In 1934, following the era of Al Capone and the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, Congress placed restrictions on the sale, purchase and ownership of what it termed “Class 3 weapons,” aka automatic weapons. Fast forward to 2017 Las Vegas – enabled by a device called a bump stock, Stephen Paddock killed 59 people and injured more than 500 in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

Was Paddock using automatic weapons? Not really, but with a bump stock, a legal AR15 semi-automatic becomes every bit as lethal as the Tommy guns of the roaring twenties.

How did the modern bump stock come about? Ask its developer Jeremiah Cottle of Moran, TX. [from an article on Tactical Life.com]

I’ve been a recreational shooter my entire life, and I’ve always enjoyed shooting full-auto weapons. At the same time, purchasing a Class 3 firearm is outrageously expensive, not to mention it requires a mountain of paperwork sure to give you life-threatening paper cuts. I had bump fired in the past, but it was completely uncontrollable, unsafe and unusable. I wanted to find a way to change that, to make bump firing safer and more controlled.

So, I thought about it, and I prayed about it. Ultimately, I decided to go for it. I used all of my savings from the military, sold everything in my house that wasn’t nailed down and started making 3D-printed models and solving problems. Finally, I sent the stock to the BATFE [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] when I had a design that was close to being commercially ready. I was so happy when I got the word that it was approved.

Cottle’s company, Slide Fire is the principal manufacturer of the bump stock. Its promotional videos are chilling. Have a look at their showpiece.

How does a bump stock get past Federal regulators? The approval letter from BATFE explains

“The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical functions when installed … Accordingly, we find that the ‘bump-stock’ is a firearm part and is not regulated as a firearm under the Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.”

More from Jeremiah Cottle:

Some people like drag racing, some people like skiing and some people, like me, love full-auto. Unfortunately, the average recreational shooter doesn’t have access to a Class 3 firearm of their very own—they’re just expensive and impractical, like buying your own personal golf-cart hovercraft. I mean, if you can afford it, why not? For everyone else, Slide Fire brings shooters the same full-auto experience but without having to take out a second mortgage on their home.

I wonder how much Cottle loves full-auto in light of what happened in Las Vegas. Maybe the incident didn’t affect him. According to Slide Fire’s video, it’s every man’s birthright, freedom unleashed. But right now @SlidefireSol is getting slammed on Twitter and rightly so.

One of Slide Fire’s videos begins with a quote it says is from George Washington [it is actually a misquote from George Washington Carver], “When you can do common things in uncommon ways, you will command the attention of the world.” Sad to say, in this case, the idea is very true.

The post Rapid fire weapons – every man’s birthright? appeared first on Occasional Planet.

There were rave reviews from a number of Democrats about Missouri Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate Jason Kander’s new ad featuring him assembling a rifle blind-folded.

How clever, many Democrats said, to hoist Republican opponent Roy Blunt on his own petard. Blunt, like most Republicans, is the darling of the National Rifle Association, but he is also from a generation of politicians who found ways to get deferments so as to not be drafted into the army (including Donald Trump, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton and the author of this post). But the younger Kander chose to enlist in the Army following nine-eleven. With his training, he developed the skills to pull off this ad.

However, despite the crafty nature of his ad, two quick questions come to mind: (1) why is Kander glamorizing guns in a society stricken with so much gun violence, and (2) wasn’t he an enabler of unnecessary wars by enlisting in the army at a time when George W. Bush was commander-in-chief? It was pretty apparent from the beginning that Bush wanted to deploy U.S. troops for reasons that had nothing to do with either national interest or humanitarian purposes. I’ll wind up voting for Kander, but he’s certainly decreased my my level of enthusiasm with his fascination with and glorification of guns.

The post Kander tries to outgun Blunt appeared first on Occasional Planet.

The National Rifle Association will make the override of Senate Bill 656 their top priority in the country this week as the omnibus gun bill continues to gain momentum as the most high-profile legislation at stake on Wednesday, says an article in the Missouri Times.

The pro-gun group will launch a once-in-a-decade lobbying effort to override Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of a bill that has drawn fervent support and opposition from all corners of the country.

As part of their efforts, the NRA has flown in several staffers to help lobby lawmakers, launched television ads, and sent mailers to key targeted districts. Whit O’Daniel, who lobbies on behalf of the NRA, said he’s been texting the entire Republican caucus to inform them that the NRA ranks SB 656 as the biggest priority in the country. It’s also their biggest priority in Missouri since 2003.

Imagine that! The NRA thinks that giving any and all Missourians unregulated rights to buy, own, sell guns and shoot their neighbors at will (as in stand-your-ground) is one of the biggest priorities in the nation. It’ll be good for NRA sponsors I suppose, as in the get-rich-quick kind of good.

Just to provide a little counterpoint,  I also want to share  this tidbit  from an article posted on the Turner Report:

A former Tarkio R-1 High School student who brought a loaded semi-automatic pistol to school, causing the school to be locked down, pleaded guilty in federal court today to illegally possessing a machine gun that was found at his residence.

[…]

According to court documents, Knoth – who came to school on Feb. 11, 2016, wearing military-style clothing, boots and ballistic body armor – displayed a fully loaded magazine to another student that day. That student alerted a teacher, and the school contacted the Tarkio, Mo., Police Department. School officials then discovered a loaded Glock 9mm semi-automatic pistol in Knoth’s backpack, along with four loaded 9mm pistol magazines, three loaded .223- or .556-caliber magazines, a spring-assisted knife, a seatbelt cutter and a window punch.

Knoth was arrested and handcuffed. The school was placed on lockdown.

Investigators searched Knoth’s vehicle, which was parked in the school parking lot. They found two loaded 9mm magazines and 15 loaded .223/.556-caliber magazines.

Investigators also searched Knoth’s residence. During a search of the southwest bedroom, investigators found a loaded machine gun in the closet – an AR-style .223/.556 pistol, containing no visible serial numbers or manufacturer stamp. They found a second machine gun, an UZI-style 9mm firearm (unknown manufacture), in the dresser. Investigators also found numerous rounds of ammunition and numerous loaded .223/.556 and 9mm magazines throughout the residence.

So are unstable young men with a fetish for guns and violence among the persons whose priorities the NRA is spending so much money to support? You better bet they, and their ilk will be among the beneficiaries.Of course, if the NRA gets its best-of-all-world druthers, teachers and administrators, along with each kid in Knoth’s school would all be sporting “good guy” guns in order to ward off attack. Possible outcomes? Draw  your own conclusions.

The post Who benefits from NRA’s push for MO guns-everywhere law? appeared first on Occasional Planet.

You know how the NRA types are always telling us that the antidote to a bad guy with a gun is a good guy? This claim owes much of its currency to the work of a “scholar,” John Lott, author of the widely cited The War on Guns, who has made shilling for the NRA his life work. Sadly for the NRA, though, Lott is a demonstrable fraud. Devin Hughes and Evan DeFelippis, two reporters at Think Progress have examined his background and his published research and confirm that, as summarized below in Raw Story, it’s all bunkum:

They presented the five worst [problems with Lott’s work], which included falsely claiming that a Lott essay was published in a “peer-reviewed journal,” lying about the number of mass shootings in the U.S. versus Europe, making deliberate misreadings of the center’s own analyses, lying about the number of deaths in “gun-free zones,” and, again, creating an echo chamber by posing as fans and supporters online.

Just to show how easy it is to fool an audience that wants to be fooled – say, for example, Fox News and its devoted viewers – Think Progress also presents evidence that Lott’s dishonesty is not new news:

But Lott’s recent successes belie a far more shadowy past. A little over a decade ago, he was disgraced and his career was in tatters. Not only was Lott’s assertion that more guns leads to more safety formally repudiated by a National Research Council panel, but he had also been caught pushing studies with severe statistical errors on numerous occasions. An investigation uncovered that he had almost certainly fabricated an entire survey on defensive gun use. And a blogger revealed that Mary Rosh, an online commentator claiming to be a former student of Lott’s who would frequently post about how amazing he was, was in fact John Lott himself. He was all but excommunicated from academia.

Will this debunking of the “good guys with a gun” line make any difference?

Maybe, but not likely. First of all, a corollary of the rule that folks are easy to fool when they want to be, is the fact that few of those folks will believe information contrary to their druthers when they get it. Secondly, this information isn’t likely to make it to the outlets frequented by 2nd amendment types. And thirdly, even if this weren’t the case, it may already be too late.

In the St. Louis-Dispatch this morning, I read about at least five shootings in St. Louis last night. Additionally, five people and a service dog in Joplin were injured when one of those guys with a gun decided to go on a random shooting spree. Thanks to the efforts of folks like Lott, there’s lots of unnecessary guns out there. Good guys and bad guys aside, you can be sure that plenty of folks will end up as shooting victims one way or another.

To make matters worse, the NRA-loving Missouri legislature passed a bill, SB656, that all but eliminated any pretense of gun regulation in the state and extended the definition of allowable “stand your ground” shootings to permit the offensive use of a gun anytime one of those itchy-fingered, paranoid good guys or gals gets all hot and bothered about what they think might be a potential threat. While the governor sensibly vetoed this absurdity, the GOP-dominated legislature is confident that they can override his veto in September.

One state Senator, Republican Brian Munzlinger, who professed to be “shocked” by the Governor’s veto, thinks we need more domestic guns because of ISIS. A few isolated incidents gets these folks more perturbed than the five victims who got in the way of a bullet in St. Louis last night, or the five in Joplin who were shot in their vehicles by a man they didn’t even know.

So there  you have it

Things are about to get truly scary if NRA fanatics get their way in Missouri whether one of the main selling points for guns and more guns is based lies or not. Mix the vast numbers of guns already on the street, exaggerated paranoia, and the fact that the NRA will continue tossing cash into the laps of compliant politicians, and nobody will even hear you when you point out that the case for more guns is built on rotting straw.

*1st and 2nd paragraphs lightly edited to source links more clearly (8/15, 4:11 pm).

[Editor’s note: This article originally appeared on ShowMe Progress.]

The post The truth about the good guys and the bad guys with guns appeared first on Occasional Planet.

We’re republishing this post from 2012, because it continues to have relevance to our ongoing debate about gun violence in America. After the recent mass shooting at a community college in Oregon, the media diverted attention from the problem of gun proliferation to ” how do we keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill?” Instead, we should be asking: Why do we allow gun manufacturers and importers to flood the country with tens of millions of guns every year? Why do we allow the NRA to posture as a gun enthusiast’s organization when its main purpose is to, a) sell weapons for the gun industry, and b) undermine any laws that might stem the flow of guns into our communities?

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is the lobbying arm of the firearms industry. It uses fear, racism, and focus-group tested catchwords like “freedom,” and “self-defence” to pimp sales for the over 300 firearms manufacturers in the United States. While the NRA represents itself as an association of gun enthusiasts, its real purpose is to serve the interests of gun manufacturers. To that end, it bullies elected officials into passing laws that will make it easier for the gun industry sell more rifles and handguns. It promotes gun sales among the public by stoking fear and racism. It conflates patriotism with gun ownership, suggesting individuals have a patriotic duty to own a firearm.

Playing off fear and racism, the NRA says “good,” people should carry a gun to protect themselves from “bad” people whom they perceive as threatening them or their loved ones. In its latest strategy to boost gun sales, the NRA has, with the help of ALEC, passed “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws in dozens of states across the country. By encouraging a vigilante mindset, these new laws have resulted in a large increase in “justifiable homicides.” Unfortunately, the recent shooting in Florida of “bad” hoodie-wearing, unarmed African-American teenager Trayvon Martin by “good” gun-toting, neighborhood watch citizen George Zimmerman may add to that statistic.

It’s no surprise that gun sales and concealed weapons applications have boomed since Barack Obama was elected. That’s because NRA president Wayne LaPierre has been spreading the rumor that President Obama “has a secret plan to take away your guns.” The NRA has cynically used the election (and racist feelings against President Obama) to gin up gun sales—because the NRA is not about what is good for the country, it’s about promoting gun industry profits.

Politicians pander for NRA campaign contributions

At the 2012 NRA convention in St Louis, MO, Newt Gingrich—while simultaneously reaching for new heights of absurdity and new lows in pandering—called for “universal gun ownership.” In delivering the ultimate gun industry wet dream, he promised if elected president to submit a UN resolution calling for the arming of everyone on the planet. Yes, really. As quoted from Digby:

The right to bear arms comes from our creator, not our government,” Gingrich said. The NRA “has been too timid” in promoting its agenda beyond American borders. The Bill of Rights was not written only for Americans, he said. “It is a universal document.”

“A Gingrich presidency will submit to the UN a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right to every person on the planet.” Every world citizen, he said, “deserves the right to defend themselves from those who exploit, imprison, or kill them.” For his latest big idea, Gingrich earned a standing ovation from the crowd of roughly 5,000.

The jaw-dropping irresponsibility of Gingrich’s craven statement, aimed squarely at the primitive reptilian brain—the one in all of us that responds to fear with fight or flight—boggles the mind. But then again, the GOP specializes in pandering to the lower aspects of our human nature in order to win elections for their corporate overlords.

The social and economic toll of gun proliferation in the United States

The Medical school of the University of Utah has collected some powerful statistics that throw a stark light on the devastating effects of gun proliferation. In the end, gun ownership has huge economic and social consequences for the United States. Here are a few highlights:

In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600. Firearm injuries are among the top ten causes of death in the U.S., right up there with cancer, stroke and heart disease.

There are over 200,000 non-fatal gun injuries per year in the U.S. Many of these injuries require hospitalization and very expensive trauma care. An older study from 1994 revealed the cost per gun injury requiring admission to a trauma center was over $14,000. The cumulative lifetime cost in 1985 for gunshot wounds was estimated to be $911 million, with $13.4 billion in lost work productivity.

A 2003 study of firearm deaths in high-income countries used data from the World Health Organization (WHO). To put these statistics in perspective, the total population in the United States for 2003 was 290.8 million while the combined population for the other 22 countries was 563.5 million. There were 29,771 firearm deaths in the US and 7,653 firearm deaths in the 22 other countries combined. In other words, of all the firearm deaths in these 23 high-income countries in 2003, 80% occurred in the US.

Accidental shooting deaths are most commonly associated with one or more children playing with a gun they found in the home. The person pulling the trigger is a friend, family member, or the victim. In the period from 1979 to 2000, accidental firearms deaths involving children declined in the U.S., aided by child access prevention laws and felony prosecution of offenders. A study of non-natural deaths in a large American city revealed that half of such deaths in persons from 10 to 19 years of age were due to homicide, and firearms were involved in 88% of them.

In a 2004 study, regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and suicide in the home. Persons who own a gun and who engage in abuse of intimate partners such as a spouse are more likely to use a gun to threaten their intimate partner.

In a 2009 study, individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession. So much for the “self-protection” argument for gun ownership.

Forget public safety, there’s money to be made in selling lethal weapons

According to Hoovers, a Dun and Brandstreet company: “The US gun and ammunition manufacturing industry includes about 300 companies with combined annual revenue of about $6 billion. Major gun and ammunition manufacturers include Browning Arms; Freedom Group (which includes Remington Arms, Marlin Firearms, and Bushmaster Firearms); Olin; Alliant Techsystems; Sturm, Ruger & Company; and Smith & Wesson. The industry is highly concentrated.

To underscore the lucrative nature of this business, large private equity firms like Cerberus and The Freedom group have been buying up gun manufacturing companies, like Remington and Bushmaster, because they have decided there is an opportunity to grow the industry beyond what it is and make even more money.

Changing the conversation about guns in America

Do we want a country where everyone is paranoid and armed to the teeth? Or do we want a country like Denmark, that has the lowest rate of deaths involving firearms of the 23 largest industrial countries? The reason Denmark has the lowest rate is because guns are illegal in Denmark and the laws against them are stringent, putting anyone who carries a gun and is not legally allowed to do so in jail. Only police officers and soldiers are allowed to carry guns. Other weapons, such as knives or lead pipes are now considered deadly weapons in Denmark, and in recent years stricter laws have been passed for assault with those deadly weapons.

The current conversation about gun ownership in the United States is based on a misguided interpretation of the Second Amendment. Widespread ownership of guns is considered a given in American culture and discussion about guns is myopic, limited to “responsible” gun ownership vs. irresponsible gun ownership, legal gun ownership vs. illegal gun ownership, or open carry vs. concealed carry. Elected officials are afraid of the NRA and rarely take it to task . To avoid hundreds of thousands of gun injuries and deaths per year, and to create a more peaceful and safe society, we need to call out the NRA as the official pimp of the gun industry—and begin the discussion about disarming America.

The post NRA: Still the official pimp for the multi-billion dollar gun industry appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In advance of the National Rifle Association’s 2015 convention, the widely circulated rumor that the NRA was banning “operational” guns from the conventional hall offered a delicious bit of irony. Word was that at the convention in Nashville, Tennessee,  any guns brought in would have to be “inoperable,” meaning that the firing pin would be removed.

Oh, man, I was so hoping that it was true, so that I could gloat about NRA hypocrisy and also share the tasty headlines and internet memes that poked fun at it.

But, alas, the NRA is not as tone deaf or as dumb as I had envisioned. And the rumor doesn’t pan out.

The first debunking I came across was on a site called “Bearing Arms: Guns & Patriots, Saving Lives and Liberty.” I don’t usually stop in at these kinds of sites, but that’s where I landed. The blogger made a pretty strong case against the rumor, stating:

The National Rifle Association holds an annual meeting every year in a different host city, and requires that attendees follow the federal, state, and local laws applicable in that city, like every major convention of every significant national group, ever.

So, according to that report, the NRA was merely following the local rules, and the venue where they were holding the convention bans operational weapons on display.

But I still desperately wanted him to be wrong.

Then I read a similar debunking at NPR. As a lefty, that’s a site that I tend to—rightly or wrongly– knee-jerk trust. And that’s where I became convinced that the rumor was baloney—something fabricated, I suppose, by others who wish to undermine the credibility and motives of the NRA.

As Blake Farmer of member station WPLN in Nashville tells our Newscast unit, one of the venues is enforcing its ban on guns. Here’s more:

“[I]t’s not unusual for meeting sites to restrict guns. In Nashville, those with carry permits are allowed in the convention hall, but not across the street in Bridgestone Arena, where the nightly concerts are held.”

And, as Blake notes, display firearms on the exhibit floor at the NRA convention will have their firing pins removed — which is typical for such shows.

NPR sent readers to an MSNBC report, which said:

The original report from the New York Daily News, which said the NRA had “banned working guns” from the convention, was inaccurate – Tennessee’s open-carry laws still apply at the NRA event. The Memphis Daily News published a piece explaining Tennessee gun laws in more detail. Similarly, when The Tennessean reported, “All guns on the convention floor will be nonoperational,” that referred to the guns on display at exhibitors, not the guns attendees bring themselves.

Contrary to the rumor, the fact is that convention-goers can still pack their own heat at NRA conventions.

Attendees can bring their own firearms as long as they are compliant with local ordinances, NRA spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said. Also, Baker said displaying disabled guns is standard practice at the event, which she emphasized is a trade show for gun makers.

MSNBC does note, though, that the NRA did impose some  limits on attendees at the convention

This does not mean, however, that convention attendees face no limits on where and when they can carry loaded firearms. We learned late Wednesday, for example, that no guns are allowed in the convention room during performances from Alan Jackson and Jeff Foxworthy. There’s also an expectation that gun owners will have the proper permits before bringing loaded weapons to see speeches from presidential candidates.

So, the whole irony thing was wrong. Sigh.

But we should also remember that the convention was held in Tennessee, where gun laws are pretty darned loose. And where a Tennessee lawmaker recently asserted that guns are as safe as bicycles. And where, just days before the NRA convention was called to order, one Tennessee State Representative pushed for a state law that would make it easier for people [meaning NRA conventioneers] to carry guns into public parks.

I still disagree with essentially everything the NRA stands for–except for the necessity of gun safety. I’m just slightly disappointed that, this time, they took away my opportunity to have a laugh at their expense.

The post I wanted the NRA “no-working-guns-at the convention” rumor to be true ..but it’s not appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Where is Don Draper when we need him?

Draper, of course, is the iconic 1960s advertising executive who stars in the hit TV series, Mad Men. He’s a chain-smoking, hard-drinking, womanizing city slicker of questionable morals who occasionally does something brilliant. Perhaps his most memorable advertising accomplishment occurred when his firm, Sterling Cooper Draper Price, lost its lucrative account marketing Lucky Strike cigarettes.

Draper’s response was to buy a full-page ad in the New York Times that read:

“For over 25 years we devoted ourselves to peddling a product for which good work is irrelevant, because people can’t stop themselves from buying it. A product that never improves, that causes illness, and makes people unhappy. But there was money in it. A lot of money. In fact, our entire business depended on it. We knew it wasn’t good for us, but we couldn’t stop. And then, when Lucky Strike moved their business elsewhere, I realized, here was my chance to be someone who could sleep at night, because I know what I’m selling doesn’t kill my customers.”

I wonder what the man who wrote that would say about the full-page ad that appeared in a recent issue of Parade magazine, a slim Sunday supplement that is inserted in many of the nation’s largest newspapers. The ad headline reads: “Who Says Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend?” Above the headline, in four-color glory, is a picture of a rifle.

Oh, but it’s not just any rifle. This is the hand-crafted “American Beauty” by Henry. It features an etched silver panel centered with a demure yellow rose. The copy says that the Henry Company is “very proud to offer the perfect Valentine’s Day gift for the most deserving woman in your life.”

I guess there are some women who would not find this silly. Personally, I find it a frightening example of a new marketing trend that is being promoted by gun manufacturers, their lobbyists and trade associations, and the NRA. That trend is to promote firearms as an everyday accessory; something we can’t leave home without.

How else to explain the pistols in pastel colors? The purses with a special compartment for a handgun? The child-size rifle with “My First Rifle” in rhinestones? The recent emphasis on open-carry, which means that we can meet up with gun-toting grannies in the supermarket?

Don Draper the advertising guru would undoubtedly find this a marvelous marketing strategy. Make people think of a firearm as a necessary accessory, like a scarf or a billfold. Make people think that “everyone has one.” Make people feel that they deserve something special. Develop the product line to fit into various niches: a beginner rifle for kids, a sophisticated firearm for the working woman, an assault weapon for the testosterone-fueled adolescent.

But there was another Don Draper: the man who wanted to be able to sleep at night because he knew that what he was selling wasn’t killing people. Maybe that Don Draper would write this ad:

We’ve had you in our crosshairs for a while because we know that you like to feel special. You like to feel important and powerful. The firearms that we have been advertising can make you feel that way. But what we haven’t told you is that these weapons can also make you, or someone who gets in your sights, dead. We are going to dodge the bullet of responsibility and resign this account right now, because we don’t believe that buying a gun should be as easy or as pleasurable as buying a candy bar. Arms should be for hugging, not killing.

Wish you were here, Don Draper.

The post Ad says rifles are a girl’s best friend appeared first on Occasional Planet.

There are two ways to solve the gun crisis in America that have yet to be discussed. First, there is one group above all others that is the source of most of gun violence in this country. According to the US National Library of Medicine/National Institute of Health one group of Americans caused 85.3% of all deaths by firearms in this country between 1976 and 1987. That is a pretty overwhelming statistic. Obviously, if we can get the guns away from this group then we can drastically reduce the amount of gun violence in this country.

The deadly group? Men. All we have to do is make sure men are never allowed to own, touch, or have any access to guns. Women can continue to have all the 2nd Amendment freedoms that they enjoy today. Men, not so much. With over 85% of all gun violence fueled by testosterone, I have no idea why this hasn’t been tried already (other than the fact that men make the laws, control almost everything, and would cry as though their favorite team just lost the Super Bowl were anything even close to this tried).

Imagine a world where buying a phallic stand-in would have to involve something that was not directly about snuffing the life out of another living being. I hear fast cars are a pretty good substitute for inadequate man pipes. Perhaps men could take up archery. Granted, getting a concealed carry permit for a long bow and a quiver doesn’t have the same thrill of stealth, but it’s a great way to play out your Green Arrow fantasies. Perhaps a Paleolithic spear thrower is more your style. Going old school.

It all sounds quite silly, but gun violence is never very funny. Having one group perpetuating so much more violence than another does point out that the testosterone-possessors among us need to be severely regulated. As the familiar phrase goes, “Everyone is a responsible gun owner until they aren’t.” So what can be done?

Enter the second way to regulate guns! We need to look at an approach taken by the very people who scream the loudest if gun ownership is threatened. After all, they’re masters at knowing how to take away a protected right.

Imagine that there’s only one store in your state that sells guns and it’s nowhere near you. Now imagine that there is no one in your state willing to sell guns, so a guy flies in once a week, on Friday, to open the shop. Now imagine that your state legislature passes a law that makes it mandatory to talk to the gun guy 3 days before you’re allowed to buy a gun from him. Oops, since he’s only there once a week, that means you’ll not only have to pay to fly to that one location where there’s a shop, but you’ll also have to get a hotel for a week. Don’t despair!

Those same lawmakers have also mandated that you not only get lectured by the gun guy against owning a gun, including made-up stuff about guns exploding in people’s hands all the time, or spontaneously burning down houses, but you also have to go for a long lecture from a bunch of people who don’t know anything at all about guns except that they hate them. These people will get to talk for several hours about the evils of guns and no one will check to see what they say is true. After you get this mind-numbing, one-sided, mandated lecture, you’re free to talk to the gun guy one more time, when he flies to the state. If you still want the gun, you get to wait until the gun guy returns (which includes getting to pay all those hotel fees, round trip airfares, or whatever). Yay! He’s back. One final lecture and you’re the proud owner of a small handgun (there are size limits)!

You may think this is ridiculous because, after all, the right to bear arms is the law. You should be protected. Roe vs. Wade made abortion legal. And yet the above is basically the reproductive law in several states. Just substitute doctor for “gun guy” and “legal medical procedure” for “gun”. Cheer up, though, because I could be discussing “admitting privileges” for gun shop owners and so sorry, you’ll have to go to Mexico and risk dying from defective arms.

So what’s the big difference? Guns are used to kill, so it can’t be about “saving lives.”Both are legal. You tell me. Why is one law backed up by billions of dollars, countless lobbyists, an enormous and powerful organization and the worshipping voices of millions of fans of things that blast holes into animals and people, and the other consists of women (because there isn’t a single law on the books restricting the rights of the father of those precious cells). It’s time to go all “pro-life” on the NRA.

The post Two ways to regulate guns appeared first on Occasional Planet.

While there may be some people who have some reasonable arguments for owning a hunting rifle, it doesn’t help their cause to have the NRA espousing the most radical, irrational positions against reasonable regulations on gun ownership. And for those who attended the recent [May 2013] NRA convention, the crazy was on full display. AlterNet recently reported on the worst of the worst. Here’s AlterNet’s top five:

1. Armed children 

The NRA wants to appeal to….children! The  New York Daily News reported that at the convention, “two 10-year-olds took aim with air pistols, an 11-year-old gawked at a semiautomatic weapon and a 3-year-old soaked up applause for being the youngest member.”

That wasn’t the only instance of children attending the NRA convention. The  Daily Mail Online notes that Will Marshall, a 12-year-old from Florida, “has been a member of the NRA for 11 years and owns four guns.” In other words, he joined when he was one.

The presence of young kids at the NRA comes as the problem of children holding guns has been tragically highlighted. One April week saw four people shot by toddlers. And  in early May, a five-year-old boy in Kentucky accidentally killed his two-year-old sister with a small rifle.

2. A bleeding target that looks like Obama

For two days, a vendor at the NRA convention hawked a gun target that had an image that looked like President Obama bleeding on it. The vendor, Zombie Industries, was asked to take the product down because it looked too much like the president. Zombie Industries sells life-sized targets for gun owners to shoot at.

Asked by a BuzzFeed reporter whether the Obama likeness was intentional, a Zombie Industries worker replied: “Let’s just say I gave my Republican father one for Christmas.”

3. Guns and the Boston Marathon bombing

There’s plenty to parse in NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre’s speech at the convention. But what attracted the most attention is this remark: “How many Bostonians wished they had a gun two weeks ago?”

LaPierre continued by saying that Bostonians were “frightened citizens…sheltered in place with no means to defend themselves.”

4. Pink bra holsters

The NRA is an overwhelmingly male organization. But they’re trying to broaden their appeal to women–and so vendors  sold bras that could hold guns.

5. Mayor Bloomberg as a Nazi

The Obama image wasn’t the only distasteful optic that occurred at the convention. In this case, though, the speaker wasn’t asked to take it down.

Glenn Beck delivered a speech to the NRA that was supplemented by an image of Mayor Michael Bloomberg looking like a Nazi, as  New York magazine’s Joe Coscarelli notes. Bloomberg has been in the NRA’s sights since he started railing against lax gun laws in the country and funding candidates favorable to gun control.

The post 5 terrifying takeaways from the NRA’s 2013 national convention appeared first on Occasional Planet.

I watched the comments by one of the grieving parents from Newtown and the President this afternoon in response to the shameful miscarriage of democracy in the U.S. Senate. Four Democratic senators voted to allow the Manchin-Toomey bill on background checks to be held hostage to a filibuster. Those four Democratic senators deserve our special attention as we respond to this black day in our history. They are Senators Bagich (AK), Baucus (MT), Heitkamp (ND), and Pryor (AR.)  If there had been an up or down vote, the bill would have passed with the minimum 51 in the yes column. Republicans Toomey, Kirk, Collins and McCain voted for the bill. They should be congratulated.

Those of you in Missouri can send Sen. Blunt a message at this link:
http://www.blunt.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile/contact-roy?p=contact-roy

Moms Demand Action, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and other gun safety groups have done a good job of teaching us about the horrors of gun violence and have urged us to contact our senators politely to express our views. Don’t you think it’s time to get angry? It should be obvious to all of us that you cannot play nice with bullies.

Those of you in other states, go to www.govspot.gov and find your senator. You can also contact the four Democratic cowards who went along with the filibuster.

Patricia Maisch who witnessed the Tucson shooting said on the Rachel Maddow Show tonight that those senators who voted against the bill “have no soul.” They are more concerned with their NRA rating than with the health and safety of their constituents. I agree.

The NRA spread outright lies about what the bill would do and spooked a vocal minority of gun owners who intimidated the senators. Shameful. That’s what the White House message is tonight. I agree.

The President said today there were no “coherent arguments” offered against the bill. Sen. Grassley and others just repeated the NRA talking points such as “Background checks would not have prevented Newtown.”   No one has claimed that it would have, but that stupid comment is the best they can do.

I heard the same message yesterday at the Capitol in Jefferson City at the Medicaid expansion rally. There are NO coherent arguments for not expanding the Medicaid program in accordance with the Affordable Care Act.  But Republicans say no anyway. They thumbed their noses at us by vacating the Capitol building under the guise of a pre-planned caucus meeting. Cowards. Just like the Republicans and four Democrats in D.C. They hate President Obama and the Affordable Care Act more than they care about Missouri families. Shameful.

Those in charge of the Republican Party in our country and in Missouri are so extreme in their views and so disdainful of our democratic processes that we can only conclude it’s time to man the barricades and take to the streets.

Former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords has an editorial in Thursday’s NY Times where she calls for us to do everything we can to get the message across to the cowards in the Senate that we will remember come election day. I hope the groups with the power and money to defeat those shameful traitors send them packing when they run for re-election. Meanwhile Giffords asks us to show them “our fury.” I certainly will let Sen. Blunt know how despicable he is for his vote today.

Three people were killed at the Boston marathon by a homemade explosive device. Sen. Claire McCaskill asked a good question today during a hearing. Is there really any difference between Sandy Hook and Boston other than the method used by the killer?  The answer is no. Dozens of Americans will die tomorrow by gunfire. And the next day. And the next. This is a public health and safety crisis worse than any bird flu epidemic or drowning accident. But we can’t discuss it because we are forbidden by the NRA. Is this really any way to run a civilized society?

The post The shameful background-check vote: Is this any way to run a civilized country? appeared first on Occasional Planet.