Gun Control Fails Again As Ex-Convict Uses Blaze To Lure Firefighters To Slaughter

FirefoxScreenSnapz013

Over the holiday a horrific story came out of Webster, New York, about a violent ex-convict named William Spengler (originally put in jail for murdering his grandmother with a hammer) who set fire to his sister’s home (he apparently murdered her too) to lure in firemen so he could shoot them.

He succeeded, killing three volunteer firefighters and wounding a few others while burning seven homes and ultimately killing himself on a beach nearby. He left a note which read that he had put the plan in motion to “do what I like doing best, killing people.”

This is an awful crime, all the more so for the fact that it targets our everyday hero first responders, and the media is making much of the fact that one of the weapons being used was a “military-style assault weapon” of the same sort used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook Elementary murders.

More fuel for the gun control argument, except that it was gun control policies which specifically failed in this crime. The State of New York already has an assault weapons ban in place which makes illegal semi-automatic shotguns as well as semi-automatic handguns and rifles with detachable ammunition clips. That would include the .223 Bushmaster Spengler reportedly used to murder the firemen.

That gun was already illegal under the sort of “assault weapons ban” Democrats would like to institute nationally, but that didn’t matter much to a criminal like Spengler.

What’s more, Spengler was a convicted felon (again, he served 17 years for murdering his grandmother) for whom the purchase and/or possession of any gun (including the pump-action shotgun and .38 revolver he also used) was illegal. Yet, gun control policy failed in that instance too.

Because you know who doesn’t abide by gun control policies? Criminals of the sort who use guns to murder other people.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • SusanBeehler

    So why did the system fail in the background check? Maybe because you do not need background checks at gun/flea markets. If we do not want felons having guns, we need to come up with a better way of identifying them and make sure they don’t get guns. Our system for buying guns could be greatly improved for better public safety. Also you can take guns between states that do not have the same “gun control” laws.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      And isn’t that just typical? Gun control laws fail, so obviously the solution is more gun control laws!

      Restricting gun sales will work about as well as restricting booze sales did. The idea that you can stop crimes like these with gun control is absurd, Susan.

      • SusanBeehler

        “The idea that you can stop crimes” is absurd? Rob why have any laws if we can’t stop evil people? The gun control laws we have now are failing. The point I am making some other form of gun control or policies or methods of buying guns has to be tried to see if it could make a difference in the multiple shootings/massacre. Do nothing is nothing. This article also proves your point of armed “guards” did not stop someone from getting shot, it probably prevented more being killed but it did not stop the guy from trying to shot as many as he could. He was not desuaded with the arrival of police shooting at him. It was the Bushmaster he choose not the 38.

        • Wayne

          The point is no matter what you do to ‘control’ guns, people will still kill people. Guns are not the problem. People are. I know, lets lock everyone up!

          • Wayne

            If armed ‘guards’ saved one life, it worked.

          • SusanBeehler

            Maybe if he did not have the bushmaster, no lives would have been lost

          • Jeremiah Glosenger

            You obviously know very little about the action of firearms. Any rifle would have taken out the 2 unsuspecting fireman approaching the home. A “Bushmaster” is a .223 caliber rifle; it is one of the lowest powered rifle cartridges made (read least lethal rifle). See: http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_ballistics_table.htm

          • SusanBeehler

            Maybe it is cheap?

          • Jeremiah Glosenger

            If you would like to learn about firearms, how they work, how to properly and safely use them, etc., I will be more than happy to give you free tuition to my course and even give you the ND CCW class free if you want to see what it is really all about. You’ll at least understand more about firearms and be able to make more informed judgments about them as a result.

          • SusanBeehler

            Sure, when and where.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            14 people shot over Christmas in Chicago, which has very strict gun control. What would you propose any different than what isn’t already on the books? http://wizbangblog.com/2012/12/26/meanwhile-in-chicago-14-people-where-shot-over-the-christmas-holiday/?

          • SusanBeehler

            I don’t have a proposal, the court has decided concealed handguns can no longer be banned, than we will see which works better more guns or no guns. Chicago is unique in the culture of gun violence the children are living there and have for many years. Kids are killing each other. The Public School System had seen a decline in shooting deaths but a increase in shootings, they think a decline in funding for anti-violence programs/mentor programs will produce even more deaths.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            “I don’t have a proposal”

            Neither does anyone else. Not one that works. That will not stop opportunistic politicians from pandering for votes to any emotional plea to further erode the gun rights of the law abiding with no good and possibly deleterious results for both safety and liberty.

          • yy4u2

            Correct. This would never have happened if this murderer would have been chaired instead of spared wasting 17 years of tax payer money n even more now with damage of property n more lives. Killing murderers stops them from killing again.

          • Matthew Hawkins

            He wasn’t convicted of murder. He got an appropriate sentence for what he was convicted for.

          • yy4u2

            My bad. /sarc He was convicted of killing his mom with a hammer (say goodbye buildings) n they found remains in his house that are probably those of his missing sister. He will be sentenced now n may he be tormented in the pits of hell for eternity.

          • SusanBeehler

            Wayne, a solution to a problem does not have to be lock them “all” up or just be complacent “people will still kill”. There is more we can do with background checks, limiting the amount of rifles with the large magazines, the semiauto type to only military or law enforcement purchases. The do nothing approach is nothing.

          • mike

            Am I seeing a trend? More gun laws and no concomitant reduction in gun crime?
            What other trends are apparent?
            Oh, I know! 1980’s pressure from a certain group of “sensitive” people resulted in thousands of mentally ill people turned out, turned loose from protective supportive environments. What happened? An uptick in homeless wandering the streets AND! more bizarre, unexplainable mass shootings. Hmmm…

          • SusanBeehler

            Hmm, only those with the same mental virtues as you are allowed to have “rights” in our country. I supposed you favor aborting babies who have a “mental” illness gene, too.

          • $8194357

            Like Uncle Ted said as well..
            78 of the 80 murders committed a day in America are from
            “repete offenders” the liberals release multiple times from the system..

          • SusanBeehler

            Yes and people will always die, but it does not mean we cannot or should not try to make a difference.

          • Jeremiah Glosenger

            You just need to leave the rights of law-abiding citizens alone as you do so. I think we all want the same goal is reducing deaths, but when you keep trying to take away fundamental rights from people who have committed no crime in order to do “something,” you are making a huge mistake. Get rid of gun-free zones–that is your place to start doing “something.”
            I was speaking with a ND LEO who does firearms instruction for the state. I told him that South Dakota only has one state law banning legal possession of firearms anywhere: it is in any SD courthouse. I told him, I thought that was a reasonable law. He promptly corrected me with numerous incidents in ND of criminals coming to a courthouse, shooting security and going on a rampage. He stated that if more people like “us” (a group of CCW instructors) had been there, not nearly as many lives would have been lost. I stood corrected and changed my thinking on that particular issue.

          • SusanBeehler

            So if people are the problem, how do you propose a cost effective way to control them?

          • $8194357

            Obamacare?
            Oh..
            You said a cost effective way to eliminate them…

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          “The idea that you can stop crimes” is absurd? Rob why have any laws if we can’t stop evil people?

          Well, it would help if you quoted me accurately, Susan. I said the idea that you can stop crimes with gun control is absurd.

          I’m for laws that work. Gun control, like most forms of prohibitionism, doesn’t.

          • SusanBeehler

            Really, what about the controls our state’s AG put on over the counter “sudafed” seems to have help curb some of the instant meth labs

          • Wayne

            How do those laws compare with taking guns away from law abiding citizens? Apples and oranges. You liberals crack me up. You not very good at critical thinking are you?

          • Bat One

            Its not the “critical” that’s at issue, but the “thinking” part that liberals have difficulty with.

          • yy4u2

            As Susan keeps proving.

          • SusanBeehler

            I don’t know how do you think the war on drugs and prohibition on alcohol laws compare with gun control? As has been presented on these blogs. YOU liberals crack me up when you think guns and booze have anything to do with gun control. Bananas and Cucumbers Not very good at critical thinking are you?

          • Bat One

            Bananas and Cucumbers

            Like the terrified focus on guns – especially big, long ones – this is clearly another bit of phallic fixation.

          • SusanBeehler

            You are smarter than I thought, “phallic fixation” like most gun owners?

          • Bat One

            You are smarter than I thought,

            And then some!

            As for “phallic fixation” I’d suggest you wait a few days before trying to co-opt the phrase. Using it so soon after I came up with it diminishes the impact, and makes you appear puerile, shallow and unimaginative by comparison.

          • yy4u2

            Curbed the lab part but did nothing for the amount moving through n how many use and/or sell it.

        • Wayne

          WeCanLegislateUtopiaSue, do you think it is possible, through greater and greater restrictions to completely eliminate murder? Not hardly. And this ‘we have to do something, anything, even if it doesn’t work’, is stupid.

          • Wayne

            I refuse to surrender my freedom merely for the sake of ‘doing something’ that won’t work.

          • Matthew Hawkins

            We cannot totally eliminate murder, but there is no reason it can’t be reduced. Why is Canada’s murder rate 1/10 th US’s?

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Who is saying murder can’t be reduced?

            i think it can be too, but I think gun control wouldn’t accomplish that goal. In fact, I suspect it would probably make things worse.

          • Wayne

            I believe we can reduce murder with things that actually work, not just knee jerk reaction that will not work and may well make matters worse. You liberals could take the guns away from law abiding citizens, but it will not reduce murder and will probably make matters worse.

          • Wayne

            You are comparing apples and oranges. There are many, many reasons Canada’s murder rate is lower than in the the US. Gangs? Drugs? The way mental health is handled? The court system? The visceral hatred of the right by the left in the US? Two different countries, two different cultures.

          • Matthew Hawkins

            But the availability of guns has nothing to do with it?

          • Wayne

            Restricting guns will not reduce murders. It may very well have the opposite effect. There are many instances where the crime rate, including murder, goes way up when guns are taken away from law abiding citizens. Look at any major liberal city in the US, Washington DC, Chicago, Detroit…etc., etc.

          • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

            Another wrong and short sighted statement.

          • Jeremiah Glosenger

            You forgot that Canada has a much less porous southern border with much less evil trying to come in. People usually quote gun death rates instead of homicide rates too. Places with fewer guns resort to stabbings, fire, baseball bats, etc. You are absolutely right; there are tons of reasons for variance.

          • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

            More people are killed in cars and by Cigarettes but I don’t see people saying we have to ban either….

          • Matthew Hawkins

            Dumbest statement of the day.

            Are you really going to claim that people aren’t trying to ban cigarettes?

            And comparing guns to cars is just asinine.

          • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

            So says you… Cars with a drunk driver behind the wheel can be just as dangerous as a nut job with a gun.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Can you refer me to a spree of gun homicides where the drives drove through an elementary school to murder 19 children? Or an instance of a car crashing into a theater killing over 20 people?

            Didn’t think so.

          • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

            Yesterday, an automobile accident kill X-number of passengers in whereever and I don’t see people calling for them to be banned, more people are killed by cars than guns but the liberal buffoons want guns banned.

            The truth remains that the gun free zones are more dangerous than the places where lawful CWP carrying members of society walk among us.

            Why do you think that Illinois and Chicago, Washington DC are two of the most dangerous places, they’re really strict in the gun law department and they’re run by bad leftwing policticans.

          • Bat One

            And comparing guns to cars is just asinine.

            Okay, if you’d prefer a different comparison, illegal aliens have been “banned” for years and there are arguably between 15 and 20 million of them in the US. And drugs, from pot to coke to hash to smack, have been banned with a fervid vengeance, yet all are readily available to anyone who wants them and can pay the going price. Fact is, despite both “bans”, there are far, far more illegal aliens and drug dealers in our public schools than there are security personnel.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Were a nation of illegal aliens, you and your family included.

          • Bat One

            Predictably wrong… on both counts.

          • Neiman

            Many, many more are killed in the Liberal Abortuaries every year than all combined, but I don’t hear anyone but Christians complaining about those murders or demanding we outlaw abortuaries.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            That’s because most people are sane and rational, leaving the majority of conservatives out. Gun’s aren’t practical everyday necessities like cars are. Cigarettes are being regulates almost as much as guns are, but they still need to go.

          • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

            That’s really not up for you to decide. Funny how a little thing like the constitution gets in the way eh?

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            1/10? I’ve seen figures from 2008, Canada’s homicide rate was 1/3 the US’s, but still twice that of Switzerland, where every able bodied man keeps a fully automatic assault rifle in their house. I guess if we want to reduce murder we should make gun ownership mandatory as they did in Kennesaw and do in Switzerland?

            Japan’s is even lower (though their suicide rate is high). I believe one of the ways they keep it that way is not having a pesky Bill of Rights that would keep the police from searching your person, car or property without a warrant, whenever they choose.

            How many of your Constitutionally protected rights are you willing to give up to reduce the murder rate?

        • Wayne

          Oh no, not a scary Bushmaster!

          • Wayne

            He could have used any rifle. It would have made no difference. Should we ban all rifles then? Then he could have planted a homemade bomb and detonated it when the fire department showed up. (And making bombs is already illegal.)

          • SusanBeehler

            Bait and switch blogging? bombs not guns? Bombs probably take a little more planning then a finger behind a trigger. Easier kill with, the easier the choice to kill

          • Wayne

            Bait and switch? Just pointing out the fallacy in your logic. I know it’s hard for you to understand. Your last sentence are very stupid. People don’t kill other people just because it’s easy.

          • SusanBeehler

            Are very stupid? People like things that are easy and why would someone pick a gun to kill someone rather than a knife or their bare hands. Easy choices make for impulsive decisions. Why would anyone choose a gun to kill a deer when they could just chase it down and knife it? Ease is the key. Using their hands would be to “real” and knifing it to death would be messy and they would probably get hurt by the deer. Never thought about why guns are a weapon of choice?

          • Wayne

            You truly are an idiot.

          • $8194357

            You mean like the 20 lb. propane cylinders the Columbine crud were going to use?
            Regulate and prohibite the sale of containers smaller than 500 lbs, huh. That should slow em down.
            Of course a “high capacity” propane tank could be used to refill those smaller ones multiple times…

          • SusanBeehler

            Guns would be the winning choice over 20 pound propane tanks. Pretty hard to lug those around without being detected. Maybe we need to make guns which weigh 100 pounds or more; so they are more difficult to use, that would be a sight to see.

          • $8194357

            Here…Re-educate your indoctrinated self…
            Americas greatest enemy is an “ideology”..

            Well worth the time to watch as we have been
            under attack by it for over 100 years.
            New link attached.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M

          • SusanBeehler

            Your link is not working

          • $8194357

            Sorry..

            Try this one…
            Ideological false hoods to usurpt a Rule of Law society..
            Long but interesesting and very educational.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M

          • SusanBeehler

            “Don’t give them a standing army” guess we have already failed there.
            And what people get the power, I can’t tell if you are a good guy?

          • $8194357

            Yup
            We have nothing more than carnies running
            a variety of illegal scams on all of us from DC.

          • SusanBeehler

            But he didn’t, what is it about the Bushmaster these gunners like?

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            Susan, do you know what a Ruger Ranch rifle is? I have one. It has a beautiful walnut stock. It’s an ideal rifle for small game or varmints. If you’ve ever had to deal with a rabid skunk, you probably don’t want to get within rock throwing distance of it until after it has assumed room temperature.

            It looks nothing like a Bushmaster, but mine is chambered in .223. It’s a semi-automatic with a detachable magazine. In other words, functionally it is almost identical to the Bushmaster. You going to ban and “control” those, too? If statistically more Chevys are used in drive by shootings than Fords or Chryslers, will banning Chevys reduce crime?

            BTW, my .223 has never been used to shoot a policeman, a fire fighter, a nun, a Girl Scout or an Amway salesman. (Well, not after I gave the Amway salesman a five minute head start!* )

            *Closed Captioning for the Humor Impaired: “Joke”

          • SusanBeehler

            Semi-auto rifles whatever their names should be banned along with the large magazines or clips or whatever the proper name is for them. Just be responsible with your guns and lock them up so the bad guys can’t easily get to them and shoot up schools or firemen or whoever.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            Let’s ban spoons, because people use them to get fat, get heart disease and die. Large capacity spoons, especially the so called assault tablespoons, should be banned because there is no sporting purpose in anything larger than a teaspoon.

            You have heard of “black markets”, haven’t you Susan? Where do you think Spengler got his weapon? The more weapons you ban, the bigger the black market. Not even counting the millions upon millions of weapons already in the US, do you not think that our thousands of miles of porous borders could keep out smuggled weapons?

            You cannot repeal the law of supply and demand.

            The bans you suggest are effective only to law abiding citizens that might use the weapons for self defense, not those intent on murder.

          • SusanBeehler

            You cannot repeal the law of supply and demand, but a marketing guru sure can come up with ways to discourage use, ease of use and the desirability of the product. Lets start painting all rifles Hot pink and calling them FAG (Flashy Armed Guys) instead of bushmaster, than make marketing slicks with hairy butted old men with catheters holding them, this marketing gimmick I know would appeal to the masses owning guns. Don’t you think? How cool would that be for the youngsters in Chicago? You know the subliminal kind of marketing.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            You don’t think that gay men and girls exercise their Second Amendment Constitutional rights? There are probably more pink pistols than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_Pistols

            I take it you’ve given up on any serious attempt to solve the problem? Let me know if the gun in the picture will kill you any less dead?

          • SusanBeehler

            I have seen the pink numbers, I am serious, gay men and women, not girls would probably find the ad campaign appealing? doubt anyone would, but I think don’t know for sure; but I bet most guns are sold to hetro men and they would be a little offended by the old hairy butted guy with a catheter. Just saying if we take some of the sizzle out of gun ownership, there might be a drop in popularity. Willing to try that for some legislation? It seems to work pretty good with smoking.

          • tony_o2

            Ever hear of a rattle can?

          • SusanBeehler

            Nope

          • two_amber_lamps

            Why spray it when Cerekote is almost as good as forever? :)

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            If you think that painting all cars pink will stop drive by shootings, then go with your pink guns. I didn’t buy any of mine as a fashion statement. Besides, there are still millions of non-pink guns on the black market.

          • SusanBeehler

            I didn’t say that, but now that you brought it up, I wonder how many really pink cars are out there, besides the Mary Kay ones? I bet they are not a big marketing payoff. Wonder if gun manufacturers made only pink guns with lipstick applicators, if they would be more popular than the bushmaster for mass murders, heck we probably don’t have to ban guns, we can just use some other feature to make them less desirable, since everyone on this blog seems to be all into appearances and what looks good and mean. Lets give a poodle with each one sold too. No more hard woods used either. Definitely should not be called a Babe master either.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            “since everyone on this blog seems to be all into appearances and what looks good and mean”

            Everyone?? You’re talking to someone with a Ranch Rifle and not a Bushmaster. Maybe you should avoid over generalizing?

            Oh, and I used to have a poodle mix. Picked him up as a stray. Might have been pure bred for all I know. Fiercely loyal dog. Plenty for smart. Good ol’ dog.

          • SusanBeehler

            No hard wood, either. Yeah I know all about poodles from the Allstate commercials. We can’t use a “pink” dog which looks like a lab, because Victoria Secret has the market on that dog, we could go with a wiener dog if you rather, I think it would be a good marketing plan, don’t you.

          • Wayne

            Typical idiot liberal response, ‘Facts be damned! We must DO something!’

          • SusanBeehler

            There you go again with “idiot”

          • guest

            Even he knows better….

          • Lianne

            let’s just ban those things that have things that come out the pointy end really really fast. I don’t know what they are called byt you know those things I don’t like, What are they called?

            sarcasm, for those unaware.

            Susan, your last statement is that of a mouthy uneducated 12 y/o.

          • Wayne

            It’s similar to what is in all the violent videos and it is what you liberals keep harping about as so dangerous. “These gunners’ are idiots too.

          • SusanBeehler

            I am sorry what video games? The ones you seem so familiar with Wayne. You should get the “idiot” award for the most times used in your vocabulary; is it your F word?

        • awfulorv

          Police shooting at him, is it? That’s assuming something that didn’t happen. The “Johnny on the spot” police did not arrive until at least twenty minutes after the shooting began. That’s twenty minutes, in a bucolic, picturesque, small town. Makes one wonder if they weren’t taking in the sights, themselves, on the way over?

          • awfulorv

            Referring to the Sandy Hook shootings, of course…

          • Lianne

            I am wondering if that is why some of the police there in NewTown are having such a tough time and are not coping? It may have more to do with the guilt of their inaction than what they saw when they arrived.

        • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

          Oh, I see, lets take more guns away from people, even though that Idea has been proven to not work… I am failing to see the Genius in that moronic idea….

      • SusanBeehler

        So

      • silverstreak

        You need to realize that gun control laws make libs FEEL safer.
        They just have a little trouble reaching the logical conclusion that feeling safer and being safer are 2 totally different things.

        • Wayne

          The problem is, when those laws are enacted and the murders continue, the liberals will want to take away more and more freedoms and enact more and more laws that won’t work. What do who think people like SusanBitch will say if all the liberals’ gun control laws are enacted and some nut case kills more little children?

        • two_amber_lamps

          Sorta like when America FELT putting Obama in office would somehow do our economy better? Amazing how where the left is concerned perceptions and reality don’t oft meet.

          • Guest

            In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this third public service announcement is to underscore the dangers of being a vile c@#nt like two_amber_lamps. Before making mean-spited, worthless posts such as the above, please reflect on two_amber_lamp’s trajectory toward a self-inflicted gunshot wound and funeral with none in attendance. While it is too late for two_amber_lamps, who will undoubtedly sit online continuing to mistakenly believe her virulent posts validate her life in meaningful way, but hopefully others can avoid such a pathetic life.

          • two_amber_lamps

            In contrast to my previous letters, I’m not planning on spending much
            space in this letter proving that Guest will go to almost any extreme
            to prevent my message of truth from getting out. Most people already
            seem to understand that. Instead, I’ll be discussing Guest’s soporific
            commentaries and how Guest uses them to hornswoggle people into voting
            against their own self interests. In the text that follows, I don’t
            intend to recount all of the damage caused by his immoral, imperious
            editorials but I do want to point out that his roorbacks are evil.
            They’re evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth
            fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that
            weren’t enough, many people are incredulous when I tell them that Guest
            intends to lead people towards iniquity and sin. “How could Guest be
            so splenetic?”, they ask me. “It doesn’t seem possible.” Well, it is
            definitely possible, and now I’ll explain exactly how Guest plans to do
            it. But first, you need to realize that he does, occasionally, make a
            valid point. But when he says that all minorities are poor, stupid
            ghetto trash, that’s where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins.

            The interesting point is this: Guest’s idea of juvenile Pyrrhonism is
            no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and
            intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of a
            disorganized bloodlust. It is, in every literal sense, an antihumanist
            and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to a pugnacious frenzy
            and then prompts them to block streets and traffic to the extent that
            ambulances can’t get through. What I want to know is how many people
            have had their lives ruined by Guest. Dozens, unquestionably.
            Hundreds, very possibly. Thousands is not out of the realm of
            possibility. Regardless of the exact number, the key to Guest’s soul is
            his longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness
            of an animal. He dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility
            of rational cognition. As a result, Guest wants us to believe that
            human rights can best be protected by suspending them altogether. How
            stupid does he think we are? I’ll tell you the answer in a moment. But
            first, let me just say that anyone who is genuinely coldhearted must
            also be genuinely brain-damaged. Guest is both. This tells us that he
            does not merely condone universal oppression. He does so consciously,
            deliberately, willfully, and methodically. In closing, although this
            letter has been lengthy there are still a large number of comments about
            Guest that I have had to leave aside. I didn’t even begin to mention,
            for instance, that surly oligarchs tend to dismiss reason, science, and
            objective reality. Anyway, the important point is that Guest is so
            intolerantly devoted to his own prejudices that his perception of
            reality is utterly warped.

            Ok silly, you’ve spent enough time reading posts here, back to work lil feller!

            http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6bSfOrzHFEg/UG6pa2zEBfI/AAAAAAAAGPo/PEf7czc9DZY/s1600/stockholm-7-eleven-109.4.jpg

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        The gun control laws you are stamping your feet about aren’t nationwide. If there was a failure, it’s that the laws aren’t as enforceable because they aren’t widely accepted.

        You are fooling nobody but yourself.

        This is yet another tragedy that hurts your case, not helps it.

    • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

      “So why did the system fail in the background check?”

      Why does any system fail, Susan? Why do you expect a system that screens people to own guns to be any better than the systems we have that deal with Medicare, Social Security and welfare fraud? And why do you assume there was background check to succeed in the first place? The weapon was subject to existing gun control laws. He could not legally own it in NY, so why would he submit to a background check if he was not purchasing the gun legally? I believe Rob’s point was that there were two entirely different “gun control” laws on the books to keep weapons out of the hands of men like Spengler and both of them failed.

      “Also you can take guns between states that do not have the same “gun control” laws.”

      Ever try it, Susan? Ever take your North Dakota driver’s license and buy a gun in a different state? Any reputable licensed gun dealer will sell you the gun and then have it transferred to a dealer in your state for you to pick up, subject to ND laws & state regulations. Same goes for guns ordered on the Internet. (Not a big high crime area). Can individuals do it? Buy guns in one state and sell them in the next? Yes, and so called straw purchases are already illegal.

      Had Spengler driven to, say, New Jersey himself to buy the gun, and showed them his NY driver’s license, any reputable licensed dealer would have refused the sale.

      • SusanBeehler

        Yes and reputable gun owners posting on these blogs would follow the current gun laws instead of bragging about not following the law.

        • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

          You go from wrong to confused and back again faster than anyone I know.

          • SusanBeehler

            Maybe you are not on the same page

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            Try answering Rob’s (or my) point, without fifteen choruses of “you must hate babies” and “you must do something for the children”, or “we have to do something”, and tell us how any of the gun bans being proposed today would have stopped this guy from killing those firefighters?

          • SusanBeehler

            How do you answer a point? What is your point? Absolutely do NOTHING or volunteer guards or legalize drugs. I can tell you if no one has access to the gun or it is so difficult to get the gun he used this would not have happened. He would have had to resort to the hammer and the hoses could have probably took out the guy.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            Susan, I’m about to give up on you. Either you are particularly dense or not living in the real world.

            “I can tell you if no one has access to the gun or it is so difficult to get the gun he used this would not have happened”

            Fine. So answer the question: “tell us how any of the gun bans being proposed today would have stopped this guy from killing those firefighters?” Tell us how much more difficult the law is going to make it to keep felons from getting illegal guns, when both are already against the law, and it should be as plain as the nose on your face that that is exactly what happened here.

            Remember, just bleating about making them all illegal doesn’t make them all go away.

          • SusanBeehler

            So we have the NRA proposal and than we have proposals that have not yet been drafted through the Biden committee; are those the real proposals you are speaking of. I thought we were throwing ideas out there.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            No one has “thrown out” an idea yet that will work. The whole of your argument seems to be: “We have to do something, because we have to do something, because we have to do something.”

            Politicians are very good at “doing something”. When enough people say that we have to “do something”, politicians will “do something”. Anything. Odds are, it will not solve the problem. It might even make the problem worse, but they can say to their constituents, “Hey! You wanted something done, so we did something.”

            Violence is a societal problem and a problem with human nature. If someone goes out and kills someone with a rock tomorrow, do you think “rock control laws” will eliminate the problem? And please refrain from the “Yeah, but he couldn’t kill 26 people at the same time with a rock” routine. He could if he brought 25 friends. (We used to call them “gangs”). In NYC, back in the sixties, gangs carried “zip guns”, homemade guns they would use on each other. Being illegal didn’t stop them then, either. And don’t get me stared on “black markets”.

            I have no problem with laws that deal with criminals and criminal acts. We have had enough history in this country to know that merely banning certain types of guns only dissuades the law abiding from owning them. Other laws which disarm the law abiding public completely, cause a rise in violent crime as the law abiding become unarmed prey.

            Been there, done that for a half a century, Susan. And the more that laws are passed in haste, the worse laws they tend to be.

            Take a deep breath and see if you can come up with anything other than a complete prohibition of guns, which has been proven not to stop criminals, as Mr. Spengler so aptly illustrates.

            I won’t hold mine while I wait.

          • Wayne

            She can’t answer the question.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            If simple gun bans were the answer, there would have been no Columbine shooting, no Newtown shooting, etc.

            I just wanted her to see that gun control laws are similar to your mother telling you to “clean your plate” when you were younger, because “children were starving in China”. She’d use a little guilt to get you to do what she wanted you to, but the children in China were no better off for it.

          • tony_o2

            I can tell you if no one has access to the gun or it is so difficult to get the gun he used this would not have happened. He would have had to resort to the hammer…

            Why would he use a hammer when he still had a revolver and shotgun? He could have just as easily killed these firemen with those weapons.

            For the sake of argument, let’s say that an assault rifle ban was effective in eliminating all murders committed with those weapons. Then what? Murderers will use hunting rifles to shoot at distances. But we’ve got to do something, right? So then we ban all rifles. Then murderers will use shotguns and handguns to murder at closer range. And because we’ve got to do something, those weapons will be banned as well. Eventually we will ban all firearms and murderers will still find other weapons to kill with. See the pattern?

          • SusanBeehler

            Yes, I do see a pattern in your thinking; whether humans will play it out like you thinking is another question. The problem in all gun owners thinking is the majority of them are not the murderers and I believe murderers are lazy, impulsive people and guns just make it too easy for them. How would you feel if your child was murdered by your gun? Gun owners need to be responsible and not treat gun ownership like it is a something fun, treat it as the weapon it is, lock them up, don’t pass them around and use them like a weekend warrior. Gun owners are part of the problem with the marketing even the sexualizing of the gun.

          • Lianne

            Susan, lazy is NOT the word I would use to describe the mass murderers. Much thought, research, preparation,etc went into their plans. Now, the low life little bum with a hand gun who robs the local convenience store, him I would call lazy. Let’s ban those cute little pistolly things.
            I can pretty much guarantee that people don’t play out what goes on in your head.

          • SusanBeehler

            Really, prove it. I don’t agree. You think they research, than prove it.

          • Lianne

            Susan, for the most part these mass murders are highly intelligent, live through computers, and just one small example of doing their homework ‘research’ is the theatre chosen in Colorada was the ONLY one that proudly posted that it was a gun free zone and it was one of the ones furthest from this guys house. Now, you need to take time away from here, do your own research on the lives of these guys, on guns, mental illness, and gun free zones. Real reasearch. Not just made up scenerios that bounce around freely.

          • SusanBeehler

            They are lazy and impulsive: even if they live through their computers and are intelligent. The Colorado guy was probably an exception because he did not commit suicide, most of the other mass murders are suicidal. You go do the research, you prove your point. Not just base your opinion on one shooter who survived. Yes, because bloggers there will be a quiz on mass murders at the end of this blog.

          • Lianne

            Susan, your posts are filled with the words ‘if’ ‘maybe’ ‘probably'; which proves that your nonsense is not based on any facts and you are here for goofiness.

          • Wayne

            Legalize drugs??? WTF? Lying liberal. You blowhard liberals keep ignoring the fact that there are other ways to kill many people without guns. Homemade bombs for instance.

          • SusanBeehler

            Yes, Wayne there are other ways to kill many people, but why do you think homemade bombs are not chosen as the method? My belief is because murderers are impulsive, lazy people seeking instant gratification; guns provide that. In case you have not been following along this blog; you know the one “blowhard liberal” Rob writes; it is his suggestion Legalize drugs or at least not arrest anyone for drugs, http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/if-you-want-to-lower-gun-crime-end-the-war-on-drugs/

          • Wayne

            Oh for sure, that’s it (whatever that was suppose to mean). It’s not the fact that you don’t have a clue.

          • SusanBeehler

            “Idiot?”

          • Lianne

            YOu said that beautifully.. Talking with her is no different than netting 50 butterlies at one time.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            Funny you should mention butterfly nets!

          • SusanBeehler

            Entertaining isn’t it?

          • Wayne

            IDon’tKnowWhatI’mTalkingAboutSue – ‘Boy, isn’t it funny that i”m such an idiot?’ No it isn’t. It is annoying.

          • SusanBeehler

            “Idiot”?

          • two_amber_lamps

            About as entertaining as watching someone with OCD wash their hands…

          • twoamberlampspsa

            In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this fourth public service announcement is to underscore the dangers of being a vile c@#nt like two_amber_lamps. Before making mean-spited, worthless posts such as the above, please reflect on two_amber_lamp’s trajectory toward a self-inflicted gunshot wound and funeral with none in attendance. While it is too late for two_amber_lamps, who will undoubtedly sit online continuing to mistakenly believe her virulent posts validate her life in meaningful way, but hopefully others can avoid such a pathetic life.

          • Onslaught1066

            Wassamatter, Ellin-A$$, your supply of 12 year old boys running low?

          • two_amber_lamps

            In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this fourth public service announcement…. tick!

            In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this fourth public service announcement…. tick!

            In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this fourth public service announcement…. tick!

            http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CAP83asoRvM/Tz2dhm1LzCI/AAAAAAAAAEM/BZepMmJQBHA/s1600/broken+record.jpg

            Run out of pithy epithets? Troll dismissed!

      • SusanBeehler

        Build a better system to address the reality of our gun world.

        • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

          Unfortunately, no one is suggesting any sort of better system, just the same tired bans on legal gun ownership that criminals have always ignored.

  • LiberalNightmare

    The good news is that the perpetrator of this horrific act did not have a 32oz soda with him at the time of the shooting.

    Gun control has failed, but soda control marches on.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Ha!

  • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

    Oh well, I guess we just paid a small cost for our freedumb again, right nutters?

    • mikemc1970

      The “small cost” we are paying is the cost of a too liberal court system. This guy shouldn’t have even been breathing.

      • borborygmi

        According to report he took a hammer to his Grandma. Plant him six foot deep.

        • Wayne

          Well, evidently he should not have been free right? Oh yea, I forgot, it’s the gun’s fault.

          • Wayne

            Or maybe it was the magazine’s fault.

          • borborygmi

            not the guns fault or the clips fault although if the guy was throwing hammers the fire fighters would have had a better chance.

          • Wayne

            Where do you get the hammer crap from? He could have easily planted a bomb and waited for the firefighters to show up. It probably would have killed many more.

            And taking guns away from law abiding citizens, banning guns, does not mean that this nut case could not have easily gotten a gun.

          • Wayne

            Why no comment on the fact that obviously this guy should have still been locked up?

      • Mike

        There was a time up until the 1980s when people who were so mentally ill were both protected and supported — but that was by federal funding and was de-funded under Reagan.

        • mikemc1970

          So you’re saying the bleeding heart liberals crying to open the cruel sanitarium doors wide, at the time, had nothing to do with that? Or that the Democratic majority Congress, at the time had nothing to do with defunding it?

          Oh that’s right, you’re just trying to distract people from the fact that this guy was convicted, in a court of law, and spent only 17 years in prison, not a mental institution, for killing his grandmother with a hammer, by wording a statement in an inane and completely dishonest attempt to somehow make it into Reagan’s fault. Never mind.

          • borborygmi

            To make the country safer the mentally insane should be locked up. Of course to make this effective everyone has to be evaluated and I am afraid a few of the SABers would be locked up. Please write us when they give you crayons and paper to write and to tell us how it is on the inside.

          • mikemc1970

            I’m the one you think should be going to the sanitarium. Yet you’re the one that thinks being moral and responsible is crazy. You make absolute liberal sense as always.

        • SusanBeehler

          And there was a time where people were committed to mental hospitals because they were immigrants, or their parents didn’t want them or they had TB.

          • Lianne

            so doing something like institultionalizing the mentally ill is worse than doing nothing?

          • mikemc1970

            No. Anything that leads away from the lefts ultimate goal of completely disarming all American citizens is simply the wrong path for her. In other words, there can’t be a solution that involves no new gun laws, no matter what facts and data you show her. She is simply ideologically incapable of accepting it.

          • Lianne

            Isn’t it funny how she demands that we do something. Whether that something will have any impact is immaterial. However, bringing the issues we as a country have with mental illness out of the dark ages is completely off her radar. And TB santariums were bad? I guess it is better to allow an outbreak like in Grand Forks to occur than to isolate those infected or to demand immigrants (legal or illegal) to have all their vaccines before entering the public domain. But, get those big long pointy things that have things come out that long end banned.
            You are right. She is not seeking a viable solution.

          • mikemc1970

            There was a time people seeded cotton by hand, but thanks to the cotton gin those days are over. There has been many revolutions in mental health since the early 80’s.

  • borborygmi

    Firemen should have armed themselves or at least put on some body armor. NOt like the equipment the carry is heavy.

    • Wayne

      Sad that in NY, a state with some of the strictest gun control laws, firemen still should consider using body armor isn’t it? Why is that?

      • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

        If anything strict gun control laws have done nothing to curb gun violence. Hum… Wait, What? That can’t be… The statists have failed once again.

  • Mike

    Rob, Rob, Rob…..
    How can you possibly consider the possibility that the man might have been mentally ill? That’s so insulting. People every where feel badly, their self esteem is damage when you tie these kinds of acts to mental illness.
    (oh wait! You didn’t make the connection. I did.)

    • fredlave

      Of course he was mentally ill. He killed his grandmother WITH A HAMMER and should never been let out of prison. People who badmouth capital punishment ignore the damage these murders can do when they are paroled, as most are eventually. Executing this guy would have saved at least three lives.

      • silverstreak

        I’m still trying to figure out how someone can plea-bargian a murder charge down to manslaugher after beating his grandmother to death with a hammer.
        I guess as long as a prosecuter got a conviction,any conviction, that was all that mattered.
        At the very least…this guy should have spent the rest of his life locked up.

  • Jeremiah Glosenger

    First off, I hate gun control laws and agree that criminals don’t care about following stupid gun laws; however, we should be fair in presenting the logic behind each argument. Let’s say that he bought the guns at a gun show in a private sale from a non-FFL who, as someone who doesn’t regularly sell guns, wasn’t required to do the background checks. Requiring the background checks would have possibly made it harder for him to secure the weapons (gun-show “loop hole”). Outlawing and confiscation of the scary looking rifles would mean there would be less of them around (or start a civil war) and maybe he would have had to change magazines more. These are reasonable assumptions.

    I present this logic so we can understand why rational people are persuaded by these arguments. If we are going to win the argument, we have to insist on pointing out the incorrect premise upon which virtually every gun control law is based. We can’t win over the public just through venting. Gun-control advocates believe that if we take away the rights of millions of people who own firearms, and it results in saving just one life, then it was worth it (regardless of the number of lives lost because the gun law hampers a law-abiding citizen’s defensive ability against criminals, foreign invasion, or tyranny). That is the problem–their premise.
    Certainly many gun controls laws (like gun-free defenseless innocent people zones) contribute to increased violence; however, even if there is one that can arguably make a difference, that must be weighed against the supreme law of the land “shall not be infringed.” The consequences of incrementally surrendering our 2nd Amendment rights as a nation will all but ensure future governmental oppression, not to mention cause casualties to individuals whose inalienable right to life and to defend that life will be hampered. Firearms are used to protect innocent life anywhere from 108,000 – 2.5 million times each year in the United States. We should always answer by correcting the premise; rather than just by saying that their laws are wrong just because they don’t work or have unintended consequences. We can’t talk about gun control laws in the context of a lone evil man trying to “kill people;” the discussion must be in the broader context of the hundreds of thousands or millions of crimes prevented by those same guns by the “good guys and gals.”

  • Jeremiah Glosenger

    U.S. Murders: All 13,636; Hands and Feet 801; Blunt objects were used to murder 611 people; “Assault” Rifles: less than 348
    What are these hands and feet? What are blunt objects? I had no idea these things were capable of so much destruction and death. We must all hold hands and ban them right now! They are more dangerous than these rifles that jump out of a box and “assault” people.

    • Wayne

      Facts don’t matter to liberals.

    • two_amber_lamps

      Interesting… study blames the “assault rifle” for 348 deaths, but they don’t fault the hands that held the weapon, or the feet that transported it, or the brain that told the hand to load the magazine, pull the charging handle, take weapon off safe, pull the trigger.

      I think the hand is a lot more guilty than we give it credit for? Only a liberal would try to follow this logic.

      Who cares how it happened. When will the fools start holding the sociopath staring down the sights responsible for their actions and stop getting mired in these frivolous details? It doesn’t matter HOW the murder was carried out… hands and feet, candlestick in the library, assault rifle with high capacity magazine. The end result is the same.

      Meanwhile leftists want to split hairs as to how it happened and can’t understand why the amoral society they’ve dreamed of produces monsters.

      • twoamberlampspsa

        In addition to the warning lights located in her username, this second public service announcement is to underscore the dangers of being a vile c@#nt like two_amber_lamps. Before making mean-spited, worthless posts such as the above, please reflect on two_amber_lamp’s trajectory toward a self-inflicted gunshot wound and funeral with none in attendance. While it is too late for two_amber_lamps, who will undoubtedly sit online continuing to mistakenly believe her virulent posts validate her life in meaningful way, but hopefully others can avoid such a pathetic life.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    The main purpose of laws is to state what behaviors a society will and will not tolerate, and the level of intolerability is measured by the corresponding punishments. Laws do not stop crime, but they do create criminals. There is a current drive to criminalize the entire population by a veritable hailstorm of laws and regulations. The passage of laws are first and foremost society’s pats on its own back heavily larded with do-goodery and wishful thinking. We love our criminals, they give us something to point at so we can feel good about ourselves.

Top