Tragedy struck the South by Southwest festival last night. An unnamed drunk driver being chased by police plowed his car into a crowd of SXSW-going hipsters, killing two and injuring at least 23. “I’ve never seen nothing like it,” attendee Russ Barone told cnn.com. “I felt like I was at a war or something.” We mention this event in relation to the outrage expressed by Shannon Watts and her followers when our man Alan Brooks posed next to the jefe of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America (a wholly owned subsidiary of Mayors Against Illegal Guns). As one of our commentators pointed out, the gun strapped to Alan’s leg was no more a threat than a vehicle outside meeting the hall. Prophetic words. And true, too.
So we need to re-instate Prohibition because if it saves just one life…… at least if you use the antis logic /sarc/
yeah! there should be a law against drunk driving or running from the police.
Comment moderated. Post has been re-written.
“Acevedo said there were no plans to change safety protocols at the festival due to the accident.
‘We do these events very well, but you cannot stop a person who rather than face drunk driving charges decides to speed at a high rate of speed, go around a uniformed officer forcing him to run out of the way, then at a high rate of speed show total disregard for the sanctity of human life,’ Acevedo said.”
^How come we never hear a comment like that when it comes to a mass shooting. From the reports that I’ve heard, the chase started at 12:30 and ended at 12:31. A lot can happen in a minute, even when police are present. Why is it that no one cares to recognize this when there is a mass shooting?
The anti gun agenda is not served by your logic or common sense.
Because Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Cars is busy promoting common sense bicycle use and bicycle lane laws. Oh. Wait a second…
So using his own words against Ms. Watts: “Despite all the gun control you desire, you will not stop someone who’d rather face capital murder charges and show total disregard for the sanctity of human life.”
Thank you for this excerpt. It is useful in the debate because it underscores the dissenters’ inability to understand that firearms and cars are both tools that when used for evil are equally deadly.
I just couldn’t help thinking as I saw this on the news that it was not the feared black semi-assault mass murder gun that perpetrated this tragedy. Nope. Turns out it was a much more common weapon, a drunk in a car. Sad. Where is Moms Demand Action for Car Sense in America when you need them?
Thanks Dan, Please tell Robert I’m sorry if I woke him…
Well, there’s Mothers Against Drunk Drivers. They’re pretty legit.
All they do is show a sob story to teenagers at prom.
I dunno, when I was the county attorney in a one-horse county in Central Texas, the Madd Moms came to my office to threaten my re-election because some of the cops I constantly stuck my neck out for trying their lousy cases to juries complained about some of the plea deals I made.
MADD on this one?
[crickets]
I wonder if their train has long since left the station.
The original Mom hates what the group has become.
I bet this only happened because that car had a gas tank larger than 10 gallons. Without a high capacity mega-flammable fuel compartment, the car would have run out of gas and then somebody could tackle the driver as he refueled.
Tackle them while they refuel — I don’t care who you are, that there is funny.
Amen.
I wonder if the seat had an adjustable thingy goes back?
It’s the muffler/silencer/suppressor thingy on the vehicle. Those things need to be banned, they are only used by professional killers to sneak up on people and cannot be heard by the police. Also, they have no sporting use. If the vehicle was not equipped with this nefarious device, the victims could have heard it coming and moved out of the way.
Killed at SXSW with guns = 0
Killed with a car at SXSW = 2
Injured with a car at SXSW = 23+
Shannon Watts at SXSW scared of guns = ?
Priceless.
bad hormones + too clueless to ask if someone’s carrying = righteous indignation – also equally priceless.
Tom
I wonder what Alan’s answer would have been if she had asked him if he was carrying? What would you say?
With regard to yesterday’s question, would saying “no” at that point be dishonest? Or would it be just as prudent as saying no If someone asked you “Do you have a hundred dollar bill?”
Most of the time, I would be cryptic about it (or just say no), but for Ms. Watts, I would tell her the truth and smile, forcing her to confront the fact that the pleasant, sociable person before her is also a gun owner.
I would have asked her; does it look like I am carrying?
She would likely say “no” and the issue would have been dropped. He would not have lied, and she would have been none the wiser.
If she for some reason says “yes” than she wouldn’t have needed to ask the question and he needs a better concealment method.
I actually have done this before with my pro-gun friends as a way to test concealment methods; but they wouldn’t have cared either way.
What would you say?
Same as always: What do you think?
No, I’m just glad to see you!
Rules of gun-life safety:
1) The people around you are always armed.
2) Don’t try to make any point you aren’t willing to see publicly destroyed.
3) Make sure you know the topic, and the facts behind it.
4) Keep your mouth shut until you know who you’re talking to.
Matt, when strangers ask me questions like that, they have given me permission to LIE. Lie like a bald-faced, egg-sucking hound dog. What they don’t know won’t hurt. Or if she were to be skeptical, then I simply would have asked her “where?”
After several wrong guesses, you’d think she would have realized what a fool she was making of herself and had an epiphany. Or so one could only hope.
But the fact of the matter is she did not ask and therefore Alan did not need to answer. Certainly nothing dishonest about that.
Tom
I believe it’s illegal in TX to disclose that you are carrying.
@ Juliesa–I don’t think that’s the case, it’s just that you have to keep your weapon so it cannot be detected by “ordinary observation” or some such. I think if asked, I would just turn it by asking a question back–like “Why do you ask” or “Why, does it make a difference to you?” or some such.
The correct response is:
“LOOK! SQUIRREL!”
We must ban drunks in cars…… Oh, right it’s not the drunk who is responsible it’s the car. Rewritten for the antis: We must ban cars!!!!!!!!
.. For the children.
A tragedy last night, as an automobile drove off and killed two people. One of the survivors was quoted as saying,”I don’t know what happened, I was just like sitting there in the driver’s seat and the car just drove off! I didn’t know it was even gassed-up,”
Clicked on this link expecting to read an article about a police mwrap or something similar. Sigh of relief and back to work….
I think I smell an official alliance forming between M.D.A. and M.A.D.D. There will be picketing in the streets I tell you. PICKETTING!!!
Perhaps picketting on the sidewalk. As we can see, the streets aren’t safe.
So someone drank and drove if only there was a law against that wait…
If only there was a liscense to drive wait…
If only all cars were registered wait…
Make a required driving safety course mandatory wait…
Just goes to show it isn’t the car, gun or other inanimate object it is the person behind it, and they will still not obey laws when they don’t want to. Making more makes no sence, enforce the ones we have now.
And those are just the ones that follow all of those rules except the first you mention. Then take into account everyone that manages to get in a car without a license or one that’s suspended. Those that have no respect for the law will do what they want anyway.
More lives would be saved requiring all cars have a smart breathalyzer attached to the ignition system than all guns having “smart” lockout technology.
Why not require all cars to have RFID and wireless police shutdown? Imagine all the high speed chases it would stop. Imagine all of those caught criminals?
Oh, that’s right! They’re not about saving lives and making a place safer. They just want to demonize scawy wifles and cwips.
I thought I heard about a drunk driving repeat offender once who had a court mandated breathalyzer placed on his ignition. If I recall the story right, he was so stubborn he took apart the ignition and started the car anyway, managed to get out on the road and kill a whole family.
And the same would happen with “Smart Guns”
Police already have that with GM vehicles that have OnStar:
“The couple was unharmed and immediately called police. The Escalade was equipped with the tracking service OnStar, which remotely disabled the SUV.”
http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/05/3975132/teen-accused-of-vicious-miami.html
Maybe the only way to stop a bad guy with a car is a good guy with a … uh well, … a gun.
“As one of our commentators pointed out, the gun strapped to Alan’s leg was no more a threat than a vehicle outside meeting the hall. Prophetic words. And true, too.”
Actually, I disagree. Mr. Brooks’ firearm was less of a threat to the good people attending the conference. Proof: a person drove a car into a crowd killing two and injuring many more while Mr. Brooks’ firearm did not harm anyone.
Further, given the likely capacity of whatever Alan had on his ankle, what’s the likelihood of it killing two and injuring 23 more (even if it was used with malicious intent, which isn’t its raison d’etre).
Content as absolutely NOTHING to do with guns, other than a very spurious connection to a previous story. This blog is going downhill fast.
(comment likely to be moderated)
Other than it reinforces a common argument point that is often used in debates against anti-gunners, and at a time when anti-gunners are actively participating at the event, no, it has nothing of relevance whatsoever.
Aside from every pro control argument for registration or insurance for your firearms begins with automobiles as an example. And that in this instance the DRIVER will be blamed, not the car.
I think the story is legit, although I would much rather see some more reviews
Agreed. The victims and survivors deserve more than to be used in a tit-for-tat with Momma Watts.
I guess you feel they should be fodder for AAA instead?
Tr0ll.
Sniff, sniff … I smell a sock puppet with Shannon’s hand up your backside.
Then you must be smelling your own backside, as I am a daily reader of this blog and an owner of plenty of items on the Gun Control Ban Wish List.
I want content about GUNS, not drunk drivers at some stupid event where a gun control nazi happened to be talking.
Felt like you were “at war”? Dont even…ugh… shut up, shut up, shut up….
Hahahaha.. That is just annoying. Especially coming from a hipster. I could picture it already.
”I felt like I was at a war or something.”
yeah.. him and tom cruise..
I’m sure the driver was trying to get his life together, just about to release his first Country & Western album.
We need to protect society from the evil drunk/crazy people who get behind the wheel. I propose an extensive background check, mental health testing and a 15-day waiting period on all motor vehicle purchases.
I wonder how many people who drive drunk have posed for pictures with Shannon Watts?
Shannon may be a teetotaler for all I know–but if she’s like the vast majority of folks, she could take a picture with someone who has met the technical definition of drunk driving (at least in Texas) by doing a selfie.
Wonder if the president will make a speech about this…probably not.
Wonder if some reactive legislation will be put up for vote in Congress…probably not.
Wonder if breathalyzers will be installed in every vehicle…no, that would hurt the auto industry and inconvenience law-abiding car drivers.
See where this is going? Alcohol-related deaths (with and without cars involved) are multitudes higher than gun-related deaths yet no matter how stringent they make BAC laws, this stuff continues to happen and will continue to happen even if 0.01% BAC is considered illegal. They won’t ban alcohol because the US already learned that lesson…in blood. Why is it this country is so slow to learn from its tragic history?
My girlfriend used to live in Austin almost a decade ago. She was living there with her previous partner and he was an Austin native. She told me that even then, he and other long time residents expressed dread at SXSW and what it was becoming. It had been causing dangerous, nightmare traffic even back then and it has only exploded further in popularity since.
It does not surprise me that something like this happened. Clearly the drunk driver was at fault, but I suspect there was quite a crowd too. People grossly underestimate the danger that comes in mass events like SXSW or big concerts, etc. These are also places where some might tend not to carry out of convenience or just let their guard down in general. Call me a stick in the mud, but I prefer to avoid such mass gatherings when I can help it, because you are rendered largely helpless and things can get ugly, fast.
It humorous to the point of disgusting…blatantly go out and kill some(s) with a gun, go to prison…go and get numerous DUI/OWI’s, and nothing happens, one after another, sure they may suspend or even revoke your license, but they’ll still drive…much like criminals with guns…it pathetic that the leftists/liberals are so hamster brained…
I get your frustration, but you’re comparing kiwis to watermelons.
If you go out and kill two people with either a gun or a car, you can expect to go to prison for a long time. Multiple DUI convictions and what seems like absurd judicial leniency happen a lot… but on the gun side of the ledger, how many stories have you heard about gang members with weapons convictions back on the street after just months in the pokey? A brief review of Chicago’s press will turn up any number of articles where the latest murder suspect has a history of illegally carrying a firearm. That’s your DUI equivalent.
I guess the real difference is that no one uses a multiple drunk-driver case to try to ban cars or to fit all motors with governors.
Provide real life examples of how a weapon is a weapon is a weapon can be used to hurt innocent people all you want.
For the true antis, I don’t think there is anything that can cause the scales to fall away from their eyes.
And then there are the repeat offenders…
Grand Junction Daily Sentinel:Woman charged in crash jailed on revoked license
TONIE ROSALES: Accused of vehicular homicide in death of cyclist
By Paul Shockley
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
A Palisade woman, who was restrained from driving after allegedly causing a fatal crash involving a bicyclist in September, was arrested Monday for suspicion of driving again in violation of a court order.
Tonie Rosales, 29, was ordered Tuesday held on $3,000 bond at the Mesa County Jail following her arrest on suspicion of violation of bail-bond conditions.
Rosales, who was free on bond on charges including vehicular homicide in the Sept. 18, 2013, crash that killed 25-year-old Eunjey Cho, was pulled over Monday afternoon in the parking lot of Taylor Elementary School in Palisade for alleged failure to use a turn signal, according to an arrest affidavit. She was arrested after a routine check of her driver’s license showed it was revoked because of the September fatal crash, the affidavit said.
District Attorney Pete Hautzinger said Rosales presents a “profound public safety risk given recent history,” asking County Court Judge Gretchen Larson to set a $10,000 cash-only bond. A man who identified himself to the judge as Rosales’ fiance said Rosales acted because of a family emergency and was driving to pick up children from school.
The judge ultimately cited a lack of evidence from Monday that Rosales was intoxicated in giving the lower bond.
“No driving means exactly that,” Larson told Rosales.
Prosecutors have alleged Rosales used cocaine for two days when she drove Sept. 18 to a court appearance in Delta and slammed into Cho’s bicycle, which was on the shoulder of U.S. Highway 50.
Rosales told an arresting Colorado State Patrol trooper she was running late for a hearing in Delta, which was related to her arrest June 6, 2013, by the Delta County Sheriff’s Department on suspicion of DUI, failure to drive in a single lane and possession of a Schedule 4 controlled substance.
We had a case in which a drunk driver ran a red light and caused a fatality, and it was the lady’s seventh DUI arrest.
MADD’s strategy of “more laws” has worked well to get a bunch of ineffective laws passed, and it is no wonder MDA was set up to emulate them.
I’m sure it was shocking, but for those of us who have been in a war, I’m pretty sure this wasn’t on the same scale.
Yeah, I’ve never been in a war and even I found that hyperbole a bit offensive.
Of course, that’s the social language of the under 30 generation…look at tv shows as an example. “Fighting for your life” on dancing and cooking contest shows, etc. Words like doomed, dead, destroyed used to describe sports plays, etc.
Symptom of a predominantly r selected culture that has never faced any real hardship…
Never let a tragedy go wasted? C’mon, we’re better than this. We’re stooping to the antis tactics.
Very good point. The tone of the story isn’t quite as gleefully smug as when antis seize on a shooting to push their agenda, but it’s not a great path to start down.
Can we get back to talking about guns please?
“I’ve never seen nothing like it,”
Oh my….what terrible grammar.
Perhaps we need to look at banning high capacity drinking glasses so people drink less alcohol. No one needs a 16oz pint glass or an 8oz wine glass for any reason.
8oz? Hell, I’ve seen “novelty” wine glasses that’ll hold an entire bottle!
You are going for hyperbole and sarcasm, but the sad part is that Bloomberg actually tried this with soda remember?
Only one solution – All regular cars should be banned in favor of smart cars. Smart cars are so small you cant drive into as many people. Since there is at least one smart car on the market now, all cars that aren’t smart cars are banned in 3 years.
Frankly I’m shocked… SHOCKED I tell you – that an alcohol and pot fueled hipster event would lead to DWI deaths.
Ban Hipsters.
Something needs to be done about those Assault-Vehicles too!
South by Southwest. Brought to you by the World Bank. It’s true; look it up!
So how does this relate to SXSW? It may not. Probably not. But I’m sorry, I am inherently suspicious… no, the better word might be “off-put”, by an event sponsored by the World Bank and its handmaiden, the International Monetary Fund (and maybe the IRS, depending on which way you look at it).
They are not mere financial institutions, but global power brokers: some for you (we like what you’re doing, it benefits us), but not for you (we hate it because it threatens us).
It’s not that different from the IRS sponsoring a “World Peace (“War”) Event on the Mall in DC.
Hosted by Bono the Phony.
Comments are closed.