Pajamas Media

52 Comments

1. Byron Dickens:

hmmm……

Maybe banning the news media would cut down on the number of mass media.

Apr 24, 2009 - 5:08 am 2. Byron Dickens:

Oops! Murders, I mean mass murders.

Apr 24, 2009 - 5:09 am 3. RV:

Gun control will have little effect on mass murderers. On the other side of the coin, concealed carry permits will have little effect on mass murderers. Until we can correct for genetic alterations, mass murderers will always exist, will always have access to tools with which to committ their deeds, and will always have the element of suprise on their side, making stopping them impossible until after they do what they do.

Apr 24, 2009 - 6:23 am 4. John Doe:

Which is more dangerous setting upon the table: car keys, a pack of matches, a gun?

If the premise be true that media coverage is a driving factor, perhaps the media should cover the amount of abortions done daily in this country.

Then again, an abortion physician is more deadly to life than the nut-jobs that are committing murder with guns.

The right to carry concealed may or may not help prevent some fraction of this type crime. However, if the crime is going down near me I’d prefer to be armed.

Apr 24, 2009 - 6:49 am 5. e:

3. RV: Until we can correct for genetic alterations, mass murderers will always exist…

Be careful what you suggest. Eugenics is a dangerous idea because genetic makeup is one thing that a person can’t change. Just be aware of the slippery slope and if you’re willing to fall down there.

Apr 24, 2009 - 7:36 am 6. Falconsword:

Every time some dillweed shoots up a bunch of innocent people I pray there is someone there like myself who can give those who are unarmed a chance to survive. Sadly it happens far too often. The truth, and it is difficult to handle, is that until a larger percentage of the population stops abdicating their RESPONSIBILITY to defend themselves to the police, who legally have no responsibilty to defend them (proven in court), this will continue. The simple fact that it rarely happened fifty years ago was that a significant percentage of the population was armed then, or had arms at hand quickly. You want to see less of this crap? Buy a handgun, take a GOOD self defense class, and take responsibility for your own defense. You might end up taking a life, and saving dozens. And trust me, you’ll sleep better.

Apr 24, 2009 - 7:46 am 7. Pastor of Muppets:

We don’t need to change genetics to rid the world of mass murderers. It’s pretty evident that to create a mass murderer, all you need to do is take a type A personality child and put them in an enviroment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger.

So, fix the environment, and you overwhlmingly mitigate the problem of sociopaths. Of course, to do that, you need more social services to assist in helping kids who live in environments that breed sociopathy. Which means you need more government. But I know how all you folks feel about more government, so I don’t really see a viable solution to this problem until we can get some consensus across party lines that big government is not necessarily evil.

Apr 24, 2009 - 8:04 am 8. not so fast:

6. Falconsword: . . . “Every time some dillweed shoots up a bunch of innocent people I pray there is someone there like myself who can give those who are unarmed a chance to survive.”

I don’t know this, but I am willing to bet that there have been armed people who ended up as victims in these mass killings. It’s dangerous to think that just because we have a gun we’re going to be able to thwart an attack – defending ourselves or saving others. How many cops have been killed in the last two months? They’re armed, highly trained, experienced in conflict, and have the backup of many other officers . . . and yet . . .

Guns aren’t evil, but we should look for as many solutions as possible and not think that guns are the only answer.

Apr 24, 2009 - 8:16 am 9. AThinkingPerson:

Re: #7. Pastor of Muppets:

“We don’t need to change genetics to rid the world of mass murderers. It’s pretty evident that to create a mass murderer, all you need to do is take a type A personality child and put them in an enviroment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger.”

So I guess that means we’ll see an escalation of mass murders since Carter II is intent on creating an environment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger?

Apr 24, 2009 - 8:28 am 10. Robin Munn:

#8 not so fast:

… and yet, sometimes the battle goes against you, yes. Police officers do sometimes lose a gunfight. But would that be a good reason for them not to carry guns at all? Of course not.

And there’s another factor that differentiates a police officer from an armed civilian: the officer’s uniform. It often acts as a deterrent — how many criminals are going to commit a crime when a uniformed police officer is right there? But if the criminal is armed and intending to commit mass murder, then his very first target is going to be the officer, because that’s the one person in the crowd he knows is armed. What he can’t know, however, is how many others in the crowd are (legally) carrying concealed weapons. If someone is going to stop the shooter, it’s going to be one of his “helpless” victims who turns out to be not-so-helpless after all.

And guns are really the only effective weapon you have unless you’re within 20 feet of the shooter. Inside 20 feet, you can close and deliver a knife strike, or a martial-arts blow, before the shooter can react. But from outside 20 feet, if you don’t have a ranged weapon of your own, the shooter can nail you before you reach him. How many people will be within 20 feet of a shooter when he starts shooting? How many will be outside 20 feet?

Finally, one more comment: I’d be very willing to bet against you on that “some of the victims were armed” bet. If any victims of a mass shooting were armed, the only way they wouldn’t have been shooting back is if they were among the first victims, killed in the first few seconds of the incident before they had time to react. Otherwise, they would certainly have been taking cover and shooting back. Whether that detail would get reported in the media, however, is an interesting question, so I don’t know if there would be any way to resolve the bet.

Apr 24, 2009 - 9:42 am 11. Herb:

It’s funny…you hear people say that we need to torture terrorists to keep us safe, but when it comes to keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths, it’s all “No, no, those psychos have a right to bear arms!”

Hey, guys, try to be consistent, rather than consistently stupid.

Apr 24, 2009 - 9:46 am 12. Robin Munn:

P.S. As for the odds of an armed would-be victim shooting back and winning, or getting killed, Clayton Cramer (the author of this article) has actually been running a blog that tracks reports of self-defense by carry permit holders. They recently published their 4,000th article, and Clayton sums up the numbers here.

Most relevant, I think, is the fact that of these 4,000, there were 30 cases where the defender was killed, and 191 where the defender was non-fatally shot. Also, the blog only records incidents where the defender had used a gun in self-defense (whether by firing it or brandishing it), so these numbers may undercount cases where the defender had a gun but was killed before he could even get it out. However, 221 cases out of 4,000 is pretty good odds on fighting back — about 5% chance of even getting wounded (let alone killed), maybe as high as 10% if you think there were a lot of “shot before he could draw the gun” cases. If I had to pick between a 10% chance of getting killed and a 100% chance of helplessly watching mass murder committed in front of me, I know which one I’d choose.

Apr 24, 2009 - 9:50 am 13. deguello:

How about midnight basketball?

Apr 24, 2009 - 9:54 am 14. deguello:

These are not mass murderers;they’re fatal event facilitators. JANET NAPOLITANO:COMMISSAR FOR HOMELAND SECURITY

Apr 24, 2009 - 9:57 am 15. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Until we can correct for genetic alterations, mass murderers will always exist, will always have access to tools with which to committ their deeds, and will always have the element of suprise on their side, making stopping them impossible until after they do what they do.”

Schizophrenia (which definitely is overrepresented among the mass murderers) certainly has a genetic component to it. However, it appears to be tied to creativity. Highly creative people have weaker latent inhibition on their senses than the general population, enabling them to re-evaluate information that normal people have missed. As a person suffers a schizophrenic breakdown, that latent inhibition seems to go completely away, probably causing the confused and distorted sensory input that causes them to see dragons, imagine themselves vampires, etc.

Even if you could remove the schizophrenia gene from the population (which is both technically and politically impossible), it might be at the cost of losing a lot of highly creative and intelligent people who never develop schizophrenia.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:10 am 16. Clayton E. Cramer:

“It’s pretty evident that to create a mass murderer, all you need to do is take a type A personality child and put them in an enviroment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger.”

If so, why are mass murderers so seldom black, when blacks are most likely to grow up in such an environment?

I think you might want to spend some time looking at the data before using this as a springboard for your well-intentioned efforts to eliminate poverty.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:12 am 17. Ms. Attitude:

7. Pastor of Muppets:

More is done for children through Chritian churches than through the government. More government takes away the ability of the individual to help others.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:14 am 18. Clayton E. Cramer:

“I don’t know this, but I am willing to bet that there have been armed people who ended up as victims in these mass killings. It’s dangerous to think that just because we have a gun we’re going to be able to thwart an attack – defending ourselves or saving others. How many cops have been killed in the last two months? They’re armed, highly trained, experienced in conflict, and have the backup of many other officers . . . and yet . . .”

Police officers have about 1/10th the murder victimization rate of the general population–in spite of having a job that necessarily puts them at high risk.

Funny, but I can’t think of a single example of a civilian victim in any of these mass murders who was found later to have a gun on them. And there have been a number of mass murders stopped part way through by civilians who drew a gun and either forced surrender (Pearl High School, Appalachian Law School), or in the case of Jeanne Assam in 2007, shot a mentally ill man who had already killed four people–and was headed into a crowded church sanctuary with an assault rifle and 1000 rounds of ammunition.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:15 am 19. Ms. Attitude:

11. Herb:

What?

I think you forgot to pass…remember it’s puff, puff, pass!

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:18 am 20. Clayton E. Cramer:

“It’s funny…you hear people say that we need to torture terrorists to keep us safe, but when it comes to keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths, it’s all “No, no, those psychos have a right to bear arms!””

Can you give some examples of someone making that argument, besides the ACLU? The fact is that until about 1965, we had little problem with psychotics and guns, because psychotics were much more likely to be institutionalized, where they did not have access to guns or other dangerous objects. In 1938, one survey indicates that about half of psychotics in the U.S. were institutionalized. Now it’s about 5%. And it is unsurprising that these sort of mass murders, which were extraordinary events before 1980, became common after the conscious decision to destroy our mental hospital system in the 1970s.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:20 am 21. Clayton E. Cramer:

“How about midnight basketball?”

How about it? Utterly irrelevant to the problem of mass murder.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:21 am 22. CaptFlood:

“Hey, guys, try to be consistent, rather than consistently stupid.

Herb”

Dear Herb:

A wild guess. You don’t carry a gun, and if given the opportunity to legally do so would refuse. You pass along the responsibility for the safety of yourself and your family to total strangers under the guise that “the police are trained for that sort of thing,” then lambast and insult others who — unlike you — take at least nominal ownership for their own safety.

Sometimes silence really is the wisest response…

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:23 am 23. Pastor of Muppets:

AThinkingPerson: “So I guess that means we’ll see an escalation of mass murders since Carter II is intent on creating an environment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger?”

Heh heh. Not quite, because the poverty, desperation, fear and anger that can be a cause of sociopathic behavior typically is characterized by a child growing up in an environment devoid of basic care or compassion and extreme abuse and violence at the hands of parents/guardians/peers.

What you’re talking about is a desperation, fear and anger of the right wing over a black man becoming president and/or losing their right to carry an AK-47.

Completely unrelated scenarios.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:28 am 24. Clayton E. Cramer:

For those interested in learning a bit more about the problems of deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill (and not just with respect to mass murder), the first several chapters of my next book (for which I am seeking a publisher) can be found at http://www.claytoncramer.com/PersonalTragediesTeaser.pdf

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:31 am 25. Pastor of Muppets:

Clayton E. Cramer:
“If so, why are mass murderers so seldom black, when blacks are most likely to grow up in such an environment?

I think you might want to spend some time looking at the data before using this as a springboard for your well-intentioned efforts to eliminate poverty.”

I never made any claims about race, but I guess it would be too much to hope that I could post a message containing the word “poverty” without someone making a racial issue out of it.

There are a boatload more white people than black people in this country, so it’s only natural that there would be more white people who grow up in abusive environments and therefore become sociopaths.

Finally, not all poor/abused people become sociopaths, and not all sociopaths become mass murderers. So it’s silly for anyone to think that there is always a direct correlation between poverty and mass murder, however, to state that a link does not exist is ludicrous.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:41 am 26. Pastor of Muppets:

Ms. Attitude: “More is done for children through Chritian churches than through the government. More government takes away the ability of the individual to help others.”

Really? Please educate me as to what kinds of affordable health insurance plans or dedicated social services are available to children through Christian Churches.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:47 am 27. Jack:

You can’t really stop them, but they can have lucrative, life long careers that garner respect for their murdering ways from their peers if they join the DNC and get elected.

Apr 24, 2009 - 10:59 am 28. Ms. Attitude:

Pastor of Muppets, if you would only realize what a scam health insurance is you would realize that it is not needed. Cost for health care would be lower if health care were a free market. Doctor’s love the health care industry no matter how much they complain, it puts more money in their pockets.

As for dedicated social services, the list is very long. I will list two that I personally know the founders of:

Big Oak Girls’ Ranch in Alabama
Outreach America in North Carolina

Apr 24, 2009 - 11:17 am 29. Ms. Attitude:

Pastor of Muppets….FYI

“Although the annual operating budget is almost $2.8 million, Big Oak Ranch gets 100 percent of its funding from donations and all its assets are paid for.” — John Croyle

Apr 24, 2009 - 11:24 am 30. Clayton E. Cramer:

“There are a boatload more white people than black people in this country, so it’s only natural that there would be more white people who grow up in abusive environments and therefore become sociopaths.”

Except as my article pointed out, the problem of mass murder is largely one of severe mental illness. Sociopaths are in an entirely different category–and few of these mass murderers would actually qualify as sociopaths. My daughter tells me that what she learned when completing her MSW was that sociopaths are actually less likely than the general population to have come from abusive homes.

“Finally, not all poor/abused people become sociopaths, and not all sociopaths become mass murderers. So it’s silly for anyone to think that there is always a direct correlation between poverty and mass murder, however, to state that a link does not exist is ludicrous.”

My point was that your claim that poverty causes this mass murder problem is demolished by the fact that blacks, who are disproportionately poor (and disproportionately both murderers and murder victims), are not disproportionately mass murderers. Poverty might cause individual murder and other violent crimes, but not mass murder.

And your conflating of sociopaths and psychosis suggests that you don’t really know much about either.

Apr 24, 2009 - 11:32 am 31. Robin Munn:

#23 Pastor of Muppets:

What you’re talking about is a desperation, fear and anger of the right wing over a black man becoming president and/or losing their right to carry an AK-47.

Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

Apr 24, 2009 - 11:35 am 32. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Heh heh. Not quite, because the poverty, desperation, fear and anger that can be a cause of sociopathic behavior typically is characterized by a child growing up in an environment devoid of basic care or compassion and extreme abuse and violence at the hands of parents/guardians/peers.

“What you’re talking about is a desperation, fear and anger of the right wing over a black man becoming president and/or losing their right to carry an AK-47.”

This may win the non sequitur award of the day.

I don’t know anyone that is upset about a black man becoming president. I know a lot of people upset about the policies that President Obama is pursuing. They would have been just as upset with President Kerry.

And from what I’m told by a social worker who recently received her MSW, sociopaths are actually less likely to come from abusive homes than from the general population.

Apr 24, 2009 - 11:37 am 33. Pastor of Muppets:

Clayton E. Cramer: “I don’t know anyone that is upset about a black man becoming president.”

Well then, apparently you don’t even bother to read the comments written by some of your readers. But I do, and I can tell you that some of your loyal readers are quite upset that there is a black man in the White House.

Apr 24, 2009 - 12:07 pm 34. Ms. Attitude:

33. Pastor of Muppets:

You see what you want to see in order to fulfill your victim mentality. The liberal elites have done their job well with you.

Apr 24, 2009 - 12:15 pm 35. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Well then, apparently you don’t even bother to read the comments written by some of your readers. But I do, and I can tell you that some of your loyal readers are quite upset that there is a black man in the White House.”

Huh? The only remark here that refers to President Obama is by “AThinkingPerson” who refers to “Carter II.” No reference to race at all (unless you want to tell me that referring to about the whitest president that I can remember is really a reference to race).

Apr 24, 2009 - 12:17 pm 36. Herb:

22. CaptFlood:

A wild guess. You don’t carry a gun, and if given the opportunity to legally do so would refuse.”

CaptFlood, you are correct… I don’t carry a gun and though I am legally able to do so, I will not. You know why? Because I am civilized.

As to this:
“You pass along the responsibility for the safety of yourself and your family to total strangers under the guise that “the police are trained for that sort of thing,” then lambast and insult others who — unlike you — take at least nominal ownership for their own safety.”

Safety? You mean safety from psychopaths with guns?

How bout this? Instead of arming myself at church, at school, at the store in preparation for the inevitable psychotic rampage…why don’t we just set it up so that no one’s in danger of getting blown away at any of these places?

Nah…that’d make too much sense!

Apr 24, 2009 - 1:43 pm 37. Never again:

HERB-

When my home was broken into and I was assaulted I didn’t have a gun. It won’t happen again! Did the psychopath that broke in have a gun? No, he had a kitchen knife. They should be illegal.

Apr 24, 2009 - 1:52 pm 38. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Safety? You mean safety from psychopaths with guns?

“How bout this? Instead of arming myself at church, at school, at the store in preparation for the inevitable psychotic rampage…why don’t we just set it up so that no one’s in danger of getting blown away at any of these places?”

As I point out in the article, mass murders are actually a pretty tiny fraction of murders in the U.S. Whatever solution you come up with this problem will have little impact on the larger problem of murder.

Secondly, how would you propose to solve the problem? Even you could pass a complete ban on gun ownership, how would you enforce it? We can’t even keep handguns out of prisons and jails. Do you suppose that smugglers won’t just put a handgun inside every shipment of cocaine or marijuana, to enlarge their profit margin? Customs would never find them.

Third, even you managed to magically make every firearms in America disappear (and it would take some serious magic), what you have done is created a situation where the disabled, the weak, or the outnumbered, are at the mercy of every thug prepared to use fists, feet, clubs, or knives, to accomplish his ends. Right now, burglars are more afraid of getting shot by a resident than they are of being arrested, both because it is more likely, and far more serious in its consequences.

Fourth, realistically, you would never get a disarmed nation. Instead, you would have a situation where middle class people like you and me would obey the laws, out of fear of punishment. But people who are prepared to commit robbery, rape, murder…you think that they are going to worry about a GUN CONTROL violation? (Well, you could make the gun control violations more serious than the violent crimes, as California has done in some cases, but wouldn’t it make more sense to treat the actual violent crimes that seriously?)

The effect of any realistic restrictive gun control law would be to differentially disarm–with people who would be afraid of arrest and jail far more likely to obey the law than those for whom prison is an old friend–a place to get your dental work done for free.

Apr 24, 2009 - 2:04 pm 39. Clayton E. Cramer:

“CaptFlood, you are correct… I don’t carry a gun and though I am legally able to do so, I will not. You know why? Because I am civilized.”

What defines civilized? When I lived in Los Angeles, a couple that I knew lived in Venice. One evening, as they were sitting at home, three thugs smashed through their front screen door. They tied him up, beat him pretty badly, gang raped his wife, then stole everything that they owned, even stuff of ABSOLUTELY NO VALUE to anyone else, such as wedding pictures. (There were lots of fingerprints, when LAPD didn’t bother to run. It wasn’t an important enough crime.)

I knew another couple, who lived not far away. About a year and a half later, they woke up to find three guys (maybe the same three guys, for all we know) around their bed. They demanded money. The husband went into another room to get some money, in the hopes that they would leave. He then heard the other two guys starting to rape his wife. He put up a fight, and was stabbed seven times in the chest. The only reason that he stopped fighting (and thus lived) is that one of the thugs came out and put a gun to his head.

When my wife was in high school, one of her classmates arrived home after school. He walked in on two burglars. His 12 year old sister had arrived home from school a half hour earlier. They raped and strangled her. My wife’s friend they beat to death with a roofing hammer, taking off his head. (It was a closed casket.)

One of my wife’s cousins living in the San Fernando Valley was gang raped. When they were done with their fun, they broke a bottle, and shoved it into her vagina.

One of my classmates from high school, named Lisa. I ran into her a couple of years after graduation. She could barely talk. Her jaw was still wired shut. Two guys in Venice grabbed her purse, and even she didn’t put up a fight (she was about 5′2″), they knocked her to ground, and kicked her until they broke her jaw.

I have lots more examples of what happens when you live in a society where people share your belief that carrying a gun for self-defense isn’t “civilized.” I don’t like your definition of civilized; it sounds more like barbarism, at least in what actually happens.

Apr 24, 2009 - 2:16 pm 40. CaptFlood:

Herb-

And how would you suggest we ’set it up’ so that no one is in danger from gun violence? Are you suggesting more gun bans, because despite having the most stringent gun control laws in the country, Washington D.C. became known as the ‘Murder Capital’ of the United States. Or, we could adopt the draconian gun laws that England enacted, only to find that ‘knife assaults’ went through the roof, to the point where Parliament is now considering stricter ‘knife’ laws…

You are not ‘civilized’ because you do not carry a gun. You are in fact, more of a ‘primitive’ than those of us who do. I believe in the rule of law, and in a world where the one-hundred pound woman can protect herself if need be against the two-hundred pound man. You believe, apparently, in a world where brute force rules, where the two-hundred pound man if so inclined can do what he wishes with the one-hundred pound woman, and that she should be made powerless to stop him. That, my friend, is a brutish world, and anyone who supports such a reality, a primitive.

Apr 24, 2009 - 2:22 pm 41. Clayton E. Cramer:

“That, my friend, is a brutish world, and anyone who supports such a reality, a primitive.”

Or an idealist, who believes that a great idea–no matter how out of touch it is with the real world–should be implemented.

One of the reasons that restrictive gun control is so popular among college professors and students–and loses much of its charm as people age–is that really bad experiences teach you pretty quickly that Herb’s worldview isn’t sufficiently shared.

Most Americans would not intentionally injure you. Many would even go out of their way to help a complete stranger. People like that with guns aren’t a problem.

But there is a small fraction, perhaps 2-5%, who because of sociopathic personality, serious intoxication, mental illness, or abusive upbringing, are quite prepared to do horrible things to other people. Such people are a strong argument for an armed society. They are also an argument for gun control laws that attempt to disarm these dangerous people. But unfortunately, most gun control laws aren’t narrowly tailored for the dangerous 2-5%, but instead apply equally (and therefore foolishly) to everyone.

Apr 24, 2009 - 2:41 pm 42. Herb:

37. Never again:

After experiencing that, I might reconsider. In fact, I should clarify what I’m trying to say, because despite the projection (yes, CaptFlood, I’m looking at you) I’m not in favor of gun control.

I’m in favor of snapping this idea that guns keep you safe. The numbers are in…and there are far more incidents of gun being used for violence than guns being used to stop violence.

Everytime I hear someone say about a school shooting or a church massacre, “If only someone else had a gun, they could have stopped it,” I roll my eyes at the naivete.

No, if someone else had a gun, there would be a gun fight.

As Clayton points out, there’s no magic way to make guns disappear. And on the flip side…there’s no magic way that guns make society a utopia of politeness either.

Look at Somalia.

Apr 24, 2009 - 3:00 pm 43. myth buster:

Swords into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks doesn’t, won’t and can’t work until Jesus rules this world. Until such a time as all men fear God, those that do not must be made to fear their would-be victims.

Apr 24, 2009 - 3:06 pm 44. Clayton E. Cramer:

“The numbers are in…and there are far more incidents of gun being used for violence than guns being used to stop violence.”

This is simply not true. There are several dozen surveys of defensive uses of guns, with a range from 82,000 uses per year to as high as 2.45 million. The bulk of these studies (some of which are from when crime rates were higher than today) come in the 200,000-400,000 defensive uses a year.

Criminal misuses of guns are typically higher, but not dramatically higher–often around 500,000-600,000 per year.

Unfortunately, you can’t just sum them and get a net benefit number. Many of the criminal misuses of guns can be quite effectively replaced with other weapons. Many of the defensive uses of guns can’t be easily substituted with for another weapon, because the person using a gun defensively isn’t as strong, or as brutal as the attacker.

“No, if someone else had a gun, there would be a gun fight.”

Instead, there’s a massacre. Hmmmm. Ten dead victims, and one suicided mass murderer. Or, perhaps two dead victims (and perhaps even the defender with a gun) and a dead mass murderer.

It’s not pretty. But it’s better than letting the mass murderer decide when he’s had enough fun terrorizing people, then killing them.

Apr 24, 2009 - 3:24 pm 45. Clayton E. Cramer:

“As Clayton points out, there’s no magic way to make guns disappear. And on the flip side…there’s no magic way that guns make society a utopia of politeness either.”

Very true. And that’s the reason that I pointed out that a big part of the mass murder problem (and part of the general murder problem) in the U.S. is related to the well-intentioned effort to deinstitutionalize the mentally ill, which led to a dramatic increase in not just murder, but homelessness, people freezing death sleeping on park benches, and a general degradation of the quality of urban life–not to mention dramatic increases in mentally ill homeless people dying of violence and exposure.

Focusing on the guns distracts attenton from what a horrible mistake deinstitutionalization was–and that’s probably why so much leftist media focuses on guns. “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”

Apr 24, 2009 - 3:37 pm 46. Clark E Myers:

Speaking of armed victims was there not a shooting south of Seattle – mall perhaps – where an armed individual announced himself and challanged an active shooter rather than engaging and so gave up the initiative? As I recall the good samaritan survived but the challenge was not very successful in persuading the shooter to give up his wicked ways.

I understand that per Ron Borsch – instructor at the Southeast Area Law Enforcement Academy in Ohio – “25% of mass murder shooting sprees he has researched were ended by armed private citizens”.

Perhaps the next pair of disaffected high school students a la Columbine could be persuaded to boil a bunch of mercury in home-ec class and the whole building will be contaminated waste?

Apr 24, 2009 - 7:10 pm 47. CaptFlood:

Herb-

Your ‘Look at Somalia’ comment is beyond the pale. Somalia is a lawless land; America is not. Just because we have guns does not indicate a willingness, desire, or propensity for law-abiding Americans to abuse and misuse them. In fact, in states where ‘right to carry’ has becom law, violent crime statitics have almost always improved, and the statistics on those carry-permit holders are equally favorable.

As to your ‘gun fight’ comment, yes, hopefully there would be one, and perhaps one of the good guys could take out one of the bad guys, and by doing so potentially save an awful lot of innocent lives.

More guns in the hands of decent Americans is my answer, and I stand behind it. What do you propose beyond asking everyone to cower, pray, and hope the boogeyman passes them by until the cavalry can arrive?

Apr 24, 2009 - 7:52 pm 48. Bill:

““No, if someone else had a gun, there would be a gun fight.””

Perhaps you should google “Pearl High School” and “Appalachian Law School:”- no gunfight; psycho arrested.

To back up Mr Clayton: in the overwhelming majority of cases of armed self-defense, NO shots are fired, and nobody is injured. The sight of a citizen’s firearm alone is sufficient to deter the crime, and induce the criminal either to flee or surrender.

Apr 25, 2009 - 6:43 am 49. ddc:

Mandatory self defense classes for all females starting at grade one through to graduation. Boys too for that matter as men will prey on both. If we want to have a society in which we all have guns, and I am not oppsed to it, the then the course of action should also be early education on usage as well as respect of such weapons. This also should be mandatory and taught early on.

Banning guns, is utterly pointless. As the tired saying goes, “guns do not kill people, people kill people.” that said, if it isn’t a guns that you see before you meet your end, it’ll be a knife, hammer, brick, rope or hands around your throat. Personally, I’d prefer to be ready to defend myself and a gun will beat out a knife everytime. Sorry but that’s the world we find ourselves living in.

Apr 25, 2009 - 8:55 am 50. DavidN:

7. Pastor of Muppets:

We don’t need to change genetics to rid the world of mass murderers. It’s pretty evident that to create a mass murderer, all you need to do is take a type A personality child and put them in an enviroment of unceasing violence, poverty, desperation, fear and anger.

So, fix the environment, and you overwhlmingly mitigate the problem of sociopaths. Of course, to do that, you need more social services to assist in helping kids who live in environments that breed sociopathy. Which means you need more government. But I know how all you folks feel about more government, so I don’t really see a viable solution to this problem until we can get some consensus across party lines that big government is not necessarily evil.

You can’t be serious? More government leads to a peaceful population? Nazi Germany had more government; so did the Soviet Union and Communist China. Are you going to try to argue they were peaceful, or somehow less prone to mass murder than the U.S? You don’t seem to be a thinking person, really, just someone who parrots silly opinions you’ve heard somewhere else, but I am one of those optimists who hopes that one day reason will penetrate your thick skull.

Apr 27, 2009 - 1:18 am 51. jimmy b.:

How about the s.w.a.t. teams moving toward the sound of the gunfire instead of directing traffic or acting as crossing guards. It galls me to no end to see these “highly trained” teams standing around these situations while victims bleed to death and shots are still being fired.

Apr 27, 2009 - 7:25 am 52. deguello:

42 HERB:YOUR naivete is astounding! I’d rather be involved in a gunfight, than be massacred without one:At least,with a gun, I’d have a chance. John Lott’s books on the relative benefits/disadvantages of guns for self defense,CONCLUSIVELY demonstrate that guns save far more lives than they take.Your comment about Somalia is simply bizarre:the only “Somalias” in the US are precisely in our cities where gun control has disarmed the law abiding,and empowered the gun wielding criminal.Switzerland is one of the most heavily -armed countries on earth;and one of the safest and most civilized.The most polite places in the USA are rifle/pistol ranges.Visit one!

Apr 28, 2009 - 8:56 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: