Online Ammunition Sales Highlighted by Aurora Shootings. ⇒
24 July 2012, early afternoon
Stop: whatever you do don’t ban the guns! You don’t want to make criminals work for their weapons, and you don’t want to inconvenience people who need assault rifles in their day to day lives.
This is a post from my link log: If you click the title of this post you will be taken the web page I am discussing.
Up until the moment James Holmes opened fire, he wasn’t a criminal. He took months to plan. No amount of inconveniene would have stopped him. If you’d banned guns entirely, he’d have used explosives – as witnessed by the fact that he loaded his apartment with them. People keep acting as though there is a potential gun law that would have kept a crazy person bent on mass murder from committing mass murder.
by Ben on July 25 2012, 12:56 pm #
Like I said, why make the process easier? If access to this stuff was harder it would also be easier to monitor who has a house full of ammo, presumably.
Also, like I said, why does a “not a criminal” need an assault rifle?
by ramanan on July 25 2012, 10:51 pm #
Given that the mandatory orientation meeting at a local shooting range was enough to stop him from further pursuing membership, I think it is clear he was affected by inconvenience.
It is really interesting that jaywalking is illegal, but buying an assault rifle is not.
by rishi on July 27 2012, 7:48 am #
I’ll write more later but listening to you guys talk about it is as painful as listening to Ted Stevens talks about the Internet.
He did NOT use an assault rifle. He used a civilian AR-15. It was NOT fully automatic. Fully automatic weapons are STRICTLY licensed and hard to acquire in the US. You have to pass a background check, spend MONTHS awaiting ATF approval, establish a trust, and they cost $12,000+. Oh, and they are twenty five years old because they aren’t manufactured anymore for civilians.
He used a rifle that HAPPENS to be black, which scares people, but which uses a round so underpowered it isn’t even legal to hunt deer with it in most states. If he had gone in there with a box fed .308 hunting rifle, he’d have done WAY more damage, wouldn’t have likely had a spree-ending malfunction, and you’d all be dumbfounded because the gun was wood and metal instead of plastic and metal.
Seriously, listening to people who don’t know about actual firearms is as painful as listening to old people talk about how computers work. It’s painful to know that people who don’t know the basics can write laws restricting their use.
The 2nd Amendment grants Americans the right to bear arms. Plain and simple. “shall not be infringed”. We believe in that here. And it’s not to hunt. It’s so that the people can never be at the mercy of their government. See: Syria.
Ammunition is purchased in bulk because of economies of scale. It’s perfectly normal for someone who goes to the range regularly to go through 1000 rounds a month. That’s expensive. Buying in bulk, the same as with any other commodity, is more cost effective. That’s why we do it. And there’s nothing criminal about it.
The simple fact is that short of deep psychological evaluations for all citizens before acknowledging their constitutional rights, this guy would’ve been able to do this. That’s the price of living in a free society.
by Ben on July 27 2012, 5:05 pm #
memo to ben: you are already at the mercy of the govt, regardless of how many guns you have. the govt has nukes and tanks and weapons you couldn’t own, afford or house.
by m on July 30 2012, 5:52 am #
The fact this person wasn’t killing people with anti-tank rounds—because those are illegal, obviously—doesn’t seem like an accomplishment.
I’m also quite sure that more guns wouldn’t have helped the citizens of Syria out. Well, maybe if they were buying anti-tank rounds in bulk.
Anyway, if shooting your fellow citizens is an important part of the fabric of your country I don’t know what I can really say about that. I would point out that despite the large number of guns in the hands of civilians, I still hear lots of stories about violent government crackdowns of protests and botched police raids. America has the highest incarceration rate in the world. But hey, at least you aren’t being “tyrannized”.
by Ramanan on July 30 2012, 2:02 pm #
Hey, It’s Ben! Or is this some other Ben?! You haven’t commented in here for so long (that or I’ve stopped reading comments on Ramanan’s site for the most part). Nice to “hear” from you. I’m being serious. Your comments are always entertaining to read.
by sh!ma on July 30 2012, 3:04 pm #
Of course it’s the same Ben. I delete comments from all the other Bens. They should have showed up earlier.
by Ramanan on July 30 2012, 7:27 pm #
I’m too busy laughing at the last two comments to say anything further about guns. Hi Shima! Mythili is lovely and I’ve been following whatever Ram posts of you guys, despite my quietness.
As far as incarceration, we have a major systemic issue surrounding our “war” on drugs. It is hugely detrimental to young black men here, and as a result, to black and urban families, in a ridiculous cycle that perpetuates and will continue to perpetuate itself until this country pulls its head out of its ass on the drug issue. Gun violence in urban settings is a symptom of the disease that is the war on drugs here.
Don’t get me started, Ram. This country is full of stupid policies. I just happen to believe very strongly in our entire Bill of Rights.
by Ben on July 30 2012, 11:09 pm #
I’ve had enough of the gun religion:
by Ramanan on July 31 2012, 8:59 am #
The Bill of Rights as intended by the Founding Father is anachronistic – how can you believe in unalienable rights and equality of all men, but support slavery?
With respect to the Second Amendment, multiple interpretations of its purpose are possible.
1) A civilian militia armed by private weapons in lieu of a standing army.
The US has the best-funded and most powerful military in the World, so there’s little armed citizens can do to augment it (particularly with rifles and handguns).
2) Self-protection: The 18th and 19th centuries are much different than now. Most of the population lives in urban or suburban areas, where they can use a cellphone to call the police, who will respond in minutes. Likewise, they don’t have livestock that need protecting from wolves and coyotes. Certainly, being scalped by “savages” or fighting at the Alamo is unlikely.
Even if a gun is needed for protection, what kind? Probably a handgun or rifle. Maybe a shotgun. But likely not a semi-automatic weapon with a large magazine.
3) Recreation: Hunting and target shooting are activities enjoyed by many people, but to do these, you don’t need a semi-automatic weapon.
4) Overthrowing the government: Surely, the authors of the Constitution didn’t anticipate creating such a horrible system that the people would need weapons to undo the government? Moreover, if this was an intent, wouldn’t the phrasing of the US constitution call out “good governance” like the Canadian one? Furthermore, wouldn’t peaceful checks and balances (recall votes, petitioning for direct democracy through referendums, etc.) be better avenues and wouldn’t the Founding Fathers have given more guidance before implying rebellion? The Founding Fathers were very sloppy here. Lastly, like (1), this would also require arms better than a semi-automatic gun.
So which of the above cases requires a semi-automatic gun with large magazines? It’s too much for (2) and (3) and too little for (1) and (4). Moreover, given events like Aurora (and Columbine and other massacres) as well as the numerous gun victims like Trayvon Martin as well as the many individuals killed (or wounded) via accidents and suicides, does the current system appropriately balance the benefits and risks? Is there adequate regulations to limit the risks? Is the unalienable right to life sufficiently protected?
I’m not saying ban all guns, but when owning, driving, and insuring a car has more oversight than something explicitly designed to kill, something is out of balance.
by Ryan on July 31 2012, 10:27 pm #
Armored and Dangerous
by ramanan on August 1 2012, 4:58 pm #