Four Marines Killed In Shootings At Chattanooga Military Sites

Tragedy in Tennessee.

Chattanooga Shooting

Four members of the U.S. Marines were killed today in two separate shootings at military facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee:

ATLANTA — A gunman opened fire on two military facilities in Chattanooga, Tenn., on Thursday, leaving four people dead, including members of the military. The gunman was also killed.

Officials said that gunman had numerous weapons, and the police chief, Fred Fletcher, said that among those “brutally and brazenly attacked” were members of the armed services.

“We will treat this like a terrorism investigation until we determine that it is not,” Ed Reinhold, an F.B.I. special agent, said during the news conference.

The mayor of Chattanooga, Andy Berke, said during a news conference that in addition to the dead, others had been injured during the episode.

The city’s statement came about two hours after the United States Navyconfirmed that a shooting had occurred at a military facility on Amnicola Highway.

Military officials also reported a separate shooting at a recruiting center on Lee Highway in Chattanooga. Kelli Bland, the chief of public affairs for the United States Army Recruiting Command, said four Army recruiters had been in the building at the time but were uninjured.

In a statement, the White House said, “The president has been briefed by his national security staff on the Chattanooga shooting, and will continue to get updates as warranted.”

The episode unnerved one of Tennessee’s largest cities. The Chattanooga State Community College posted an alert on its website that urged people on its main campus to remain inside and to close doors. Lee University, which is near Chattanooga, temporarily ordered a lockdown, the university said.

More from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — A gunman unleashed a barrage of gunfire at two military facilities Thursday in Tennessee, killing at least four Marines and wounding a soldier and a police officer, officials said. The shooter also was killed.

“Today was a nightmare for the city of Chattanooga,” Mayor Andy Berke said. “As a city, we will respond to this with every available resource that we have.”

U.S. Attorney Bill Killian said officials were treating the attacks as an “act of domestic terrorism,” though FBI Special Agent in Charge Ed Reinhold said authorities were still investigating a motive. The first shooting happened around 10:45 a.m.; the attacks were over within a half-hour.

Berke said five people died in all, including the gunman. A police officer was shot in the ankle, and others were wounded, he said.

Two U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, told The Associated Press four U.S. Marines were among the dead.

A Marine recruiter was treated at a hospital for a gunshot wound to the leg, the Marine Corps said on its Facebook page.

Lives have been lost from some faithful people who have been serving our country, and I think I join all Tennesseans in being both sickened and saddened by this,” Gov. Bill Haslam said.

The shootings began at a recruiting center on Old Lee Highway in Chattanooga where five branches of the military all have adjoining offices. A gunshot rang out around 10:30 or 10:45 a.m., said Sgt. 1st Class Robert Dodge, 36, the center leader for U.S. Army recruiting at the center.

“Shortly after that, just a few seconds, the shooter began shooting more rounds. We realized it was an actual shooting,” he said.

He and his colleagues then got on the ground and barricaded themselves in a safe place. Dodge estimated there were 30 to 50 shots fired.

He did not see the shooter or a vehicle. The Army recruiting office was not damaged, but doors and glass were damaged at the neighboring Air Force, Navy and Marine offices, he said.

Law enforcement officials told recruiters that the shooter was in a car, stopped in front of the facility, shot at the building and drove off, said Brian Lepley, a spokesman with the U.S. Army Recruiting Command in Fort Knox, Kentucky.

The recruiting center sits in a short strip between a Cricket Wireless and an Italian restaurant with no apparent additional security. Nearby, Nicholas Donohue heard a blast of gunshots while working at Desktop Solutions. But he had music playing and wasn’t quite sure what the noise had been. He turned off the music and seconds later, a second blast thundered. He took shelter in a back room.

“Even though it knew it was most likely gunfire I heard, you also don’t want to believe it’s happening in the moment,” he said. “Since I didn’t see anything, I couldn’t be sure.”

By the time he emerged, police were cordoning off the area.

Within minutes of that attack, the shooter then opened fire at the Navy Operational Support Center and Marine Corps Reserve Center Chattanooga, about 7 miles away. Reinhold said all of the dead were killed there.

The center sits between the highway and a pathway that runs through Tennessee RiverPark, a popular park at a bend in the Tennessee River northeast of downtown Chattanooga. It’s in a light industrial area that includes a Coca-Cola bottling plant.

The two entrances to the fenced facility have unmanned gates and concrete barriers that require approaching cars to slow down to drive around them

Law enforcement officials are not ascribing a motive to the attack as of yet and indeed have not officially identified the gunman who carried out the shootings. However, CBS News is reporting that it has two sources who identify the shooter as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez. Obviously, if that turns out to be true then the immediate speculation regarding this attack will be whether or not there is a link to international terrorism of any kind. The most plausible theory, of course, is that this person, if he is indeed the shooter, falls into the same category of many of the self-radicalized “lone wolf” attackers and potential that we’ve encountered over the years, and especially recently in cases such as the Boston Marathon Bombing and the shootings at the Canadian Parliament last October. It’s less likely that he has had any real direct contact with groups such as ISIS or al Qaeda outside of possible communication over the Internet. Whatever the reason, though, the shootings are obviously a tragedy that are likely to lead to discussions about security at military facilities that are off base, especially recruitment centers such as the one targeted her which are often located in strip malls and other commercial business developments alongside other businesses such as restaurants and hair salons.

This isn’t the first time that a military recruiting center has been the target of an attack. In 2009, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, an American-born Muslim convert, killed one member of the military and injured another in a drive-by shooting outside a center in Little Rock, Arkansas. Muhammed had spent time in Yemen prior to the attack but there was indication that he had had any contact with terrorist elements while he was there. Ultimately, he plead guilty in the middle of his trial and was sentenced to life in prison. During the trial, his attorneys had attempted to assert a defense that Muhammed was delusional at the time of the attack but there does not seem to have been any real evidence of mental illness. Whether this case turns out to be similar, only time will tell.

FILED UNDER: Crime, Law and the Courts, Military Affairs, National Security, Terrorism
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Tony W says:

    A terrible tragedy, and my heart goes out to the families.

    Because this is a political site I’ll suggest that it’s too bad there were no good guys with guns there….

  2. Jack says:

    Gun Free Zone Self Defense Prohibited Zones, luring murderers while disarmed personnel perfectly capable of self defense left disarmed and cowering behind desks as others die–all in the name of political correctness.

    Wasn’t all this hatred supposed to stop after the removal of the SC Confederate Flag?

    Maybe someone should propose yet another law that will make criminals OBEY the LAW!!!

  3. C. Clavin says:

    @Tony W:
    I’m betting the Marines weren’t armed…which will only feed the gun cults obsession with arming everyone and living out their fantasy of the wild wild west.

  4. C. Clavin says:

    @Jack:

    Wasn’t all this hatred supposed to stop after the removal of the SC Confederate Flag?

    No…the flag is only a symbol of your racism and hatred…not your actual racism and hatred.

  5. JKB says:

    @C. Clavin:

    DoD specifically prohibits the possession of any type of weapons by personnel at recruiting stations.

    The second facility was a reserve center with a Naval recruiting station so to bad they don’t do security at reserve centers.

  6. m un chb o x inc says:

    Gee golly Doug …so many lone wolfs named mohammed…what are the chances?

  7. DrDaveT says:

    “We will treat this like a terrorism investigation until we determine that it is not,” Ed Reinhold, an F.B.I. special agent, said during the news conference.

    I’m curious — does that mean that they will be more diligent, or less diligent, than usual?

  8. Dave Schuler says:

    There’s a rumor out there that there was a DAESH tweet identifying Chattanooga a little before the shooting began. I’m guessing we’re going to be hearing a lot of speculation over the next day or so.

  9. bill says:

    Guy named mohammed, probably workplace violence.

  10. JKB says:

    @DrDaveT:

    Actually, it was the way the FBI would get the investigation as the shooter never actually entered federal property.

    But it is looking more and more like a local Arab radicalized (born in Kuwait).

  11. Beth says:

    @m un chb o x inc: Yeah, they’re usually named Adam or James or Dylan…

  12. DrDaveT says:

    @JKB:

    Actually, it was the way the FBI would get the investigation

    Aha. Thanks for the clarification.

  13. JKB says:

    Interesting is the prior tweet from an apparent ISIS account demonstrating knowledge of the subsequent attack.

    Reports that the intel community didn’t have any indications of an attack

    Rapidity of FBI/federal take over.

    Possible the weapon used was select fire and he had multiple weapons.

    Perhaps this was lessened because local police got into hot pursuit as he went to the 2nd locaiton limiting what he could do to Marines outside the facility.

    No doubt that he was on a freeway that goes over a dam, passed a community college, and that the 2nd facility was right up the road from the 911 center, the university, a major area hospital, and the downtown of Chattanooga is causing some concern.

  14. michael reynolds says:

    It’s terribly sad for the families and friends.

    But as terrorism it’s laughable.

  15. David M says:

    This is what we get for negotiating with Iran.

    Thanks Obama

    /teabagger

  16. Gustopher says:

    Can it be terrorism if they attack our military? Or is that just war?

    If we’re going to go into hair splitting on definitions, let’s at least consider all the hairs that can be split.

  17. michael reynolds says:

    @Jack:

    1) The killing was done with a gun.

    2) You are a great fan of guns.

    3) The NRA supports wide access to guns (and profits from it). And you support the NRA’s efforts to make sure that every potential murderer has immediate access to guns and ammo.

    4) This terrorism – like Dylann Roof’s – was made possible because of policies you advocate.

    Right? If not, explain please how this man could have shot up a Marine Corps office without access to the guns your policies ensure he has access to.

  18. Matt says:

    @michael reynolds: Oh I don’t know maybe something like a pressure cooker?

  19. stonetools says:

    My understanding is that it was labeled terrorism right away. Hey, the shooter was a Muslim guy (had it been a white guy? Isolated shooting by crazed loner. Black guy? Commonplace shooting by thug).
    So, yet another impossible to prevent mass shooting of the type that rarely or never happens in other civilized countries with better gun safety laws. Of course, it’s too early to politicize the shooting, but the problem is that no good guy with a gun was there (funny that there almost never is). Blah blah Blah.

    Man, I am so sick of this sh!t. It’s like we are arguing with a religious cult that believes the earth is flat, except this cult has equally ludicrous beliefs about guns, numbers in the millions, has a rich and powerful lobby backing it, and employs hundreds of Congressmen who do their bidding with zombie like obedience.
    A century from now, people will look at the gun cult with the same horrified fascination that we look at Aztecs who sacrificed people to Quetzalcoatl, and wonder why so many people had to die unnecessarily.

  20. michael reynolds says:

    @Matt:

    A pressure cooker exploded with what? Soup? Oh, that’s right: gunpowder.

    As I’m sure you know, different weapons have different uses. Bombs are not guns, nor the reverse. Arguing that terrorists have access to 22’s does not support a belief that “Oh, well, we might as well let them have RPG’s and tanks.”

    Who is responsible for the fact that this nation is saturated by guns and by ammunition – including the gunpowder that is so effective at blowing up pressure cookers? Who arms domestic American terrorists?

    The NRA arms them. A bought and paid for Congress arms them. Gun manufacturers and retailers arm our domestic terrorists. They profit from arming domestic terrorists. The profit from today’s shooting – weapon and ammo – is already in some manufacturer’s account balance.

  21. stonetools says:

    @Matt:

    Pressure cookers aren’t made to kill people. Guns are.
    The more apt analogy would be if we treated explosives the way we treated guns. Then the killer would have had access to C-4 explosive or the like that he would have gotten to buy immediately from Walmart or from some private person after the most cursory of background checks and with no training requirements, waiting periods, etc.
    If explosives were under the same regime as guns, the Boston bombers would have killed a lot more people with much more efficiency, the way mass killers do with guns. Thankfully, millions of Americans don’t worship explosives they do guns, so the laws relating to explosives are rational and properly enforced.

  22. bandit says:

    @michael reynolds: Yeah it’s focking riot you POS

  23. bill says:

    @michael reynolds: is the body count too low for your definition?
    were you worried when you first heard of this that there might be a muslim involved and that would make your positions on that religion even weaker than usual?

    and the “gun” thing is weak too- people who want to kill will find a way. maybe we weren’t profiling him properly?

  24. michael reynolds says:

    @bill:

    No, you imbecile. Terrorism is a political act meant to cause certain reactions leading in turn to changes in policy. This act fails as terrorism.

    And just what actions would you care to take that would have screened out this man, given that the NRA, gun makers and retailers, and the whores in Congress oppose every law, every single one?

  25. @Dave Schuler:

    It turns out the Tweet in question was sent three hours after the attacks. I’ll post the link on that if I can dig it up again.

  26. wr says:

    @Beth: “Yeah, they’re usually named Adam or James or Dylan…”

    No, silly Beth, if they’re named Adam or James or Dylan they’re not terrorists — they’re disturbed individuals whose actions have no bearing on any other issue in the world.

    Which is funny when you think about it — right wing creeps like Jack and Bill are always whining about “political correctness,” and how they are so oppressed by the government not calling every brown person a tairist. But if you call a white supremacist who murders innocent blacks to start a race war a terrorist, they go — you should pardon the expression — ballistic.

  27. walt moffett says:

    Didn’t take long for the fishing tournament/hobby horse races to begin.

    Condolences to the grieving, fair winds and following seas to the departed and a speedy recovery to the wounded.

    Lets hope the press will give us an inkling of the motive. Might want to read the Chattanooga paper for more details.

  28. Jack says:

    @michael reynolds:

    And just what actions would you care to take that would have screened out this man, given that the NRA, gun makers and retailers, and the whores in Congress oppose every law, every single one?

    There are literally thousands of gun laws on the books you imbecile.

    Blaming the NRA for violence is like blaming the Catholic church for abortions.

    In a gun free zone, the armed predator is king.

    Repeat after me: “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.” If a person cannot be trusted with a gun then they cannot be trusted without a custodian.

    The single largest mass murder in American history was reportedly committed with box cutters (9/11), the second largest ostensibly with fuel oil and fertilizer (OKC) and third place was taken using a gallon of gasoline and a match (Happyland Dance Club). But yeah, Micheal, keep complaining about the guns, Libtard.

    But of course, you are the same idiot claiming the gun culture is dying. I guess you didn’t see that “Background checks for gun sales spiked 11% in June compared to last year, making it the busiest June ever, according to the FBI’s background check data.”

    http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/07/news/gun-sales/

  29. Jack says:

    @wr:

    right wing creeps like Jack and Bill are always whining about “political correctness,” and how they are so oppressed by the government not calling every brown person a tairist.

    Ft. Hood shooter – Registered Democrat – Muslim
    Columbine shooters – Too young to vote but both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals.
    Virginia Tech shooter – Registered Democrat – Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff.
    Colorado Theater shooter – Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal.
    Connecticut School Shooter – Registered Democrat; hated Christians.
    Congresswoman Gabby Giffords’ shooter – Leftist, registered Democrat.
    Washington Navy Yard shooter – Democrat
    Isla Vista shooter – Offspring of Hollywood liberal
    All of these shooters were progressive Democrats!

    It was a liberal wet dream when finally an of-age white southerner, Dylan Roof went off his rocker and killed 9 people. Did you finally get the stain out of your pants or were they ruined?

  30. wr says:

    @Jack: Nice list of terrible mass murders comitted because insane people had such easy access to guns… Oh, but guns are good, guns are sweet, guns are my precioussssss.

  31. Franklin says:

    @Beth: I think you forgot Timothy.

  32. Bob @ Youngstown says:

    @Jack:

    If a person cannot be trusted with a gun then they cannot be trusted without a custodian.

    Persons who cannot be trusted with a gun are called “prohibited persons”. Are you proposing that all prohibited persons should have a custodian?

    Or are you suggesting that because all “prohibited persons” do not have custodians, they should be trusted with a gun?

  33. Monala says:
  34. Bob @ Youngstown says:

    @Jack:

    “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual……

    appropriately written by a author of science fiction.

  35. anjin-san says:

    @Jack:

    The single largest mass murder in American history was reportedly committed with box cutters (9/11), the second largest ostensibly with fuel oil and fertilizer (OKC) and third place was taken using a gallon of gasoline and a match

    And if you add them up and compare them to the number of dead bodies associated with firearms, well, lets just say that guns kill a hell of a lot more people.

  36. anjin-san says:

    @Jack:

    Jesus Jack, you are gullible enough to buy this fairy tail hook, line, and sinker. And you apparently think quips about “stains in pants” are clever. Maybe we can rub you, bill, and bandit together and see if we can create even a single intelligent thought.

    Do you wonder why people are not thrilled at the idea of you running around with a gun?

  37. bill says:

    @michael reynolds:
    name calling- the last refuge of someone who knows they’re wrong…..and very frustrated by it.

    http://news.yahoo.com/chattanooga-active-shooter-officer-down-live-coverage-154953657.html

    oh, the Marine recruitment center is another wonderful “gun free” zone……note the sign on the door. that means nobody should bring a gun there, guess mohammed didn’t abide by the sign……….just a normal American kid they say…….named mohammed.

    but somehow it’s the nra’s fault that this sheethead chose to break the law and shoot unarmed men, like his brethren in the sand lands.

  38. anjin-san says:

    @bill:

    that there might be a muslim involved and that would make your positions on that religion even weaker than usual?

    I’m curious, if a Christian or a Jew commits murder, do you put guilt by association on all Christians and Jews?

  39. anjin-san says:

    @bill:

    name calling- the last refuge of someone who knows they’re wrong…..and very frustrated by it.

    sheethead

    Have you ever thought of just not talking? Sometimes silence is best.

  40. Grewgills says:

    @Jack

    Blaming the NRA for violence is like blaming the Catholic church for abortions.

    No, you’ve carried one side of the analogy a step too far. It’s like blaming the Catholic church for higher levels of unwanted pregnancies because of people refusing to use birth control. That might actually increase the number of abortions or it might just swell the ranks in adoption agencies and foster care, but that is a separate issue.

  41. Mikey says:

    A few more details I heard on the news this morning.

    Nobody died at the recruiting center–Abdulazeez just pulled up in front with his car’s top down and sprayed a bunch of rounds through the front windows. One person was hit in the leg.

    The four dead were killed at the Reserve center, where Abdulazeez actually got out of his car and went inside.

    Abdulazeez was born in Kuwait but came to the U. S. with his family while he was still a baby. He grew up about as normal as could be, graduated high school and college in Chattanooga (the latter with a degree in Electrical Engineering). He didn’t avoid alcohol, in fact only a few months ago he was charged with DUI.

    It was also only recently he began sporting a sizable beard, which could indicate a greater identification with Islam’s more radical elements.

    I think this is another instance of someone who has grown up in the West and for whatever reasons become “radicalized” and then chosen to carry out an attack. The Tsarnaev brothers did the same thing. Whether Abdulazeez received some direction from a terrorist organization, or just inspiration, we’ve yet to learn.

  42. grumpy realist says:

    Yes, well–if we were to have an “act of terrorism” by an Islamist nut using a gun, HOW WOULD WE KNOW?

    Pretty hard to distinguish it from all the other deranged killings by punks who shouldn’t have been permitted near anything more lethal than a rubber band.

    We don’t have to worry about the terrorists coming in from abroad–they’re already here. Young white man snaps, takes out loads of surrounding people due to gun. News at eleven. Yawn, oh dear, here we go again, another load of dead bodies.

    In fact, the only way we can tell whether something is “terrorism” or not is if they DON’T use a gun.

    Might want to think about that, hmmm?

  43. Jack says:

    @anjin-san: Yeah, I could care less if people are thrilled about me owning/carrying a gun. It’s not their business and I am not limited by their fears.

  44. wr says:

    @Jack: It’s always so comforting to have it reinforced this clearly that the people who are most in love with their guns routinely turn out to have the mentallity of four year-old… and whose deep analytical skills never quite penetrate beyond “you’re not the boss of me.”

  45. Jack says:

    @wr: So, apparently you are saying I should not exercise my rights because others might wet their pants at the sight of my gun. Grow a pair, cupcake.

  46. gVOR08 says:

    Over the last few years of OTB gun threads, I think Reynolds has been right. We can’t outlaw guns, don’t even want to. But like smoking and gay rights, over time attitudes will change, culture will change. We can’t get rid of guns, but maybe, maybe we can get rid of this stupid gun culture that motivates people like @Jack: to want them so badly.

    Maybe in a hundred years Jack’s descendents will be something like smokers, huddled two or three at a time in the cold around the back corner of the restaurant, furtively glancing around to see who might be watching them stroke their pieces.

  47. anjin-san says:

    @Jack:

    Yeah, I could care less if people are thrilled about me owning/carrying a gun.

    No doubt some of the killers discussed on this thread had similar thoughts.

  48. Jack says:

    @gVOR08: Apparently you didn’t read what I wrote to Micheal.

    But of course, you are the same idiot claiming the gun culture is dying. I guess you didn’t see that “Background checks for gun sales spiked 11% in June compared to last year, making it the busiest June ever, according to the FBI’s background check data.”

    http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/07/news/gun-sales/

  49. Jack says:

    @anjin-san:

    No doubt some of the killers discussed on this thread had similar thoughts.

    The killers discussed on these threads did not care about rights, they were not exercising rights.

    But keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better, cupcake.

  50. gVOR08 says:

    @Jack: Why no, of course I didn’t read what you wrote. % of households owning guns is declining. What we have is fewer people like you owning more and more guns each.

  51. Jack says:

    Maybe all of you have heard of the Magnus Effect?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_effect

    I have found a new one I shall call the “Maniac Effect”. The Maniac Effect occurs when liberalism spins against common sense and total bull***** comes out of thin air stinking and messing up everything around it.

  52. C. Clavin says:

    To my like minded friends…
    You cannot argue with the gun cult…because the whole thing is a delusion.
    Seriously…2nd Amendment protections against tyranny? Jack is going to take on the US Army?
    You cannot argue with a delusion.
    Seriously…every citizen armed? Guys like Jack imagine themselves as a later day Matt Dillon…strolling down the Main Street of Dodge City, or Little Joe on the Bonanza. Their whole world view is based on a fantasy stoked by the NRA and other lobbyists for the gun industry.
    You cannot argue with a fantasy.
    Fantasy and delusion are powerful things. The gun industry knows this…and they pay the NRA plenty to dupe the fools. The god news is that arc of history is toward reality and away from stupidity. Unfortunately it will be too late for these Marines and their families.

  53. Jack says:

    @gVOR08: % of households owning guns is declining increasing. What we have is fewer people like you owning more and more guns each like me willing to volunteer information on owning and buying guns to government bureaucrats and idiot pollsters.

    FIFY

  54. CrustyDem says:

    @Jack:

    I believe you, because everything you’ve said is so accurate and clear.

    Oh wait never mind.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html

  55. Jack says:

    @CrustyDem: Yes. A survey. People like me are not willing to participate or provide information to those surveys. Thus, false data.

  56. michael reynolds says:

    I love watching Jack flail.

    We’re coming for your guns, Jack. You’d better get them all out and count them to make sure they’re still there. How many is it now? How many guns does it take to make you feel like a man? 10? 20? Best go oil them, stroke them, reassure yourself.

  57. CrustyDem says:

    Ahh. Facts and surveys are fickle and meaningless compared to the unerring and figmental genius that is Jack.

    I’m guessing you’re one of those guys who can’t believe that your candidate didn’t win even when he’s 10+ pts down in every poll. Because polls don’t account for Jack.

    And if you disagree, you don’t know Jack!

  58. Mikey says:

    @Jack: The unwillingness of some small percentage of people to participate doesn’t invalidate the survey results. Survey designers expect it and good survey design takes it into account.

    Also, we’re looking at a multi-decade trend–this specific survey has been conducted annually since 1973 and the trend has been down.

  59. SenyorDave says:

    @Jack: And competent survey organizations know how to statistically correct for that fact. Just as there are people with views opposite of yours that do not participate in surveys.

    You sound like the people who say “that political poll can’t be true, I never got polled”. Like the Republicans who were sure Obama was going to demolished by Romney, when in reality the people who understood the polls pretty much nailed the election.

    Full disclosure – I work for a survey company.

  60. Jack says:

    @CrustyDem@Mikey: @michael reynolds: : Disproved.

    “The recent report by GSS has been both contradicted and supported by other survey firms. According to Gallup, gun ownership in America has actually remained relatively stable, save for a big increase in the early 1990s and the resulting slump in the early 2000s. The difference between today and 43 years ago in the number of gun owners is almost negligible—42 percent in 2014 as compared to 43 percent in 1972. Going further back, Gallup reported that 49 percent of American households claimed to own a gun in 1960. The Pew Research Center, on the other hand, does support GSS by reporting similar numbers, lending to the speculation by many that while guns are still selling at a brisk pace, it may be that more guns belong to fewer people.”

    I know that makes you uncomfortable, but who cares. You should be uncomfortable.

  61. Jack says:

    @michael reynolds:

    We’re coming for your guns, Jack.

    Will it be you that knocks on my door and demands my guns? No, you are too much of a pussy.

  62. michael reynolds says:

    @C. Clavin:

    I agree. But when we argue with Jack it’s not about Jack. He’s an idiot. But there are lurkers, certainly far more than participate in comments. Jack is a useful punching bag because he’s so clearly nuts, so cringingly insecure and afraid, so irrational, he makes an excellent representative of the gun cult.

    No rational person looks at Jack and thinks, “I want to be like him! I want to surround my house with barbed wire, fly a POW/MIA flag, and spend all my money on guns!” The more we “out” the actual gun nuts the more people see what they really are, the less attractive the cult becomes. And if you poke Jack you get the whole deal, the paranoia, the lunacy, the bigotry.

    I mean, he’s really kind of perfect. He embodies the clichés.

  63. michael reynolds says:

    @Jack:

    Yes, Jack, I’m coming. You need to get yourself and all your guns into position. Get ready!

  64. Jack says:

    @michael reynolds:

    The Maniac Effect occurs when liberalism spins against common sense and total bull***** comes out of thin air stinking and messing up everything around it.

    What you wrote:

    I agree. But when we argue with Jack it’s not about Jack. He’s an idiot. But there are lurkers, certainly far more than participate in comments. Jack is a useful punching bag because he’s so clearly nuts, so cringingly insecure and afraid, so irrational, he makes an excellent representative of the gun cult.

    No rational person looks at Jack and thinks, “I want to be like him! I want to surround my house with barbed wire, fly a POW/MIA flag, and spend all my money on guns!” The more we “out” the actual gun nuts the more people see what they really are, the less attractive the cult becomes. And if you poke Jack you get the whole deal, the paranoia, the lunacy, the bigotry.

    I mean, he’s really kind of perfect. He embodies the clichés.

    is the perfect example. Thank you.

  65. Mikey says:

    @Jack: What you cut-and-pasted didn’t disprove a thing, it just indicated a difference between Gallup and GSS, while stating Pew and GSS are in general agreement.

    In other words, what you claim “disproved” our positions actually didn’t. Consequently, I am far from “uncomfortable.” That would require you actually presenting a cogent argument.

  66. James Pearce says:

    @Jack:

    “I know that makes you uncomfortable, but who cares. You should be uncomfortable.”

    What makes me uncomfortable is that you find every shooting rampage a perfect opportunity to talk about guns. It’s like you get it, as if you truly understand that these massacres are inevitable.

    And you would prefer to keep it that way.

  67. Franklin says:

    @bill:

    just a normal American kid they say…….named mohammed.

    Two of my kids have friends named Mohammed. Yes I live in a normal American town. Tell me Jack, are my kids’ friends already guilty? Should we lock up these children because you have this delusion that their name somehow makes them automatically evil?

    You are truly despicable, and a very sorry excuse for a human.

  68. C. Clavin says:

    @Jack:
    Big brave keyboard commando…with a gun.
    So impressive.

  69. Mu says:

    Bingo! Finally filled the Reynolds Bingo sheet, took till the 7th post until he used gun nut. I need to use more than 10 keywords to make it harder.

  70. michael reynolds says:

    @Mu:

    Here’s some extras: gun nut, gun nut, gun nut.

    Yes, you people are gun nuts. Nuts with guns. Obsessed, paranoid, insecure, ridiculous. If you weren’t in the business of arming terrorists who kill Marines and church ladies, and putting guns where children can shoot themselves, you’d just be funny.

  71. Jack says:

    @James Pearce: As long as gun free zones continue, shootings will continue. I can accept that. Can you?

  72. Jack says:

    @Franklin: Tell me Frankiln….did I at any time mention Muslims or the name Mohammed?

    I think you are projecting.

  73. Jack says:

    @C. Clavin:

    Big brave keyboard commando…with a gun.
    So impressive.

    I rather be a keyboard commando with a gun than a keyboard commando with a sheep and jar of KY.

  74. Franklin says:

    @Jack: @Jack: I quoted you, dumb***k. Take a look at your comment.

    By the way, another shooting spree overnight. This guy’s name was also pretty scary sounding: Anthony.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/07/17/maine_shooting_spree_convict_sought_after_four_are_shot.html

  75. Jack says:

    @Franklin: You quoted Bill you Dumbf&*k!

  76. wr says:

    @Jack: Yes, that’s it. I am terrified of your towering manliness. I mean, what is more impressive than a grown man who is too scared to leave the house without a deadly weapon? Truly you must be a fearsome warrior.

  77. Jack says:

    @wr: Truly you must be Caitlyn Jenner.

  78. James Pearce says:

    @Jack:

    As long as gun free zones continue, shootings will continue. I can accept that. Can you?

    Please don’t pretend your argument is that gun free zones are an insufficient means of gun control when your opposition to gun free zones is rooted in your opposition to any form of gun control, effective or not.

  79. Jack says:

    There are no forms of “effective” or “common sense” gun control. Call it what you want, but what you really want is control over people, not inanimate objects.

  80. Franklin says:

    @Jack: Oops, you are right! Somehow I did conflate Jack with Bill. It is indeed Bill who is despicable. Apologies for smearing Jack’s good name. My fingers are being given 20 lashes as we speak.

  81. Franklin says:

    @Jack: Do you agree with laws against drinking and driving?They are also exerting control over people, many of which haven’t even hurt a fly (yet). But the law is to control the *risk* of somebody getting hurt.

  82. Jack says:

    @Franklin: I disagree with the courts on DUI checkpoints. Actual DUI laws only affect those that are actually drinking and driving. These laws do not exert control over anyone that is not drinking and driving.

  83. James Pearce says:

    @Jack:

    There are no forms of “effective” or “common sense” gun control.

    Oh, Jack, I know that’s what you think.

    It’s just too bad the only way you’ve figured out how to argue for it is to be dishonest and rude. Don’t be surprised that approach is unconvincing.

  84. Jack says:

    @James Pearce:

    Oh, Jack, I know that’s what you think.

    FACT: Gun control is the killer’s best friend.

  85. Franklin says:

    @Jack: Intentionally or not, you don’t appear to be seeing the analogy. There are many laws that control people’s behavior in order to mitigate risk. Dangerous toys that are banned, rules about lead paint and asbestos, the aforementioned drinking and driving, and yes guns.

    Do you cry for freedom because the government doesn’t let you sell lead paint anymore? Even though the stuff doesn’t even hurt you unless you stupidly ingest it?

    But wait, you say, it’s well-known that small children chew on things. It’s just common sense that we should avoid having lead paint around which they might ingest. And you’d be right. Unfortunately that common sense you just used is called “being a liberal.”

  86. wr says:

    @Jack: “Actual DUI laws only affect those that are actually drinking and driving. These laws do not exert control over anyone that is not drinking and driving.”

    Well, yeah. They forbid anyone who is not drinking and driving from drinking and driving.

    Is there anything in the world you do understand?

  87. michael reynolds says:

    @Jack:

    So that’s why Australia’s murder rate skyrocketed when it banned most guns. Right?

    They’re practically unarmed now. And the murder rate has been dropping for the last 16 years.

  88. Jack says:

    @Franklin:

    But wait, you say, it’s well-known that small children chew on things. It’s just common sense that we should avoid having lead paint around which they might ingest. And you’d be right. Unfortunately that common sense you just used is called “being a liberal.”

    I’m a firm believer in Darwinism.

    If you let your kid eat paint and it kills him, then you are an idiot and should not be allowed to sue someone because they make lead based paint. Just as I believe if you leave a gun around and one of your children kills another one of your children, you are an idiot and should not be able to sue the gun manufacturer.

  89. James Pearce says:

    @Jack:

    FACT: Gun control is the killer’s best friend.

    No, Jack. That’s an argument.

    And, sadly, it’s one that you are unprepared to make.

  90. Jack says:

    @michael reynolds:

    They’re practically unarmed now. And the murder rate has been dropping for the last 16 years.

    Which will never happen here. But keep on drumming little drummer boy.

  91. Jack says:

    @michael reynolds: Homicides in Australia have gone from roughly 325 per year in 1990 to roughly 280 per year in 2007. Yeah, that’s a huge drop….especially since guns are outlawed.

    If you can’t tell, I’m being sarcastic. So effectively what you are saying is they decreased homicide by 14% by outlawing guns. Now what slugger? What do you suggest is the cause of the remaining 86%?

    http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

  92. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @michael reynolds:

    Jack is a useful punching bag because he’s so clearly nuts, so cringingly insecure and afraid, so irrational, he makes an excellent representative of the gun cult.

    That’s a useful side benefit. The entertainment value inherent in watching him spin out of control, spittle flying and eyes bulging out of his head, is justification enough in and of itself for provoking him into a response.

    We’re just lucky that 1) it’s so incredibly easy to bait him and 2) he never fails to take the bait.

  93. LWA says:

    I will say it again, as I do after every mass shooting, that the time has come to challenge the existence of the 2nd Amendment, and challenge whether there exists a natural right to won a deadly weapon in a civilized society.

    I don’t believe there exists such a moral right by nature. I know its codified in the Constitution, but it isn’t supported by any moral logic so far as I can see.

    I also know that the political reality is against the overturning of the 2nd, but like any other march in progress, it will take time. The first step is in challenging the status quo and presenting people with an alternate future, where guns are a highly restricted privilege.

  94. gVOR08 says:

    @Jack: In that period the population of Australia increased by 40%. Had nothing changed, there would be 455 homicides a year. The homicide rate has dropped by about 40%. At essentially zero cost.

  95. michael reynolds says:

    @Jack:

    A 14% drop – which is the precise opposite of the claim you loudly trumpeted as fact.

    And of course when you look around the world you see that all of the countries where guns are severely restricted have lower – usually very, very much lower – murder rates than we do.

    And then there’s this:

    Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

    And then there’s the way the Gun Whores of Congress order the CDC not to do any research into gun deaths. You figure that’s because the NRA thinks the news will be good?

    Your “fact” is a lie.

    What you believe about guns is not true.

    Your side deliberately blocks any effort to get at the truth.

    And you are an obsessed cult member, no different from a Scientologist nut or some Aum Shinrikyo nut.

  96. stonetools says:

    @James Pearce:

    It’s like you get it, as if you truly understand that these massacres are inevitable.

    And you would prefer to keep it that way.

    This is what is so disheartening about the gun cultists. It’s actually known what can be done to reduce the gun homicide rate in general and mass killings in particular-broad background checks, waiting periods, and mandatory safety training for everyone who buys and/or intends to use a gun. (That’s Canada’s very effective gun safety scheme). But the gun cultists oppose each of those ideas for the most specious of reasons, merely because it would inconvenience them. They’re willing to live with thousands of unnecessary homicides because they don’t want to have to comply with rigorous background checks or (Gawd help us) even waiting for three days for a NCIC check to come back.
    Its all about their convenience, wrapped up in talk of rights.

  97. KM says:

    @gVOR08:

    Maybe in a hundred years Jack’s descendents will be something like smokers, huddled two or three at a time in the cold around the back corner of the restaurant, furtively glancing around to see who might be watching them stroke their pieces.

    I work with a woman who is currently 8+ months pregnant. She is a 39yr old primigravida so right off the bat higher risk pregnancy. She used to smoke 2 packs a day but has “cut down” to the equivalent in ecigs since it’s “healthier”. She takes a smoke break every half hour and her skin is absolutely saturated in the smell so that changing clothes for a client visit does nothing to mitigate the stench. She stands outside in the smoking area right by the parking lot and hides in the bushes when people walk by. It’s really pathetic since there’s a giant bank of windows near my office so we can see her no matter what. She knows she’s being judged. She is fully aware of the risks and just doesn’t give a damn – she needs that nicotine, baby! (regardless of the actual baby). She cannot figure out why none of the women here (including myself) haven’t thrown her a baby shower yet. My admin told her to her face that if she didn’t care about her kid, why should we and reward her bad behavior? Even the other chain-smokers show her complete disdain and loudly complain when she goes there.

    Social pressure works amazingly well…. only if the person in question gives a damn. Still, it would be a step in the right direction.

  98. Pinky says:

    @michael reynolds: The number of murders in the US fell by 28% in the same time period.

  99. wr says:

    @HarvardLaw92: “The entertainment value inherent in watching him spin out of control, spittle flying and eyes bulging out of his head, is justification enough in and of itself for provoking him into a response.”

    Especially since once he gets really spittle-flecked, all his insecurities about his masculinity come roaring up, and he can only start flinging around weird accusations of repressed homosexuality or bestiality. I know it’s a cliche to say that a gun is a penis substitute, but good old Jack is desperately trying to prove it’s accurate.

  100. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @Pinky:

    So are you asserting that eliminating guns in Australia caused them to enjoy a 12% greater drop in their murder rate?

  101. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @wr:

    If he weren’t otherwise so obnoxious, I would almost feel sorry for the guy. It’s clear that he’s wandered into the deep end of the pool without his floaties on, so he flails about cutting and pasting whatever he can find – which more often than not he doesn’t understand and often doesn’t appear to even have entirely read – that he thinks is supportive of his position.

    It either gets debunked, or the ways in which his lack of understanding has led him to cite things that actually undermine his position get pointed out to him, and then the invective cranks up.

    Which tells me that 1) he has no substantive thoughts of his own, and 2) he isn’t bright enough to understand the substantive thinking of others, and 3) he is primarily functioning on rage. His natural state appears to be anger. He’s a prosecutor’s dream come true.

  102. michael reynolds says:

    @Pinky:

    Yes, at the same time that numbers of households with guns has been dropping.

    You know, you’re not the complete cretin Jack is, why don’t you go look at the Harvard link I gave him and come back and give us your analysis. Go ahead, I dare you. Unlike the NRA’s pets in Congress, I’m not afraid of data.

  103. michael reynolds says:

    Here’s more from that Harvard meta-study:

    Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).

    After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

    So yes, there is a clear connection between guns and homicide. More guns = More homicide. And as for the inverse, the bizarre NRA notion that more guns somehow means less murder:

    Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.

    So, more guns = more murder. Fewer guns ≠ more murder.

  104. michael reynolds says:

    Now, if you don’t like the mountain of facts that Harvard assembled, petition Congress to let the CDC study gun deaths. Go on. Demand the facts, because gun nuts are all about facts, right?

    Dear Congress: Please fund the CDC to look at gun deaths. Signed, Jack, Pinky, MU and Bill.

    Right? Cause you’re not scared of facts, are you?

  105. michael reynolds says:

    As for guns deterring murder, ‘splain something to me my little NRA mouthpieces. You love to cite the gang war in Chicago. So tell me, geniuses: do the gang bangers who get shot have weapons? Or is it only the unarmed gangsters who get shot?

    Because it kind of seems like the people getting shot at have guns, and when the innocent unarmed bystanders get killed it’s because one bunch of guys with guns is shooting at another bunch of guys with guns.

    Can you explain this in light of the idea that more guns equals safety?

  106. James Pearce says:

    @stonetools:

    They’re willing to live with thousands of unnecessary homicides because they don’t want to have to comply with rigorous background checks or (Gawd help us) even waiting for three days for a NCIC check to come back.

    Yep.

    There hasn’t been a single high-profile mass shooting since Jared Loughner where the guns weren’t purchased legally and easily.

  107. Matt says:

    @michael reynolds: You don’t need gunpowder directly. There’s at least a thousand different options for explosive materials including fireworks. Do keep in mind the technology to manufacture explosives is thousands of years old. You can make all kinds of explosives in your house with common household items.

  108. Matt says:

    @michael reynolds: So we can agree that California has the strictest state level gun control laws right?

    We can also agree that Texas has some of the loosest gun control laws in the country? That Texas is overflowing with guns.

    So why is it that more people per 100,000 are murdered using guns in California than Texas? You say fewer guns will result in fewer murders but clearly that’s not happening.

    It doesn’t really matter though once the drug cartels start printing guns. All bets will be off then.

    You can already print guns that are capable of handling +1000 rounds safely with no appearance of stress cracks etc. The same company is also printing parts for custom guns. If I wanted I could have a friend print me 30-60 round magazines that are more than capable of taking many trips to the range.

    What are you going to do in that world?

  109. stonetools says:

    Well, let’s stop smacking around our resident gun cultist for a moment to discuss some of the implications of this. I’ve said-and still believe-that the way to do terrorism in America is to launch attacks using guns, not explosives. While there are sensibly-tight controls on explosives in the USA, so that terrorists have to “cook up” their own bombs, the gun laws here allow them to get hold of near military grade firearms with relative ease. Think of the success the unstable ” lone wackos” have here, then imagine what would happen if a gang of well trained terrorists decided to make a strike at a shopping mall or a metro station.
    It would be relatively easy for ten terrorists to round up an arsenal of AR 15s in an afternoon of trawling through gun shops in northern Virginia, for example. They could order all the ammunition and body armor they need on line, and Viola! they would be ready for attack on a soft target anywhere in the DC-MD-Va area. I must confess that this is the scenario that scares me, not anything involving airplanes. We’re looking for that, and have taken measures to make it very hard for terrorists to take over or blow up planes. I’m afraid that we’ve done nothing to prevent something like the attack in Tunisia, or what happened in Mumbai in 2008.
    I’m also worried about the growth of home grown Islamic terrorists. What can be done about THAT? From all accounts, this guy was from a middle class Muslim family. What set him off?

  110. James Pearce says:

    @Matt:

    You can make all kinds of explosives in your house with common household items.

    Yes, Matt, and making explosives in your house with common household items is illegal.

    Not illegal: Buying the guns and ammo you will use in your planned massacre.

    If you make the latter illegal, it does not mean the former was legalized.

  111. Matt says:

    @James Pearce: Last I checked killing people is illegal too…

    Dylann roof illegally bought his gun. Unfortunately the locals dropped the ball so the gun store owner didn’t know it was illegal.

    @stonetools: You do realize that the traditional hunting rifles used today are military grade firearms right? That statement by you is both meaningless and shows your outright ignorance of firearms.

    Nothing much can be done without turning this country into a fascist police state. Violent crime is at a historic low including murders.

  112. stonetools says:

    @James Pearce:

    Not to mention that these home made bombs often aren’t great or reliable. Try to imagine if you could buy powerful, professional grade explosives like C-4 or TNT at the local Walmart or even over the Internet.That would be rightly seen as “crazy pants”. But you can buy modern firearms just that easy.

  113. James Pearce says:

    @Matt:

    Dylann roof illegally bought his gun.

    No. The purchase was legal. Your information is erroneous and your arguments are goofy.

    At any rate, I looked this up:

    So why is it that more people per 100,000 are murdered using guns in California than Texas?

    Texas has 3.2 gun murders per 100K people. California has 3.4 per 100K.

    In other words, they have the same amount. And the difference is a rounding error.

    DOH!

  114. James Pearce says:

    @stonetools:

    Not to mention that these home made bombs often aren’t great or reliable.

    Or to mention that sometimes, as with James Holmes, you get the homemade bombs with the massacre.

  115. stonetools says:

    @Matt:

    You do realize that the traditional hunting rifles used today are military grade firearms right?

    Aren’t you the one always insisting on the huge gulf between “modern sporting rifles ” like the semi-automatic only AR15 and true “assault rifles” like the M-16 and the AK47, which are capable of fully automatic fire? Have you given up on that distinction?

    Nothing much can be done without turning this country into a fascist police state.

    So Canada, Australia, UK, France, and Switzerland are fascist police states? You might want to crack a history book there, mate.

    Violent crime is at a historic low including murders.

    Yet mass killings are up. In fact they’ve been up since the Heller decision in 2008.It would be interesting to know why that is, but since your team barred the CDC from researching gun violence, we won’t be able to investigate that.

  116. wr says:

    @Matt: “Nothing much can be done without turning this country into a fascist police state.”

    Apparently to a gun nut, the definition of “fascist police state” is “I have to wait an extra day or two to add the four thousandth gun to my aresenal.”

  117. mantis says:

    @Matt:

    So why is it that more people per 100,000 are murdered using guns in California than Texas?

    Two reasons. First, even states with “strict” gun laws make it easy for criminals to get guns. Proxy purchasers with clean records buy the guns, and the gangs use them.

    Second, many guns used in crimes in states/cities with strict gun laws come from surrounding areas or neighboring states with loose gun laws. It’s not like we have border checkpoints between states looking for guns (but don’t take any fruit into California!).

    Comparing gun crimes between the states shows nothing at all. It’s amazingly easy to buy a gun anywhere in the US. It’s just a little bit easier in some places than others.

  118. michael reynolds says:

    @Matt:

    You need to check your facts.

    Texas murder rate is 4.3% and California’s is 4.6%, nearly identical.

    Now, shall we check some other states? Bobby Jindal’s Louisiana comes it at 10.8%, Confederate flag-loving South Carolina is 6.2%, good ole’ Mississippi 6.5%

    See, that’s why we get Harvard to study these things rather than relying on cherry-picked stats. Because the real question you should be asking is, “How can gang-ridden, urban, parched, congested, overpriced, liberal-run California kick rural, mint julep-sipping South Carolina?”

  119. michael reynolds says:

    @stonetools:

    Yep. It’s an interesting bit of unintended consequences that 9-11 was so spectacular that it overshadows any less spectacular. For ISIS to best Al Qaeda they have to do bigger, better, more extreme, and that’s hard.

    The DC sniper showed the way to do this if what you want is to create real terror. You could have dozens of NRA-armed lone wolves shooting out of their car’s trunk, disrupting life in a dozen cities.

  120. Pinky says:

    @HarvardLaw92: Just for clarification:

    Homicide rate in Australia:
    1989/90 1.9
    2006/07 1.3
    Decline: 32%
    http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

    Homicide rate in the US:
    1990 9.4
    2007 5.6
    Decline: 38%
    https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_01.html

  121. anjin-san says:

    @Matt:

    Violent crime is at a historic low including murders.

    Interesting. In Obama’s America, violent crime is at a historic low including murders. You would think even Hannity and Rush would give him some recognition for this remarkable accomplishment…

  122. Grewgills says:

    anjin-san, to be fair it is the republican controlled House that put the fear of god into the criminal element and lowered the crime rate by dint of will.

  123. anjin-san says:

    @Grewgills:

    Criminals could be sentenced to watch all of the 2012 GOP debates… scared straight!

  124. DrDaveT says:

    @Matt:

    So why is it that more people per 100,000 are murdered using guns in California than Texas?

    The phrase “controlling for urbanization” appeared in the material Michael cited. It was there for a reason.

  125. bill says:

    @anjin-san: sure, like that crazy kid who shot up the black church? somehow he became the symbol of all white people and the confederate flag. obama and co. lined up to to get air time for that but where are they now that 5 military people are gunned down by a muslim? hint- enjoying the weekend…..

    btw- this mohammed dude is called a “lone wolf”- even though he’s made several trips to the mid-east….and his name is mohammed.

    @anjin-san: i don’t call bloggers in here “names”- they’re reserved for the ones who deserve it. what’s wrong with “sheethead” anyways, i’s got a nice, subtle ring to it and yahoo hasn’t found a way to block it!

    @michael reynolds: it’s always about the gun i guess? thx for that study that ended in 1997….i’m sure the entire country is the same since then. and any study coming out of harvard will always be weighted down by their predetermined result.
    there’s studies out now that are contrary to the harvard study but you wouldn’t believe it so why bother?
    ok, i had 10 seconds to google it for you, you’re welcome. note that the study concludes in 2011, not 1997…..

    http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4616

  126. michael reynolds says:

    @bill:

    The link is to multiple studies, not studies that ended in 1999.

    As for it always being about the gun, yes, when people get shot with a gun the gun plays a big part.

  127. bill says:

    side note- all the victims were white guys , is that why the press is trying to focus on what could have possible gone wrong with this avg. American…named mohammed- instead of why he may have chosen only to kill white guys? now see how dumb that sounds?

  128. Grewgills says:

    Bill, you seem rather fixated on his name, is there a reason for that?

  129. bill says:

    @Grewgills: yes, and here’s a little video parody from 2007 to explain that!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd8cRvZZv44

    see any parallels to the way the msm covers this stuff!?

  130. Grewgills says:

    @bill:
    No, but it does remind me why conservative attempts at daily show style humor fail spectacularly.

  131. markm says:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/chattanooga-shooting-fbi-recovers-gunmans-disturbing-diary/story?id=32558310

    “The person who committed this horrible crime was not the son we knew and loved,” the statement said. “For many years, our son suffered from depression. It grieves us beyond belief to know that his pain found its expression in this heinous act of violence.”

    ……huh…..