Absent relevant facts, I’m not sure what “solutions” to “gun violence” would have prevented the Las Vegas spree killing. I’m not sure Everytown for Gun Safety is sure, either. But I am sure that the civilian disarmament industrial complex is in high gear, waving the bloody shirt for gun control. Whether or not this ghoulish antigun agitprop will have any legislative impact on Americans’ gun rights remains to be seen. But I wouldn’t be surprised.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

38 COMMENTS

  1. Given the recent press release from ISIS, I think it’s much more appropriate to talk about Islam control.

    • It’s just as likely that he was a DEMOCRAT, just like the DEMOCRAT who shot Steve Scalise.

      • This is *why* I’m looking forward to Scalise debating the SHARE act soon.

        The *victim* of a mass-shooting assassination attempt speaking for WHY suppressors are necessary…

  3. If you are not a member yet, join one of the gun rights groups, and then engage in a “conversation” with Everytown.

    • Yes, it’s time we had a “national conversation” about gun control. And as usual, that conversation will be conducted by obtuse media talking heads. People who work in a 40 square block area of NYC who know nothing about guns, don’t own guns, don’t KNOW anybody who owns guns because the clearly don’t like people who own guns.

      But as self-described “journalists”, you’d think they could find an expert on guns. Someone who owns guns, knows how they work, understands their capabilities and limitations and can use the correct terminology. Maybe even someone who understands the laws that regulate them, as most gun owners do. They keep military and intelligence experts on staff as contributors during wars, experts in meteorology during storms, medical experts, aviation experts after plane crashes, etc. But they can’t find one knowledgeable person about guns or gun laws. Amazing.

  4. so if a single immigrant commits a crime it is time to talk about immedealty ending all legal immigration and make a decision “Now” before the facts are in?

    so if some one with a prior arrest kills people, it is immediately time “Now” to talk about one strike and you are out, ending Miranda, or search warrants, and not after waiting for the full facts?

    If a person who got off on a technicality kills or rapes someone it is time “NOW!” to end double jeopardy prohibition???

    The Everytown nuts are still saying that background checks would have stopped newton. They are still saying an AR ban would have when that guy could have done that with a mini14 ranch and 10 round mags.

  5. Leghorn described it perfectly: these shameless, bloody minded gun-control “activists” are “dancing in the blood” of the victims. The blood hasn’t even dried and the virtue signalling has already begun.

    • Please. The 400+ injured haven’t even finished bleeding and TTAG is already posting stories about gun stocks going up.

      • You didn’t manage to refute Sheepdog6’s argument the last time you made this comment, so I’ll paste it here and give you another shot.

        “It’s valid news relating to a currently breaking story. Maybe you shouldn’t wake up every day looking for the next thing you find offensive. Imagine the things you can do with the time you use to spend being indignant at the smallest thing that rustled your jimmies.”

        Maybe you’ll be able to come up with a valid response this time.

        • What is there to refute? His comment was way more emotional than mine. So who’s the one really offended? It’s just common decency to wait until you start reporting about gun sales when the country has suffered a tragedy—out of respect for the victims and their families. People are always arguing that the gun advocates are insensitive and always focused on the profit of gun sales…..and here TTAG is giving them the ammunition they need. Pun intended. Gun advocates and common decency are not mutually exclusive.

        • Perhaps the second chance to respond was overly generous. He did worse with it than silence.

          His previous post boiled down to “I know you are, but what am I?” when he asked whether the other guy was offended, when the other had in fact only made a straightforward observation.

          Now he’s accusing us of being indecent, insensitive, and disrespectful, for supposedly focusing on gun profits. That’s a misunderstanding of the article.

          Antis accuse the gun industry of pursuing profits and the expense of victims. False as that is, even if true, it would be different from this article’s point. That point is that a major spree shooting usually prompts Democrats to seek new gun controls, which in turn drives up short term demand for guns, as people try to beat the new regulations, which increases gun profits and stock prices.

          This article gives no ammunition to antis because the two topics are different. Their casting aspersions on the gun industry’s motivations and morality is one thing. TTAG’s assessing the immediate political and economic impact of a current event is something different. There is no ammunition provision.

      • Point of fact, RF’s story was about gun STOCKS (as in futures), not guns themselves.

        The increase in the sale of firearms manufacturer stock may be speculative in response to the massacre but it’s still two different things.

        However, let’s face it, an incident like this will inevitably lead to reenergized demands for ‘gun control’ (legislation, restrictions, confiscation (“voluntary buy back”) no doubt targeting the scary black rifles, even though the types of firearms recovered from the crime scene hasn’t been reported yet). Such efforts have a strong likelihood to result in another ‘panic buy’ cycle (ammo too).

      • @Chicago counselor, those are nto at all the same., TTAG’s is an observation of what happens to the stock market, and Everytown’s is a pushing of policy on new limits Civil rights/liberties.
        One is adovacy, one is not

  10. 0 people shot back (or none reported). Maybe open rifle carry would help. Cops might have been on the ground “monitoring” the open carriers and not getting shot-up, while SWAT played late-to-the-party coroner on an upper floor of a casino about ~ 10 minutes later (and, no shit, that was impressive response time).

  11. “Let’s Talk About Gun Control Now!” OK FU, NO! Done, now STFU, and don’t bring it up again mf.

  12. But we have to do … SOMETHING!! …

    Time again for a “national conversation”. To be held entirely by liberal media talking heads, who don’t own guns and don’t even know anyone who does. Otherwise, they might actually put one on the air.

  13. A thought Mr. Franklin had seems appropriate,”Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

  15. The libs are at it again. They lie and distort the truth. Face it, the mainstream media is in the entertainment business, not in the fact business. Rank and file Law enforcement officers rarely talk with reporters because they know that the media “doesn’t let facts get in the way of a good story”. I hear the media mantra how horrible it is that someone who is on the no fly list, can still buy a gun. Correct, if you haven’t been convicted of a crime you can still buy a gun, no matter who’s “list” your on. These lists mean nothing. They are suspect at best. Hillary was a suspect in numerous felonies, was she banned from flying? Of course not. If we restrict peoples rights based on mere suspicion, half of America would be on a no fly list and unable to own a firearm.

    How about reading the constitution and the bill of rights, you might learn something.

    Just my .23 cents worth (adjusted for inflation).

  16. I do not know about you, but it seems awfully coincidental that Everytown wants a conversation on gun control only when white people get shot.

    When black people (even kids) are shot to death in Chicago, they are strangely silent.

    Is this really a coincidence?

    • You obviously have never spent any time on Chicago’s South side. There are community marches and rallies all the time organized by the community and by a lot of victims’ family members and friends, who talk endlessly about the need to have common sense gun laws. It’s not about black and white, it’s about red, victims of gun violence all bleed the same color.

      • “Common sense gun control.” Where have I heard that mantra before?
        Oh yes… it’s the euphemism used for every single scheme to make legal gun ownership more challenging & more expensive, to restrict legal gun choices, to reduce standard magazine capacities, to suggest mandatory “buybacks”, to add restrictions as to where guns can be carried, to ban certain safety equipment (such as hearing protection), to have bureaucrats who decide a 15.75″ rifle barrel needs “special” permission and an extra $200 to own, to demand mental health evaluations, waiting periods, licenses to buy ammunition, state approval for what gun safes are allowed, disregard of due process if found on secret lists, and so very much more.
        “Chicago Counselor”, if you’re using the mantra of every gun hating, pro criminal politician around, you have no (NONE) credibility. STFU

        • so the words “common sense” trigger this kind of heated response? No wonder you don’t agree with something logical like mental health evaluations. People who can’t control their emotions, don’t need to have access to guns.

  17. Ban guns altogether…and just like drugs…those that want guns WILL find a way to get them…legal or not.
    Laws affect the law-abiding.
    Sentencing is what affects the law-breakers…but only after the fact.

  18. To a gun grabber, everything is a nail, knife attack, car attack, baseball bat attack, all immediately lead to a demand for gun control. Look at the instant response to the Ohio State incident.

  19. “Everytown for Gun Safety: Let’s Talk About Gun Control Now!” Did you think I was waiting for the next shooting, to listen to you gun control BS? Guess again.

  20. Perhaps someone should turn the tables on the anti-gun lobby. Considering the increase in vehicle attacks (re: people driving into crowds), maybe someone should start an anti-car lobby. Why should people be able to drive these 2,000 lb killing machines. Anyone can get a license, and it’s too easy to circumvent existing laws that limit availability to vehicles. For the childrens’ sake, we should outlaw cars. They’re too dangerous to just allow normal citizens to own and use.

    Maybe then they’ll see the ridiculousness of their argument. What really troubles me is that the anti-gun crowd are almost entirely people who don’t own guns. They should read “First They Came..” by Martin Niemoler for some perspective.

Comments are closed.