What Do They Have in Common?


The New York Times published an interesting piece a couple of days ago, detailing “Criminal histories and documented mental health problems” of eight of the gunmen in recent shootings. While the NYT does its usual “fear the big, bad, black glock_19gun” thing, with close-ups and scary pictures of scary firearms, there’s something else that’s notable in this report: the vast majority of the shooters listed passed background checks and purchased firearms legally. They passed background checks that are supposed to keep bad guys from getting guns. None of the jackwagons listed had criminal records, the majority bought guns legally after having passed a background check, and one (Lanza) simply stole legally-purchased weapons from his mother. The majority were also not under the care of a mental health professional… hell, Nidal Hasan WAS a mental health professional!

I also note the Times’ froth-flecked zeal to paint the Roanoke shooting of two reporters as a “mass shooting,” but hey… it advances the narrative, so why not, right?

Several of these malcontents should have been prohibited under current law. John Hauser, who opened fire in a Louisiana theater was ordered into a psychiatric hospital by a judge and had been denied a concealed carry permit. Bureaucracy FAIL.

The white supremacist maggot who killed nine people in a church in South Carolina should have been barred from buying a gun because he had admitted to possessing drugs, but the F.B.I. examiner conducting the required background check failed to obtain the police report from that incident. Bureaucracy FAIL.

The father of the kid who used his dad’s gun to shoot up his school in Washington state, should have been prohibited as well, since he was the subject of a permanent domestic violence protection order, which should have been entered into the federal criminal background database. But he bought the gun legally, a background check failed to come up with the protection order as it was never entered into the system. Bureaucracy FAIL.

The dildo who shot up disarmed victims at the Washington Navy Yard passed local and state background checks, even though he was nuttier than squirrel shit and twice sought treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs for psychiatric issues. Bureaucracy FAIL.

And despite the fact that he communicated with a terrorist and advocated terrorist acts in his presentations, authorities were apparently too scared of being accused of cultural insensitivity or something to actually take action on Nidal Hasan. He wasn’t under the care of a psychiatrist. He was a psychiatrist and an Army Major with a clean criminal record. But apparently the exchanges with a radical cleric  and attempts to contact al Q’aida, weren’t enough to give the feds a clue that maybe something wasn’t quite right in Hasanland. Bureaucracy FAIL.

So what is it that Uncle Fester and other gun grabbing shitbirds think enhanced background checks and increased gun control will do in light of the fact that the bureaucracy can’t even handle current standard background checks correctly? How would banning private sales have stopped any of these murders, in which the perps easily walked into a store, passed a background check, and waltzed off with a gun? And more importantly, what kind of law would stop any criminal from obtaining a gun on the black market, avoiding a background check altogether?

And yet, the first words out of the maw of the White House spokeshole after last week’s tragedy were lies about public support for more gun control, including the hackneyed mantra about the nonexistent “gun-show loophole.”

Here’s a clue: no law would have done so. None. No law would have prevented the bureaucratic failures that resulted in the legal purchase of firearms by these violent fruitcakes. And yet, every time one of these yambags loses his shit and proceeds to kill innocent people, opportunistic swine all over the nation try to put limits on those of us who committed no crime.

In their zeal to foment fear of the big, black, scary guns, the NYT pointed out something most don’t think about: the failure and inadequacy of the background checks system that was supposed to prevent violent scum from purchasing firearms and the folly of growing said bureaucracy.

Newsflash! Oregon Shooter’s Dad is a Jackass!


After finding out that his abominable offspring, in whose life he apparently didn’t participate all that much, shot and killed a bunch of innocent people, Ian Mercer has decided that inanimate objects, i.e. guns, are to blame for the massacre.

Ian Mercer, during an interview outside his California home Saturday, told CNN that he didn’t know his son had a single gun, let alone 13. He asked, “How on earth could he compile 13 guns? How could that happen?”

Well, shitstick. Had you actually been in his life, instead of somewhere on the periphery, you would have known the answer to that question, but since cowards like him would never accept responsibility for the fuckups in their lives, blaming the gun not only allows them to shirk that responsibility yet again, but also promote their pusillanimous political philosophy.

Mercer said he has never held a gun. He doesn’t want to, he said. He laid out his personal philosophy on the issue: “I’m a great believer (in) you don’t buy guns, don’t buy guns, you don’t buy guns.”

I’m imagining this petty, testicle-deficient invertebrate running away from the responsibility of being a positive influence in his son’s life. I’m picturing him whimpering on his knees, begging for his pathetic life as an armed thug victimizes him and his family. Amoeba like him would never actually take a positive step to defend himself and his family. They consider it a lot more virtuous to beg and plead in front of monsters.

And then, as the interview wore on, he doubled and tripled up on the stupid.

“It has to change. How can it not? Even people that believe in the right to bear arms, what right do you have to take people’s lives? That’s what guns are, the killers. Simple as that. Simple as that. It’s black and white. What do you want a gun for?”

There’s so much fail in this incoherent rambling, I’m having trouble finding the right words to properly convey the level of stupid! He equates the right to own a tool with a nonexistent right to kill people, which no one claimed exists. He appoints himself the arbiter of other people’s wants and needs. He ascribes human qualities to guns.

It’s not difficult to picture someone this irrational spawning a psychotic murderer.

And then, there’s this asshole…

Yep, Uncle Fester is at it again, scrambling for relevance in a world that has long ago recognized his hypocrisy.


Kelly said lawmakers in Washington need “to close these loopholes that make it very easy for the mentally ill to get firearms.”

Interesting. Was the Oregon shooter in psychiatric care? Did he have mental issues? Was he seeing a mental health professional? Is Uncle Fester a mental health professional in his own right?

He noted that there are fewer deaths from gun violence in states that have strong laws restricting firearm sales and ownership.

“The idea is where there are more guns, people are less safe. If you have a gun in any kind of situation where things start to get heated, there’s a higher likelihood that somebody’s going to get shot,” he said.”

Of course, he missed the part where some of the most violent states writ large are ones with strong gun control laws, as if deaths by other means don’t matter. Obviously, they don’t matter in Uncle Fester’s world, because that little fact doesn’t support his political agenda.

Fact is there was nothing in the shooters background that suggested he should have been prohibited from buying a gun. He did not have a criminal record, and he and his mother purchased guns legally, as it is every American’s right to do. There is no law and no background check that would have prevented this.

But that won’t stop Uncle Fester from pontificating on gun control, using his injured wife as a poster girl for his twisted agenda, and cashing in on yet another tragedy.

So Now What?


Well, if you aren’t aware, there was another campus shooting yesterday. An unhinged loon opened fire on unarmed students at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon. I didn’t want to write anything about this yesterday, because details were scarce, and initial reports are almost always wrong.

Preliminary information indicates 10 people were killed and more than 20 others injured in a shooting at Oregon's Umpqua Community College on Thursday, said Oregon State Police spokesman Bill Fugate.

Of course, that didn’t stop the White House from doing a blood dance on top of the bodies of the victims before they were even cold. Spokeshole Josh Earnest spewed the usual “sensible gun laws” mantra before the details of the shooting were even revealed.

Earnest said the “vast majority of Americans” support stricter gun laws, including closing the so-called gun-show loophole. But he said Obama is “realistic” about the dim prospects of congressional action on gun control.

Dear Spokeshole – you might want to check your information before puking forth utter garbage.

Most Americans do NOT support stricter gun laws. This has been proven again and again by various polls. But in addition to that, Oregon already has universal background checks! That law has been in effect for two months, genius, and it did absolutely nothing to stop this shooting.

But hey, never let facts get in the way of a good panic mongering!

It doesn’t matter that we don’t know how Christopher Mercer-Harper got access to firearms.

We don’t know if he was in any way prohibited from owning them in the first place.

We don’t know his motives, and we don’t know how long he had planned this massacre.

This White House doesn’t care. It just continues to push the old, hackneyed “sensible gun control” mantra, disregarding the fact that it’s about as sensible as a football bat…

Ignoring – apparently willfully – the fact that this loon was specifically executing Christians (because apparently only minorities, non-Christians, and other “protected individuals” can be victims of discrimination and hate)…

Overlooking the fact that by the time police arrived at the scene, nine people were killed and several more wounded.

Dial 9-1-1 and wait.

I don’t mean to impugn police response to this tragedy. They got there quickly and took out the maggot efficiently. But the average police response time to an emergency in this country is nine minutes. Even if the cops had arrived at lightning speed, and even if they only took five minutes to get to the scene, it was too late. How many victims do you think could be shot in that awesome five minute time period?

I hurt for the victims and their families. What happened is a horrifying tragedy. My son is in college now, and I do think about what would happen if there was an active shooter on campus. Certainly, he has no access to firearms over there, and he’d have to cower under a desk with his fellow students should this ever happen, waiting for the police to arrive, and hoping against hope that they don’t take too long as he watches his fellow classmates get murdered.

Yes, these thoughts do stomp on my brain. He’s my child. He and his sister are my life. He’s the sweet, redheaded baby I held in my arms 18 years ago and whose little face I kissed as he grinned that toothless grin at me. Would I demand more disarmed victims should, dog forbid, something happen to him? Would I pressure the legislature into giving psychotic murderers more targets to shoot at with impunity?


I’d want as many trained, law-abiding citizens as possible to be able to carry their tools of self defense in as many places as possible, including my son. I’d want him to be armed, trained, and ready. No, I wouldn’t want him to live his life in fear, but I would want him to be situationally aware and to know what to do in case tragedy strikes.

I will probably never see those common sense changes to this nation’s gun control mentality – at least not in my lifetime. After all, never one to let a crisis go to waste, Hillary Clinton is already making gun control part of her presidential platform. So I guess for now, I’ll settle for this administration shutting the fuck up until they get the facts, instead of rolling around naked in the blood of innocents and then doing a little dance on their graves.

A Shooting in Virginia (UPDATED)


Cross posted at the Zelman Partisans.

There was a shooting in Virginia today. The shooter, a former WDBJ journalist pulled a gun on two of the station’s reporters and killed them both. He also wounded the woman being interviewed on the air. She is thankfully listed in stable condition. He then proceeded to drive north on I-81 and east on I-66 with police in pursuit before shooting himself in the head.

Before the bodies of 24-year-old reporter Alison Parker and 27-year-old cameraman Adam Ward were even cold, Virginia’s opportunistic swine of a governor Fast Terry McAuliffe started immediately calling for more gun control.

“There are too many guns in the hands of people that shouldn’t have guns,” McAuliffe said during an interview with WTOP. “There is too much gun violence in America,” he said, adding that he has long advocated for strengthening gun background checks and that it should be made a priority.

The only problem with Fast Terry’s contention is that no background check would have stopped Vester Lee Flanagan from purchasing a gun.

Let’s for a moment ignore the fact that he could quickly and easily have gotten a firearm through illegal means.

Let’s for a moment forget that Vester Lee Flanagan did not have a criminal record, and the only crime he had ever been charged with was driving with an altered or revoked licence and having no registration on his vehicle in Pitt County, North Carolina in 2004, which certainly would not have made him ineligible to purchase a firearm.  And he had no history of mental illness either. In other words, he would have passed any background check any time.

So what would Fast Terry suggest?

Depriving him of his Second Amendment right, because he had a history of filing grievances against his employers?

How about making him ineligible to purchase a firearm because he was black? Or gay?

Or how about taking away his rights because he was upset about being fired and refused to leave, forcing the station to call the police to physically remove him from the premises? Would Terry have infringed on his right to keep and bear arms, because he was a jerk to his co-workers?

I’ve always said that the gun grabbers’ goal was not to reduce violence or save lives, but to disarm those of us who committed no crime whatsoever all for the sake of political expediency.

Fast Terry knows perfectly well that no new law would have stopped this shooting. Flanagan would have passed every background check in the world, so the only option left is for Fast Terry to start working to deny others their rights. Others who may be odd… or gay… or black… or difficult to work with…

As my friend Mike Williamson said in an article a long time ago, these politicians want to keep guns out of the “wrong hands” – and guess what! You’ve got the “wrong hands.”

UPDATE: In an interview with Megyn Kelly last night, Alison Parker’s father pledged to do everything in his power to keep guns out of the hands of people he called “crazy.”

I grieve along with Mr. Parker. I cannot imagine the unbearable grief of losing a child! I understand the emotion behind that pledge to shame “legislators into doing something about closing loopholes and background checks.”

However, I also understand the following as a rational person: There was no loophole, and no background check that could have prevented Flanagan from getting a firearm! He was not even seeing a psychiatrist! He was not a prohibited person. There is no background check he would not have passed. The fact that he was an entitled jerk, a bad employee, and a crappy co-worker does not make him mentally ill or ineligible to own a firearm.

There is literally no loophole and no law that allowed him – a law abiding citizen, until he pulled that trigger yesterday – to purchase a gun when he should not have been allowed to do so. None.

And yet, in the heat of grief, the push for more ineffective laws that will do nothing but disarm those who have committed no crime continues, with the likes of Fast Terry and Hillary Clinton leading the charge.

Florida State shooter


According to a police source, the guy who shot three people at Florida State University yesterday is Myron May. Here’s a profile. He was a lawyer who graduated from the university with a B.A. in economics in December 2005, and then proceeded to get his JD from Texas Tech University School of Law in December 2009.

The gun grabbers’ usual cacophony of “MOAR GUN CONTROLZ LAWZ” has already begun on my Twitter feed.

None of them can tell us which gun control initiative they advocate would have stopped this shooting.

FSU is a “gun-free” campus (and by “gun-free,” I mean the university disarms its students, in delusional hopes that crazed gunmen will also abide by their disarmament policies). So what are the gun grabbers going to do? Ban guns twice? Yeah, that’ll stop them.

Myron May was an attorney. Until September of this year, he was a felony prosecutor in New Mexico. Fairly sure he probably wasn’t a person who would have had a problem passing a background check.

From his Facebook page, it appears he lost his job as a prosecutor in New Mexico and moved back to Florida in November.

He was very religious, and eerily enough, here was his last Facebook post.


So what initiative would have stopped this guy, who quite obviously was out to commit suicide by cop? When ordered to put down his weapon, he fired at police instead, releasing a shitstorm of bullets.  He did not kill anyone. Two victims have been hospitalized. One has been released. It’s quite obvious the coward didn’t mean to kill anyone – just inflict enough damage to have the cops do what he was apparently too chickenshit to do.

So how would MOAR GUN CONTROLZ LAWZ have stopped this?

I’d love to hear some answers from those who advocate said folly.

A Few Questions About Jaylen Fryberg


Cross posted at Zelman Partisans.

A shooting at the Marysville-Pilchuk High School in Washington state has resulted in a familiar deluge of cries for MOAR GUNZ CONTROLZ from the gun grabber camp.

The Zelman Twitter feed is rife with #gunsense #notonemore #enough #stoptheNRA hashtags, and the Mad Moms Demanding Attention have once again robotically began to retweet their leader Shannon Watts’ snarky calls for more gun control.

Note the dismissive, arrogant, sarcastic tone about the tragedy. Very much typical of Shannon’s normal MO.

And mind you, the calls started before anyone knew exactly what happened, who the shooter was, where he got the gun, or why he went on a rampage.

Soon, details began to emerge, and a picture is beginning to take form.

The shooter has been identified as 14-year-old Jaylen Fryberg, who took his own life after shooting several classmates, two of whom were his cousins.

Tweets he posted prior to his rampage show a kid who was obviously angry at a break-up, upset, and threatening others.

He was suspended from the football team prior to his rampage after getting into a fight about “racist comments,” directed toward him, according to the Daily Mail.

Jaylen was too young to legally buy the handgun he used to murder his classmates, so he took his father’s gun and proceeded to shoot his cousins and classmates.

Let’s put aside the obvious – that the “universal background checks” the Mad Moms are demanding would have done nothing to stop Jaylen’s actions. He stole the legally-owned gun from his dad.

The bigger question was: where were the parents?

Why were they not following their son’s social media posts?

And if they were, why were they not concerned about the violent nature of a number of his Twitter posts, and the pain this kid was obviously feeling?

And if they were concerned, why didn’t they get him some help, or at the very least lock up their firearms until the kid either explained his angst-ridden, violent statements or got some help.

As a mom,  have full access to my son’s social media. We talk. We discuss his life. We find the time to chat each night, even if he’s working or swamped with homework. I guarantee you that if I suspected my son’s mental condition was deteriorating, the first thing I would do is get him help, and the second thing I would do is ensure his access to firearms was revoked until things were cleared up.

My house. My rules. He has full access to guns, and he is very proficient with them. But the moment I suspect something is wrong, that access goes away.

So where were the parents?

Why did this obviously depressed kid grab a pistol that belonged to his father and head on over to the school to commit murder and ultimately suicide?

Why are the Mad Mommies not discussing the roots of this problem, rather than trying to use the tragedy to push their political agenda?

Wouldn’t you think that if they were truly interested in helping kids, they would focus on the true causes of these shootings, rather than merely using them as agitprops in their senseless disarmament campaign?

Shannon Watts’ snarky tweet and the renewed drumbeat for more control and punishment for people who didn’t commit this senseless act of violence, once again confirms that the Bloombergian Stepford Moms’ mission has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with imposing Bloomberg’s nanny statism on their fellow Americans.

Here’s what we know about the gunman


There was yet another shooting at Fort Hood yesterday. The gunman, 34 year old Ivan Lopez killed four people, including himself.

The gunman in the Fort Hood shooting was an active-duty enlisted soldier who served four months in Iraq and was being evaluated for PTSD, military officials said Wednesday night.

Ivan A. Lopez, 34, had previously served in the Army National Guard in Puerto Rico, a military official said. He was assigned to the 13th Sustainment Brigade at Fort Hood.

He was apparently being treated for depression, and self-reported as having had a traumatic brain injury after having served in Iraq.

“The soldier had not been wounded in Iraq, but was being treated for behavioral problems, anxiety and ‘a number of other psychological issues,'” according to this report.

Apparently his .45 caliber pistol was not registered on base and was brought there only recently.

So far this does not appear to be terrorism related, no matter how ardently some whose Twitter feed I had the misfortune of reading hoped it was.

I’m sure more details will emerge soon. Keep everyone there in your thoughts.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: