for sustained periods, as well as clothing and feeding them - far less recycling them with newer equipment each year!

It therefore became necessary to authorize the basis for a non-centralized force or "Militia" in order to supplement any governmentally organized army called up. This "Militia" originated in the countryside, from citizens living across the land in various villages, towns and states. In effect, the 2nd amendment drafters were asserting the necessity for a subsidiary people's army to assist the main one. Citizens then became in effect, necessary to the security of the nation. One could then describe the state militias as "adjunct armies".

Indeed, some interpreters of the amendment believe the original content is really even more diluted than what I portrayed. They see the "well regulated militia" provision as actually devised as protections from any marauding, "loose cannons". These interpreters insist the framers would never in a million years have envisaged people (individuals) possessing permanent private weapons in their own homes.

In  a controversial 1939 case, FDR's Solicitor General framed the argument to the Court:

"The Second Amendment grants people a right that is not one which may be utilized for private purposes but only exists where the arms are borne in a militia or some other military organization provided by law and intended for protection of the State."

The SC decision was unanimous.  This was barely 79 years ago, so what happened in the interim to debase the amendment to be unrecognizable today?

While the Court's decision prevailed for several more decades, it started to unravel by the 1970s as various Right wing extremist groups coalesced to challenge "gun control"  based on spurious private gun ownership  interpretations. By virtue of the infusion of millions of bucks  into state legislative campaigns they successively overturned laws in legislatures - much like the abortion opponents are now doing in many red states.

But then Chief Justice Warren Burger was dissuaded by the gun crazies' arguments, especially that the 2nd amendment granted every man the right to keep and bear arms on his own, responding that this interpretation was "one of the greatest pieces of fraud on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

Alas, as the strength and political power of the NRA metastasized, it was just a matter of time before more and more state legislatures (like in Florida) were bought out and their NRA slaves passed laws contravening Justice Burger's and the earlier 1939 ruling. This is why the only way things will change is to vote out the NRA political slaves, like Rick Scott, and vote in firm gun regulation leaders.

Yes, the gun-tards will scream that this amounts to "taking away citizen rights" but it no more does this than driving laws that prohibit driving on the wrong side of the highway, or driving 100 mph at night takes away driving rights..  We are not "taking away" rights but seeking temperate regulation such as in Massachusetts, e.g. requiring passing gun safety courses, being licensed to purchase ammo or guns, and being fingerprinted with the latter circulated to all state law enforcement centers - as well as a Criminal History Board such as in MA.

This is not too much to demand (say by the parents of the Parkland shooting victims)  given the lives that can be saved, and it's nowhere near as tough as Australia's gun laws - passed after a massacre in 1996 - that required turning in all military style assault weapons.

Conclusion:

What do we derive from the preceding arguments? That the REAL un-Americans (especially the NRA) are those who have twisted the meaning of the 2nd Amendment to their own ends, with the result that the fallout has created a never-ending sea of maimed, crippled and murdered gun victims. None of this will change until we return to the gun control concepts and legislation common 70 or more years ago, and flush the current deviant memes down the toilet of history, Again, gun regulation - especially via licensing, fingerprinting etc. - is NOT taking away rights, neither is outlawing the purchase of military style weapons.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/richard-eskow/77752/a-kingdom-where-nobody-dies

And:

• Mother of slain Parkland teen screams in grief and leaves CNN reporter, congressman speechless

How A Minority Of Gun Extremists Distorts U.S. Crime Rates And Gun Laws

 

"The Founders could no more have conceived of semi-automatic or automatic weapons when they wrote the Second Amendment, than they could have conceived of space ships."  - Steve Schmidt Republican strategist


The horrific Vegas mass shooting again brought to the fore the lax gun laws to which we're all subject. In this case,  how a $200 previously unheard of accessory ("bump stock")  converted two semi-automatic weapons into effective (not "simulated")  automatic ones.  By way of that actual conversion, there were 600 casualties  (59 deaths) or what you'd find in a combat scenario.  In the wake of  that mass murder by a psycho named Stephen Paddock we heard the usual vanilla babble about "thoughts and prayers", but no genuine proposals to halt the madness.

Left unsaid is how this madness is enabled by a minority of mostly white, male conservative gun extremists determined to take the whole nation hostage as the price of their specious perceptions of "freedom".   No surprise then that a relatively tiny group of gun obsessives and "gun liberty" extremists could have been harnessed by the NRA for the purpose of legislative obstruction.. Why? Well, to strike fear into any politicians, any legislators who might want to vote for sane gun regulations.  That includes banning bump stocks, and all semi-automatic weapons by which a conversion (to automatic) can be made.

It's mind boggling that when one learns of the facts concerning gun ownership in the U.S., one's whole outlook changes. It is then possible to see the level of how the larger society is held hostage by a minority. That includes how its social dynamic is distorted in multifold ways, from suicide and homicide rates to the abnormal frequency of mass shootings.  How warped as a society have we become since the 2nd amendment was perverted by a small, loud gun lobby (the NRA) that has our lawmakers' cojones encased in cement?

Let's start out by recitation of some hard facts:

- Super owners are those I call "gun extremists" who own up to 17 guns apiece

- This lot comprise just 3 percent of the whole adult population.

- Nearly HALF of the planet's civilian- owned guns are in the hands of Americans.

Let's parse this further. From the above and doing the relevant math (e.g. U.S. population etc.) 4.2 percent of the world's population owns half the planet's guns. But in fact, this lot comprises 3 percent of the whole U.S. adult population (which is 4.2 % of the world's population) so that nearly half of  the planet's civilian- owned guns are owned by Americans and nearly three fourths of these are "super owners".  Try to process that for a few minutes.

Some further facts:

1- Of the 134 mass shooters who have preyed on Americans since 1966 only 3 were women.

2- Mass shootings are therefore a 98 percent male enterprise.

3- Firearms are used in close to 70 percent of homicides.

4- Super owners are most likely to be white, male and conservative.

Republican gun owners insist that "the right to own guns is essential to their sense of freedom".

But who is fooling whom?  If their "freedom" is dependent on owning or carrying a weapon - presumably for protection - then how free are they really?  It's a delusion. Anyone who absolutely needs a security appendage to secure his or her "freedom" is not truly free. They are victims of a freedom delusion, a fantasy.

Also, do they really need AR-15s, Uzis, and AK-47s for protection?  All through most of the nation's history the standard weapons for protections have been single shot pistols, like revolvers (e.g. .38 special) or at most a .45 automatic or shotgun. NO one in the late fifties or 60s owned anything like the weapons today, nor did they need them for any "protection:" or "freedom".  So what exactly is different today? Do we have space aliens ready to land and invade homes? Why the need for so much firepower? When you think about it, there really isn't any "need" to have such weapons, exceeding what standard gun owners had in the late 50s, early 60s.

Any such "reasons" offered, e.g. "Well, my home might be invaded by a gang of Crips or Bloods" is pure bull pockey.

The excuse of "protection" then falls through the cracks. It's a red herring.  A redirection of argument to a specious basis for which the person can better respond.

What is the real reason then for this subset of white males to own so many guns?   Part of it is frankly to be part of a white man gun culture.  This culture revolves around activities that glorify assorted guns and shooting them. For example, going to gun shows to collect more guns, or taking the family to machine gun shoots, e.g.


Those joining this gun culture and its activities reinforce each others' deformed perceptions that: a) guns are essential for protection, b) guns are key to having a good time, and c) if the choice of guns used for (a) and (b) is removed then one de facto loses his freedom.  Which is obvious bollocks.

The subtext rationale for this minority affinity  can only be the projection of dominance and power - or more bluntly - the projection of WHITE male power through physical domination. Even the most lame lightweight loser "Woody Allen" type - but loaded with racial animus and fear - can access mighty power with an AK -47 against any more muscular black man .  All this weakling whitey has to do is curl his finger against the trigger and pop pop pop ....problem solved.  So, rather than having to go through the time and trouble  to train or body build for physical strength or advantage, the white fatty or the Woody Allen type can simply buy a gun and 'Voila!' -  the ultimate equalizer is available.

What a feeling of unsurpassed power then for the average little fearful whitey to hold a gun and be convinced he has the power of life and death. This then is also the reason so many of these insecure guys feel they have to pack heat when they go out in public, whether to churches or bars or restaurants.

Of course, they will argue back that it's got nada to do with any insecurity or projection of white dominance but rather "freedom". To which I again call bull pockey.   As Shayl my psychologist niece put it the other day: "It's all about securing their freedom from the fear of being confronted by a stronger black man."  Bingo!

Again, to validate this we can return to the hard numbers I displayed earlier, and ask what they mean. In short, they disclose the vast majority of Americans - indeed people across the globe - never need or feel they need a gun for protection.  Indeed, as I posted before, a gun in the house makes a person more vulnerable to deadly violence.

For every time a gun is used in self-defense in a home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts and 4 accidents involving guns in or around the home. Making the last more likely: 43% of homes with both guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.  To see a recent case to do with what I'm referencing here, go to:
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/09/new_jersey_4_year_old_accidentally_shoots_6_year_old_in_head_ap/


Six times more women are shot by husbands, boyfriends and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers. A woman’s chances of being killed by her domestic abuser increase more than 7 times if her home has a gun in it.

The unholy truth is that most shootings are  NOT ideological, terror-based or random but rather domestic (in people's homes) - either suicides or one spouse (usually male) killing the other after a fiery argument.   Assaying all mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, the Huffington Post found that 70 percent occurred in the home. Of these, 57 percent involved a family member or current or former intimate partner. 81 percent of the victims were women and children. These killings were not done by 'crazies'  or Islamic terrorists but usually normal people who simply lost it in the midst of a heated argument and reached for the weapon nearest and dearest - a gun.

Firearms currently claim an average of 93 lives per day in the United States - more than half by suicide.  Guns are responsible for more deaths than vehicle crashes or even terrorism.

Self- defense by using guns? Give me a break! As reported recently in The New England Journal Of Medicine accidental deaths (e.g. a kid shooting another) were 30 percent more common than self protection homicides. In addition, suicides involving firearms were 37 times more common than any self defense scenarios.

It is time, methinks, that we cease allowing three freaking percent of our populace to control the social dynamics of our entire nation. It is high time gun sanity prevail over the gun extremism and obsession of a tiny minority.

Those like Caleb Medley, who suffered a head wound in the Aurora massacre and is still trying to get his shattered life back, would be grateful for any measure that can stop the senseless bloodletting.

Dotard Again Shows He's A Deranged Imbecile Re: Vegas Shooting "Miracle" & Puerto Rico

President Donald Dotard again showed why he's an asshole and deranged nitwit with unscripted comments on the Vegas shooting and Puerto Rico's continuing catastrophe. Let's take the last first given Dotard actually traveled to the island territory of the U.S. earlier today,  This degenerate "piece of trash"- as one Puerto Rican called him - actually insinuated the Puerto Ricans didn't have it "that bad" since "thousands didn't die as in Katrina".  WTF?   What species of asshole is this fruitcake, anyway?  True,  "only seventeen died up to now" , but 3.5 million lives are still up in the air as they scratch for desperately needed resources including fuel, food and clean water.  There is no guarantee up to now that hundreds more may not perish as the failure to deliver essential items continues.

Trump's implication, showing what a dunderhead he is, was that Puerto Ricans ought to be thankful their catastrophe wasn't as bad as Katrina in New Orleans.  Says who? Though the deaths are (so far) fewer the elimination of support systems is just as bad or worse, especially given that Puerto Rico is an island that requires all essentials to enter from outside - air or ship.  In addition, Puerto Rico's needy citizens are scattered over a vastly larger areas - over 1700 square miles - than Greater New Orleans.  Dispatching supplies to the several hundred thousand people of N.O. therefore was vastly easier than getting them to the 3.5 MILLION of Puerto Rico. But evidently Dotard has no conception of the difference at all.

He lacks any inkling of the differences in magnitude between the areas of the respective locations or their populations.  He has no conception that most of Puerto Rico - outside of San Juan and its beaches -  comprises a rugged terrain that in conditions now, is relatively inaccessible (most bridges, roads washed away)  That means extraordinary means must be employed to get supplies to those who need them including patients in hospitals.  What means?  Aircraft carriers based offshore enabling hundreds of choppers to make daily runs into the island's hinterlands.  Nothing short of this will halt the loss of lives - but then it appears Dotard values white lives - like Stephen Paddock's - more  than brown-skinned anyway.

Dotard was actually stupid enough to assert Puerto Ricans "didn't need flashlights any more" despite the fact 90 percent still don't have any power.   His tossing of paper towels to a crowd in a hall was demeaning and reflected what a vicious piece of crap he really is, as Gen. Russell Honore also noted. The claim about denting the budget was also cruel and imbecilic, given Puerto Rico is every bit as American as Houston, Texas or Miami, Florida.

Then there was his daft, clueless remark on the Las Vegas massacre that took out 59 people and injured 527 - many saddled with neurological (head) injuries as bad as the one that affected Gabby Giffords. People who will now need to commit to years, decades of therapy and rehabilitation to become mobile - assuming they are able - or regain their speech.

 Dotard said Tuesday that the quick response of law enforcement during the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history was “in many ways, a miracle.”. His full remarks, said as he departed the White House for a trip to Puerto Rico on Tuesday morning. were:

“Look, we have a tragedy. What happened is, in many ways, a miracle.  The police department, they’ve done such an incredible job. And we’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes on. But I do have to say, how quickly the police department was able to get in was really very much of a miracle. They’ve done an amazing job.”


No, Dotard Dummy, it was law enforcement doing its job - which still required precious time to triangulate positions to identify where the shooter was. This entailed technology and expertise not any "miracle".   Miracles are proclaimed for alleged supernatural events, and would have been the case if the suddenly mortally wounded had gotten up and walked away. They didn't.

Triangulating an active shooter position, by contrast, is no miracle, it's a process that has been developed over many decades by law enforcement. It enabled the SWAT team to eventually get to the shooter's room, but by then over fifty lay dead or dying and hundreds wounded - many seriously. That was NO miracle. But again, the depths of Dotard's ignorance knows no bounds so he can't process the difference.  To him, not having ten thousand killed - out of the 22,000 - was a "miracle", like only 17 killed in Puerto Rico (so far) dead, was a "miracle" compared to Katrina's toll. The man is a blatant idiot.

 In the Vegas massacre, it was late Sunday when Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old retiree who lives in the area, opened fire on an outdoor country music festival from the windows of a 32nd-floor hotel suite at the Mandalay Bay. For perhaps as long as 11 minutes, bullets rained down on the concertgoers and the panicked crowd rushed to escape. As Paddock fired round after round, gun smoke filled the hotel suite and set off a fire alarm, allowing a SWAT team to zero in on Paddock’s position in about 20 minutes. As officers closed in, Paddock killed himself.

The most  damnable aspect?  Despite the historic number of people killed, Trump has repeatedly stressed that the shooting could have been even worse. Well, if the NRA and Dotard's Repuke cronies had their way in passing a law allowing silencers, he's correct.

The National Rifle Association thinks Congress owes them more armor-piercing rounds and gun silencers on the streets, and most Republicans have shown they’re happy to do what they’re told, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) told Politico earlier this month. “I’ve been here since 2003, and passing these bills in the name of ‘helping sportsmen’ is one of the most cynical excuses I’ve ever heard.”

Silencers mounted on Paddock's assorted weapons, which we now know were equipped with bump firing stocks to fire faster (using the recoil capacity to shoot hundreds of rounds per minute) would have likely claimed twice as many lives.  The reason is no one would have known where the shots originated from until many more had been shot.  So perhaps Dotard has contemplated signing into law the NRA- pushed provision to allow silencers on automatic weapons .

THAT would confer some basic "sense" on his comment: He'd know that had he signed a bill allowing silencers into law then yes, what actually transpired  Sunday night in Vegas would have been a comparative  "miracle" since the silencers would have killed more than twice as many, and probably injured thousands.

Thanks for telegraphing your intent, Dotard, you malicious freak bastard.  As one of the Puerto Ricans put it who was asked by a reporter what she thought of your arrival,  you ARE a pierce of trash. Toxic trash.

In the words of Gen.  Russell Honore (Ret.) who oversaw the rebuilding of N.O. after Katrina:

"The mayor (of San Juan) is living on a cot and I hope the president has a good day at golf."

In a CNN interview Gen. Honore was even more blunt:

"You don't give a damn about poor people. You don't give a damn about people of color. And the S.O.B. that rides around in Air Force One is denying services needed by the people of Puerto Rico".

My sentiments exactly, General, especially the S.O.B. part!  And let's bear in mind who the S.O.B. is pandering to.

The Vegas Mass Shooting - Done By "Old Man Psycho" or ISIS Stooge?

A searing question arises once more after the Las Vegas massacre last night: How much longer are our legislators going to allow the rogues in the NRA to keep their balls under lock and key? Preventing them from passing effective laws to halt the string of mass shootings piling up dead bodies?

The same ritualized responses are heard once again to "offer thoughts and prayers" to the victims when this has never worked before. Thoughts and prayers, even offered a million times, don't make a dime's worth of difference until gun laws are changed. What will it take? Will it take a mass shooter armed with automatic weapons going into a nursery and slaughtering 100 infants? According to wifey, not even that will alter the laws because too many people are brainwashed by the NRA and puppet politicos into believing "guns don't kill people, people kill people".

The problem as I've written before is that guns (especially automatic and semi-automatic weapons) make it too easy to slaughter, as the 22,000 gathered for a country music festival learned not far from the Mandalay Bay Sunday night.  No guy armed only with ten bags of knives could have killed 59 people and wounded more than 500 using only knives. It would have been too difficult to do and he'd have been brought down long before he could finish the job.

Compare that to the case of  64 year old Steven Paddock  on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel - with the full benefit of altitude, hundreds of feet from the scene- firing at will into a mass of people below and using automatic weapons.   Oh, and doing it from two open windows in his double-room suite (which he had to smash out beforehand).

What set this lunatic off we may never know. But let us first dismiss two fake news stories that have been circulating on Facebook, and social media:

1- The guy was an "Isis soldier" who recently converted to Islam and was trained online by the ISIS website.

This is total horse manure, and has already been discounted by FBI terror specialists.  The guy doesn't fit any profile for ISIS mind slaves - namely being a young, clueless loser and loner, searching for "meaning" and a "cause".  This is merely a ploy by the vermin to claim credit for a slaughter with which they had nothing to do.

2- Paddock was a liberal who "lost it" and sought vengeance on country music -loving Trumpies.

Again, total BS. No "liberal" worth the name would commit such a vile deed, mainly because liberals are not gun nuts. (The guy had a total of 23 weapons he carried in via ten bags in ten separate trips. He also had 19 other weapons found in his Mesquite, NV home.)

My psychologist niece Shayl probably has offered the most logical explanation of what drove Paddock to commit his vile deed. Her summation? He was an "old man psycho".

Granted, at 64 years of age one is generally not considered "old", it is more middle age. After all, to hear some of the ads, "60 is the new 40". But age - as Shayl points out- is not merely measured chronologically.  There are actually tests available - many even online - that give your psychological age. You may therefore be forty years old but your attitudes, outlook on life, translate into making you the equivalent of 70 or 80.  You have less tolerance, less patience, exhibit less resilience at setbacks, and carry grievances and grudges much longer. To the extent you live an isolated life all the preceding are exacerbated.

We know from all accounts given by his neighbors in Mesquite, NV thus far, that Paddock was described as "standoffish" and "keeping to himself" .  This already sends up red flags, according to Shayl, that he has a very limited social group and is almost entirely isolated. These conditions are almost tailor- made to breed an elder psychotic - and that's before even factoring in the genetic aspect that his father (Benjamin Paddock) was on the FBI most wanted list in the 1960s and was diagnosed as "psychotic". (As the authors of 'Nature's Thumbprint' point out, psychological traits are as likely to be inherited as physical ones.)

According to Shayl, the combination of factors made it almost 100 percent certain that Paddock "went psycho".   What about piling up gambling debts, as some have conjectured? (We know the guy loved video poker and described himself as a "professional gambler".)   Shayl agrees it is conceivable but far more likely that Paddock went all out on a gambling binge before doing the shooting, reasoning that whatever video poker or other debts amassed would never be paid off.  Well, it ought to be easy enough to check that hypothesis, given there are hundreds of CCTV cameras at every casino.)

Maybe the sadder aspect, much more than Paddock's psychological issues, is that Vegas is still planning to have a series of gun shows starting on Nov. 25th. Then, nearly one every month thereafter Wouldn't it be better - in the memory of those killed - to call off all these shows at least for a year?

Wouldn't it also be better, in the memory of those 59 murdered Vegas victims, to finally pass gun regulation laws like Australia did a few years ago - after another hideous massacre?

Those behind Sandy Hook Promise are absolutely right, we need rigorous new gun laws not more "thoughts and prayers".  The latter are cheap to offer when the NRA forms a powerful lobby that doesn't hesitate to put a pol's name on its "enemies" list.  It is time to let the NRA know that laws are not hostage to special interests- especially a group that offers a raft of semi-automatic weapons as part of a "sweepstakes" to join.  (See my earlier blog post, last month, on this.)

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/kali-holloway/75503/gop-congress-appears-hell-bent-on-making-mass-shootings-even-deadlier