What media bias?
ABC news thinks it’s newsworthy to point out that it’s an election year err no one is calling out for more gun control in light of recent shootings:
In light of recent high-profile shootings, Friday’s World News with Charles Gibson featured a report that seemed to lament the absence of public calls for additional gun control. While not directly advocating new gun laws, the report cited statistics often used by those who support gun control. Before correspondent Pierre Thomas cited a poll showing 60 percent of Americans “favor stricter gun control laws,” Gibson introduced the piece: “Well, there are 230 million guns in America. There are more guns than there are adults. In the past incidents, like the one in Kirkwood, would rekindle debate over gun control. But as ABC’s Pierre Thomas reports, gun control advocates are now mostly silent.”
This bit was interesting:
Thomas relayed that those who oppose gun control are more likely to voice their views
Or, you know, there’s just more of us.
February 9th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
A gun control group DID call for more gun control, they’re called the media.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Or Both!
February 9th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
These alleged shootings are impossible. All of them have are supposed to have happened in gun free zones. We know for a fact that a gun free zone is free of guns. No one would violate this law, especially not some nut case who wanted to go on a random killing spree. In summary, these stories are being fabricated by right-wing-nuts who wear tinfoil hats.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
I live in Kirkwood – yes, that Kirkwood – and I can tell you that I have heard precisely zero about new gun control laws, even here. Cookie Thornton, to my knowledge, did not have a CCW permit and our City Hall proudly sports a sticker on the front door that indicates that concealed weapons are not permitted within even if you do. So Thornton was able to precisely pick out who the threats were (two policemen died, ambushed by the killer) secure in the knowledge the rest of his victims were sitting ducks.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
TO: SayUncle
RE: Perhaps
“”But as ABC’s Pierre Thomas reports, gun control advocates are now mostly silent.”” — ABC News, as cited by SayUncle
Not to be too obnoxious about it, but maybe…..just maybe….the gun control advocates don’t care much for politicians either?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. You acquire a dark form of humor in 27 years in the infantry.
During a Masters Program course on legal issues in business, presented by a local attorney to a group of military types, the instructor explained that there were two ways of removing a sitting judge from his bench; [1] Impeachment and [2] being voted out in the next election where he comes up for public balloting.
At this point, there was a dry voice from the back of the class that said, “There’s a third way to remove a sitting judge from his bench….an M1911A1. It’ll not only remove him from the bench, but do a fair job of trying to put him through the wall behind.”
The guy was an airborne-ranger and a comrade-in-arms.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
TO: Jeffersonian
RE: Oh?
“Cookie Thornton, to my knowledge, did not have a CCW permit and our City Hall proudly sports a sticker on the front door that indicates that concealed weapons are not permitted within even if you do.” — Jeffersonian
Another ‘shooting gallery’, eh?
How much you wanna bet that if a law-abiding citizen with a CCW and a .32 semi-auto couldn’t have put an end to this idiocy before the third victim in the room was shot?
If he were faster with his piece, maybe even the second victim.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[An armed society is a polite society.]
February 9th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
“GUN FREE ZONES” are just target practice sites oor nutjobs.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
To: Chuck Pelto
Well, probably third. Thornton ambushed and killed a police office outside City Hall (stealing his gun) before continuing his rampage inside. His second victim was a friend of my wife’s, Officer Tom Ballman, who didn’t know Thornton was armed until just before he was shot in the head. After that, the killer had free reign until other police, just 20-30 yards away at the adjacent police station, arrived and ended the massacre. It was after killing Tom Ballman that the opportunity would have likely presented itself.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Yes, because letting bored middle class men with hero complexes carrying guns around with them everywhere will definitely lower the amount of violent deaths per year.
Ed note: are they 21 and law abiding?
February 9th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take guns from the people who didn’t do it.” -William S. Burroughs.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
TO: Jeffersonian
RE: Friends
We all lose friends in this way. Seems like more frequently than I recalled from earlier years. My congregation in Littleton, CO, suffered such from Columbine.
My condolences for your wife’s loss.
RE: Taking Out the Visible Threats
“….Officer Tom Ballman, who didn’t know Thornton was armed until just before he was shot in the head. After that, the killer had free reign….It was after killing Tom Ballman that the opportunity would have likely presented itself.” — Jeffersonian
You emphasize my point that. The uniformed officers are obviously the first targets to take out in this sort of scenario….if you’re a murderer. It’s all those un-uniformed, and possibly armed, citizens that make such a place much safer. They’re the ones who will give a potential murderer cause to reconsider.
That’s why the Hamas crowd favors suicide bombers over suicide gunners. Israelis are prepared to shoot back.
Condolences, again….
Regards,
Chuck
[Along with the other curses of being unarmed, it causes you to be despised. — Machiavelli]
February 9th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
It should also be pointed out that Thornton was a well-known trouble maker at city council meetings. Way too many of these types (the males, anyway) go really bonkers when they finally are not allowed to rant as long as they want. Thornton had just lost a court battle over his speech rights at such meetings.
I have students who are just amazed at the amount of ranting and raving that is allowed at city council meetings. (They’re assigned to go to 2 city council meetings for class purposed in State and Local Government.) I tell them to ask around, and it is *always* the case that the ranter is incredibly well-known to everyone and usually pretty closely watched by the police. These people are usually not crazy enough to be locked up but not nearly sane enough to get a CCW permit.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
TO: Nolan
RE: Okay….
“Yes, because letting bored middle class men with hero complexes carrying guns around with them everywhere will definitely lower the amount of violent deaths per year.” — Nolan
Bring forth the evidence to support your a[ss]cersion.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Prejudice, n., A vagrant opinion without visible means of support. — Ambrose Beirce, The Devil’s Dictionary]
February 9th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Hmm,
Does anybody remember what happened at New Life Church in CO Springs? The same nut job that had his inner child disciplined up at the YWAM base, got upset and killed people up there, went on a shooting spree a little further south at the church. The lady who stopped what would have been a massacre was a church attendee and was asked to be a part of the security team. She stopped him with a gun.
Should there be gun laws with background checks and such making it difficult for people with violent crime backgrounds or such to get guns? Absolutely, they gave up their rights when they broke the law. However, to think that by taking guns away from all people in all areas will make things safer for everyone is ludicrous. Whacko’s and nut jobs will always acquire guns, weapons, and whatever explosive devices they need to accomplish their sadistic hearts desires. The only difference is, that if regular citizens are stripped of their ability to equally arm themselves, the headlines will read “60 shot, 35 killed in New Life Church Massacre”
February 9th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
TO: JorgXMcKie
RE: Speaking Out
“It should also be pointed out that Thornton was a well-known trouble maker at city council meetings. Way too many of these types (the males, anyway) go really bonkers when they finally are not allowed to rant as long as they want. Thornton had just lost a court battle over his speech rights at such meetings.” — JorgXMcKie
Funny thing, that.
I know someone where I live who can be described as a “well-known trouble maker at city council meetings”.
Just in the last few weeks, he has ‘troubled’ the City Council over various forms of ‘conduct’ they’ve manifested.
Probably the most interesting one was where he stood up in a council meeting and kept saying, “You CAN’T do THAT! You CAN’T do THAT! You CAN’T do THAT!”
The Chief of Police escorted him out of the chambers and had a ‘talk’ with him.
After this the City Council decided to have an armed police officer in attendance at meetings.
The really ‘funny’ part of this whole business is THIS….
This guy was RIGHT. The City Council could NOT modify their procedures ‘on the fly’ just to shove a decision through.
The city paper reported the results of a legal review by the City Attorney.
However, there are still armed police in the City Council meetings.
Now…with Kirkwood…I figure they are there to stay.
Personally?
I think it is better for government to fear its citizens than visa-versa.
What do YOU think?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it. — George Washington]
February 9th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
David,
How can someone give up natural rights? THe only thing that they can give up are priviledges. If they are safe enough to be among fellow humans then they are safe enough to be armed.
Oddly enough, we have many felonies on the books that have absolutely nothing to do with violence. Yet the State forbids them from owning weapons as well as the violent offenders.
Finally, please note that many of the Founding Fathers had very violent backgrounds which were considered crimes at various times by various countries. Yes they were all guilty of the high crime of treason, not to mention the actions undertaken against both English and French citizens.
February 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“Yes, because letting bored middle class men with hero complexes carrying guns around with them everywhere will definitely lower the amount of violent deaths per year.”
Absolutely. The world needs more bored middle-class men with hero complexes, like Richard Jewell, and fewer gun-control advocates, like the media bastards who tormented him relentlessly for being a bored middle-class man with a hero complex.
February 9th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
TO: JorgXMcKie
RE: P.S.
“I think it is better for government to fear its citizens than visa-versa.” — Chuck(le)
Oh. Yeah. Lest I forget to mention it, I’m PART of my local government. And so is the distaff. We’re ‘commissars’.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Politics is the entertainment division of Industry.]
February 9th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Politicians are only responsive to a citizenry they fear. The only citizenry they fear is one armed to the point that they can band together and successfully resist any attempt at tyranny by the federal government. This means citizens should be armed exactly as the military is: Same side arms, same rifles, and the same body armor. Anything less is surrender.
“The true measure of a people’s freedom is whether they are armed or not.” – Aristotle
All laws limiting the possession of any arms by any citizens of any country are tyranny. – Me
February 9th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
TO: David
RE: Yeah
“Does anybody remember what happened at New Life Church in CO Springs? The same nut job that had his inner child disciplined up at the YWAM base, got upset and killed people up there, went on a shooting spree a little further south at the church. The lady who stopped what would have been a massacre was a church attendee and was asked to be a part of the security team. She stopped him with a gun.” — David
New Life Church (C’ Springs)? Youth With A Mission (Arvada)?
Been there; or rather lived there.
And she wasn’t wearing a ‘uniform’ was she….
My point about the utility of the armed ‘citizen’ stands.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. — James Madison]
February 10th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Nolan:
Actually where a large number of middle-aged middle-class law abiding males carry guns for protection there is a great deal less crime. The stats are clear. Signs claiming a place is a gun free zone are essentially signs that say “here’s where the disarmed suckers are”.
February 10th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Gregg,
I am a far cry from an anti-gun guy. I’ve used them for competition, hunting and home defense. I see a gun the same way I see hammers, knives, acetylene tanks, ice picks, baseball bats, and all other inanimate objects. All of them are tools meant to be used for one purpose or another. A few of them have the unique purpose of causing death, whether to an animal or a human. However, none of these tools can inflict harm or death independently of the will of a human being using it in such a manner.
The use of guns have shaped, for better or worse, the history of this great country we live in. They have been used to take freedoms from some (Native American’s) and have also been used to protect the freedoms of others. Currently they are used by our military and police to protect our freedoms, and by regular Americans for defense and recreation. They have also been used against us by crazy, violent men to take our freedoms, and to take the freedoms of millions of people around the world. Many sick men and women throughout history have used firearms not to defend the rights of others, but to take them and forcefully submit their will on these defenseless people. Some of sick people, had they been apprehended before things got out of control, would not have been allowed to commit such atrocious crimes against humanity.
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, bin Laden, and other terrorist/dictator type rulers had the natural right to bear arms. However, when people like that, and other violent criminals within our country (murders, rapists, armed robbers, etc) knowingly use their natural right to bear arms to suppress and subjugate the natural rights of others, they should lawfully be restricted from owning such tools as to ever allow them to commit such crimes against the natural rights of humans again. This I am not opposed too.
I believe the 2nd amendment to the Constitution is not giving us a privilege, but is making obvious a right that all people have to bear arms for their own safety. The intent of the law, I believe, is to allow the citizens of America to protect itself from enemies both foreign and domestic, as well as it’s own govt’ should the need arise. I would imagine that many of the people that walk our streets today, probably would have been strung up in the day of our founding fathers because of their crimes and the threat they would have posed to free people.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Well, it certainly has done so everywher it’s been tried.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:31 am
“Yes, because letting bored middle class men -”
Sorry Nolan, but if you are going to exercise your civil rights here, you need to 1) register 2) submit to a background check, and 3) attend a safety class on hate-speech. We can’t take the risk that you might be some wacko who would yell “fire” in a crowded theatre.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Thank you, Chuck, she was very upset over Tom’s death. He was only 37 and had little kids.
BTW, I found out last night that the City Council had offered to wipe out all of Cookie’s fines, which totalled over $20,000, if he would just stop parking his asphalting and demolition equipment on the residential street where he lived and removed all of the materials he was storing in his back yard.
In short, Thornton killed five people because he didn’t want to move his trucks and materials.
February 10th, 2008 at 11:02 am
TO: Fen
RE: YEAH!!!!
“….3) attend a safety class on hate-speech. We can’t take the risk that you might be some wacko who would yell “fire” in a crowded theatre.” — Fen
And that class includes taking the MMPI.
I want to know if he/she/it would rather shoot his mother or strangle his father.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Psychoceramics – The Study of Crackpots]
February 10th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
TO: Jeffersonian
RE: Losses
“….she was very upset over Tom’s death. He was only 37 and had little kids.” — Jeffersonian
I know the feeling. We lost a close family friend and most of his family last year; a strange traffic accident that killed him, his wife, and one of his two children. [Note: I STILL think that the car that caused the accident had a driver talking on a cell phone at the time. But the police didn’t seem to want to investigate any further.]
The surviving child, 2 years, is in the care of the distaff’s best friend/boss from the place where she and our late friend and their boss were both employed.
RE: Thornton’s Problems
“I found out last night that the City Council had offered to wipe out all of Cookie’s fines, which totalled over $20,000, if he would just stop parking his asphalting and demolition equipment on the residential street where he lived and removed all of the materials he was storing in his back yard.
In short, Thornton killed five people because he didn’t want to move his trucks and materials.” — Jeffersonian
Interesting.
I sit on my community’s Planning & Zoning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Your reports provides useful insight into the background on what transpired.
We’ve had similar issues come before us.
The last one, a pest-control guy, found a place he could open an actual store; instead of operating out of his house in a nice residential area.
It might be useful to know what Thornton claimed were his reasons for parking the vehicle(s) where he did. They SHOULD be in the minutes of whatever empaneled authority he was called before. There should also be audio recordings available for review, to verify that the minutes are complete and accurate.
Yeah…there are psychos out there. And they can crop up anywhere. But in a situation like this, I think the most thorough investigation by disinterested, i.e., not DIRECTLY involved or under the ‘thumb’ of those directly involved, parties must be accomplished.
Six people are dead and if it were MY community, I’d be demanding such.
RE: For the Remission of ‘Sin’
As for the report that the City Council, or whatever authority in Kirkwood, HAD offered to drop all the tickets….may I suggest….
….you verify that information by looking for it in the minutes of whatever authority that was. [Note: I’ve seen some ‘funny’ things go on about what someone says and what REALLY went on, since I got involved in local politics/policies.
I’ve come to the decision that at any hearing, not only those people who come to testify before the panel have to swear an oath not to perjure themselves, but the city officials who make up the staff have to swear to the same about THEIR testimony.
The challenge is to get such a requirement into the city charter. And we’ll begin working on that idea this Tuesday evening.]
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Caesars wife MUST be above suspicion.]
P.S. That applies to all governmental authorities.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
TO: All
RE: Back On Media ‘Bias’
The local paper has been following this mass murder in Kirkwood rather closely. And EVERYONE who has been following the local news recognizes the obvious parallel the paper is attempting to draw between Thornton and the Kirkwood City Council vis-a-vis our local ‘well-known trouble maker for City Council’; the guy who is a retired engineer and knows how to read technical documents, i.e., City Ordinances and Charters, and come up with a good idea of what can and cannot be done by the City Fathers and Mothers.
And he is unafraid to point that out to them.
So….
….the question becomes….
Why do they think they need to defend themselves against such citizens with armed officers?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Power does not corrupt man; fools, however, if they get into a position of power, corrupt power. — George Bernard Shaw]