What hell? I just got a breaking news alert that a Congressman has been shot?

[MillCreek]

One of the biggest differences I see if most Republican voters I hear from despise their elected officials (outside a very few) but vote for them anyway.  I don't see many liberals who feel that way about the Democrats they vote for.  I am sure there are some, but I don't see it. 

Boy, I don't think I really see that here in Washington, at least at the state legislative level.  There was a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the state Republican party leadership regarding candidate Trump, though.

[Angel Eyes]

That sad thing is that someone on some discussion board that text you quoted makes sense.

Professor John Griffin, for instance:  http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9154

[Hawkmoon]

I used to think the left was just mistaken and misguided. Now that the mask is off, I see that they are actively evil.

Welcome to reality ...

[Angel Eyes]

Some cell phone video taken at the scene of the attack.  Not particularly informative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXiXxBI2L4A

[castle key]

Of course VA Governor Terry McAuliffe couldn't resist a stab at "Gun Control." He stated that 93,000,000 Americans die daily from gun violence.

At least many, many, many felons have had their rights restored by him so that they can now add to that body count..... after all, it's not criminals that kill but mechanical objects and white Christian males....

[mellestad]

I'm all for bashing the Loony Leftists, but most liberals don't think the way many of you make them sound.  In fact, most liberals sound just like us when the roles are reversed.  Same sarcasm. Same blame of intolerance.  Same view that nothing will change.  And even the same bad-mouthing of the bad actors.

People are people, man. Hyper-partisanship may be getting worse--it's hard to tell. We'll find out.

We live in the safest, most productive, healthiest, objectively best in almost every way, time in human history. The Internet and the 24-hour news cycle, along with the way people idealize the past, makes it hard to see that sometimes.

As much as I dislike the way the media handles things, they're selling a product and we're all buying it so I can't get too mad at them either.

The world's a complicated place. On both sides you can see the casual dehumanization of the other side and that's what leads to this type of thing. It's easier to kill when you're killing 'monsters' and 'bad guys', 'leftists' and 'fascists', 'whack-jobs' and 'evil'.

[freakazoid]

It looks as if you have forgotten some of these violent events on the right, for example when President Obama was elected, but since they were reported in the MSM, perhaps you discount such reports.  A quick Google will pull up the data for you.  The point is that neither side has clean hands, despite the efforts of one side to demonize the other.  This ties in with what Chris is saying.

What "violent events"? A few backwoods hicks hanging effigies in their 30 person town? Not even close to the country wide crazy we have seen come from the left time and time again.

[Mannlicher]

the news coverage, and the outrage from the dhimmicrats, sure is not the same with this shooting, as it was with the Gabby Giffords event.   Eh?

[Hawkmoon]

I've seen reports that he had an AR-15, that he had an AK-47, and that he had an SKS. Does anyone know which (if any of the above) is correct?

If he had an SKS or similar, I'm sure the media will nonetheless portray it as an "assault rifle" or "assault weapon." They're already calling it a "high-powered rifle" even without knowing what it was. My dilemma is: for the spreadsheet I've started keeping to track these sorts of events, is it better to log an SKS as an "assault weapon" even though it's not, or to stay close to the definitions and consider an SKS to be a non-assaulty semi-automatic rifle?

If it does turn out to have been an SKS, and the usual suspects do portray it as an assault weapon, I hope we'll all take them to task for it.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I've seen reports that he had an AR-15, that he had an AK-47, and that he had an SKS. Does anyone know which (if any of the above) is correct?

If he had an SKS or similar, I'm sure the media will nonetheless portray it as an "assault rifle" or "assault weapon." They're already calling it a "high-powered rifle" even without knowing what it was. My dilemma is: for the spreadsheet I've started keeping to track these sorts of events, is it better to log an SKS as an "assault weapon" even though it's not, or to stay close to the definitions and consider an SKS to be a non-assaulty semi-automatic rifle?

If it does turn out to have been an SKS, and the usual suspects do portray it as an assault weapon, I hope we'll all take them to task for it.

Bayonet lug makes an "assault weapon" according to the '94 ban... You know, because of all those drive by bayonetings that happened.



Anyhoo... back to the subject at hand. As far as I'm concerned, we haven't yet reached the level of violence that was going on the 70's, but, as of today, it looks like we are getting there.  I think this event will rally they Antifa groups, not dissuade them.

[Perd Hapley]

If it does turn out to have been an SKS, and the usual suspects do portray it as an assault weapon, I hope we'll all take them to task for it.

'Cuz that's been so helpful in the past. 

[Mannlicher]

one witness was saying that the weapon used had a curved magazine, and he thought it was an AK

[Hawkmoon]

Bayonet lug makes an "assault weapon" according to the '94 ban... You know, because of all those drive by bayonetings that happened.

No, not according to the criteria established in the 1994 federal AWB. First, it ONLY applied to rifles with detachable magazines -- the SKS doesn't. Then, IF you had a detachable magazine, it was only an "assault weapon" if it had at least TWO of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Bayonet mount
• Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
• Grenade launcher moun

No folding stock
No pistol grip
No grenade launcher

Do they all have both a bayonet lug and a flash suppressor?[/list]

[RoadKingLarry]

Don't forget the shoulder thing that goes up.

[Perd Hapley]

Don't forget the shoulder thing that goes up.

Absolutely correct. You don't want to forget that. It's the most lethal part of the gun.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I'm pretty sure most the comblock surplus have both lug and flash suppressors, and the conversion between nondetachble and detachable mag isn't exactly a challenge.

[freakazoid]

If it was a Yugo it more than likely had a grenade mount, not all types do though.

[Perd Hapley]

The Washington Post has reprinted (for educational purposes, of course) a political cartoon that shows Steve Scalise talking to klansmen. Um, they didn't publish any of Charlie Hebdo's anti-Muhammad cartoons, did they? 

[Hawkmoon]

Congresscritters still can't get over the notion that they should be subject to the same laws they pass for the rest of us. At least one Congresscritter has seen the light, and thinks Congresscritters should be allowed to carry guns for self defense when in Washington, DC, so he's proposing that DC be required to extend reciprocal recognition to carry permits issued by the states.

Oh ... but only for members of Congress. Not for you and me. Get back to digging your blocks of peat, you lowly serf.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/barry-loudermilk-wants-concealed-carry-for-lawmakers-in-dc-after-scalise-shooting/article/2625970

[Ben]

So the NYT

1) Decides to talk about how the Giffords attack was worse and it was Sarah Palin's fault, because she created a much more violent prelude for that attack than the antifas and everyone else did for this attack (I think this kinda relates back to my comment about the Tea Party and their Gadsden flags vs antifas and urine bombs).

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/06/14/new-york-times-determined-to-find-political-balance-in-shootings-even-if-means-reviving-old-lie/


2) Are completely flabbergasted that Republicans, instead of calling for gun control, are calling for ways to keep people from bringing a baseball bat to a gunfight.

http://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2017/06/15/there-they-go-again-ny-times-doubles-down-on-post-shooting-shamelessness/

[makattak]

So the NYT

1) Decides to talk about how the Giffords attack was worse and it was Sarah Palin's fault, because she created a much more violent prelude for that attack than the antifas and everyone else did for this attack (I think this kinda relates back to my comment about the Tea Party and their Gadsden flags vs antifas and urine bombs).

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/06/14/new-york-times-determined-to-find-political-balance-in-shootings-even-if-means-reviving-old-lie/


2) Are completely flabbergasted that Republicans, instead of calling for gun control, are calling for ways to keep people from bringing a baseball bat to a gunfight.

http://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2017/06/15/there-they-go-again-ny-times-doubles-down-on-post-shooting-shamelessness/

Of course they do. And you know what? I no longer believe they are intentionally lying about Giffords being assassinated by Palin. I think they've told the lie so often they DO believe it. There are 5 lights.

They no longer inhabit reality.

[makattak]

Of course they do. And you know what? I no longer believe they are intentionally lying about Giffords being assassinated by Palin. I think they've told the lie so often they DO believe it. There are 5 lights.

They no longer inhabit reality.

Oh, apparently the NYT updated the story (I won't say "corrected" because they didn't correct it, they changed it.) Someone must have pointed out that printing such obvious and completely debunked falsehoods opens them up to libel suits, even by a public figure.

So they've gone from explicitly stating that Palin assassinated Giffords through her mind control of the nutjob to just implying it.

Classy.

[TechMan]

I've seen reports that he had an AR-15, that he had an AK-47, and that he had an SKS. Does anyone know which (if any of the above) is correct?

If he had an SKS or similar, I'm sure the media will nonetheless portray it as an "assault rifle" or "assault weapon." They're already calling it a "high-powered rifle" even without knowing what it was. My dilemma is: for the spreadsheet I've started keeping to track these sorts of events, is it better to log an SKS as an "assault weapon" even though it's not, or to stay close to the definitions and consider an SKS to be a non-assaulty semi-automatic rifle?

If it does turn out to have been an SKS, and the usual suspects do portray it as an assault weapon, I hope we'll all take them to task for it.

As of this morning (6/15/17) an SKS.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-scalise-shooting-legally-purchased-assault-rifle-sources/story?id=48051990

[Perd Hapley]

How nice that they call him the "baseball shooter." It's just like how they refer to Jared Loffner* as the "airport shooter," right?



*He doesn't deserve my looking up the correct spelling of his name. I would just call him "the guy who murdered six people, and started another fund-raising scheme for gun control," but that's a bit unwieldy.

[Perd Hapley]

I don't know if they meant to or not, but the NYT just published the most postive peice on Republican politicians that I've ever seen.

Shaken and angry, Republican members of Congress seized on the brazen daytime shooting of their colleagues on Wednesday to demand that existing restrictions on gun access be loosened so that people facing similar attacks are able to defend themselves.

Past shootings have brought calls for more gun control, especially for restrictions on the kind of rifle used in Wednesday’s attack. But the ardent supporters of gun rights who came under fire this time were not about to change their views.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/us/politics/targeted-republicans-gun-laws-alexandria-virginia-baseball-shooting.html