Little has changed with the handgun groupies. Certainly not their point of view (summary: “The Second Amendment is the revealed word of God”), no matter how many lone-gunman shooting sprees we have.

And the anti-handgun control arguments posted here? Staler than last year’s Christmas fruitcake (an apt metaphor for a lot of these pious pistoleros).

C’mon, NRA and its acolytes: Time to freshen the material.

“Freshen the material.” This really does read like a late night comedy show.

His responses to paraphrased arguments against gun control demonstrate how short of “material” the gun control crowd is getting.

This comment on the post pretty much sums it up:

Do you really think that answering those who oppose your arguments, by cherry-picking that opposition’s worst arguments, presenting them in ludicrous form, and then ridiculing them, while never articulating your own position, is something a responsible writer should do?

Via Sebastian: We bring facts and arguments…they bring dismissive insults and ignorance. Keep it up.

“Gun control” banned from Ft. Hood news coverage

According to a check on TVeyes.com, the phrase “gun control” has not been mentioned once* in the context of the Ft. Hood shooting by any reporter, anchor or pundit appearing on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News, or MSNBC.

In the dozens and dozens of cumulative hours of Ft. Hood coverage amassed by those television outlets, as they focus on the latest mass, workplace shooting, the phrase “gun control” has not been uttered once. Once again, in the wake of epic gun violence, the topic of guns and non-stop gun violence in America is not on the media table and is not open for debate.

When the Columbine killers unleashed their fury inside a suburban Denver high school in April 1999, killing 15 and wounding more than 20, the horror show set off all kinds of media-driven debates about gun control. i.e. Were current laws too lenient, etc.

Today, the press couldn’t care less about the issue or the related policy debate. It seems gun advocates have cowed the press corps, even as we watch wave after wave of mass shootings.

The blogger, Eric Boehlert, updates his post to note that the phrase “gun control” was finally used one time in new coverage by a guest.

He seems disappointed that the media isn’t driving more debates about gun control. He’ll get over it. Or not. Who really cares?

We’ve had a lot of those debates and the momentum is clearly on the side of those who think we already have enough or too many controls in place that aren’t doing any good. Or actually doing harm.

It could be that the media isn’t using this incident to drive gun control debates because it’s been less than 24 hours since it happened and they just haven’t started up yet. It could be that they are waiting so as to not appear too overeager to capitalize on a tragedy. It could be that they’re being careful due to the momentum that the Supreme Court decision on the DC gun ban has given the civil rights side.

Regardless, I’ve got no doubt that we’ll be hearing more noise in that direction soon.

Obviously, these people haven’t spent a lot of time on base.

I don’t know the regs for Fort Hood, but military bases are often pretty “gun free” in the sense that personnel aren’t issued weapons and generally not allowed to carry unless it’s part of their duties. So pretty much just MPs. It’s not like all the 11B infantrymen are walking around in armor with a loaded M4.

I thought I had posted about some new rules a while back that were trying to control personal weapons off base, also, but I can’t find it right now.

Suffice it to say that the personnel on Fort Hood had no real chance to defend themselves against Nidal Malik Hasan, a lifelong Muslim who reportedly gave an “Allahu Akbar!” shout-out before opening fire.

Will we be seeing the Bradys and other anti-gun groups trying to spin this as some sort of evidence that more guns won’t make anyone safer? Probably.

Even though police say they have not yet determined what weapon was used, Ralph Fascitelli, president of Washington CeaseFire, says he plans to cite [police officer Timothy] Brenton’s murder when lobbying for the bill in the next legislative session.

“Maybe this particular [police victim] wasn’t killed with an assault weapon, but the next one maybe will be,” Fascitelli says, adding that police safety was a key reason that automatic weapons were banned decades ago and that the International Association of Police Chiefs supports a ban on military-style semiautomatic weapons today.

Based on “the next one maybe will be”, this guy is going to take it to the state government. Must be nice to not need any proof or any evidence or even any case to back you up.

Four gun-rights organizations, including the National Rifle Association, are suing the city of Seattle and Mayor Greg Nickels over the new ban on guns in city parks.

They were joined by five individuals, including two Department of Corrections workers who say they need to carry their personal weapons in city parks to protect themselves against criminals.

“The city is acting illegally in putting a ban into effect,” said Alan Gottlieb, with the Second Amendment Foundation, and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court. “Lots of people in Seattle need firearms for self-protection.”

The story is discussed (term used loosely) at a site called Slog:

The insistence of this form of stupidity, gun rights, is like the backside of a proud water buffalo.

And the conversation (term used loosely) continues in the comments:

Let’s legalize guns in schools too, right? Legalize guns in courthouses, jails, and bars too, am I right? After all, a #2 pencil can kill someone too, right? And let’s legalize poison gas and explosives, since it’s the people killing other people, not the poison gas.

Pro-gun rights arguments are so leotarded.

That guy’s user name is i heart hunting accidents. No, I didn’t make that up.

Here’s another good one:

I failed to mention my respect for the second amendment despite personal sentiments. I just don’t respect the white man’s burden blubbering, tea-baggers who carry them.

But at least someone has a solution:

I think any law-abiding citizen should be able own and carry guns, but I also think that guns should be much more strictly regulated.

“But.”

Here are the proposals to incorporate that “but”:

Buying and selling of guns should be tightly regulated. All transfers of ownership should be registered with the state, even when between private parties. Perhaps a gun can be “scanned” out of one license holders inventory, and scanned into another. Obviously close the gun show loophole too.

All guns should be inventoried every two years. Since each transfer of a gun would have to be registered with the state, we would theoretically know who had every gun in the state.

The three men often discussed their desire to participate in “violent jihad against American interests” and talked about “their desire to die on the battlefield,” prosecutors said. But when they were unable to join terror groups in Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan, they found inspiration in the Washington-area sniper shootings and turned their interests to domestic terror pursuits while they plotted the attack on shopping malls, authorities said.

And get this:

Mehanna had “multiple conversations about obtaining automatic weapons and randomly shooting people in shopping malls,” Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Loucks said. Prosecutors would not say which malls had been targeted.

Loucks said the men justified attacks because U.S. civilians pay taxes to support the U.S. government and because they are “nonbelievers.”

The mall plan was abandoned after the men failed to track down automatic weapons, Loucks said.

We’re all told how simple it is for just anyone to pick up assault weapons at gun shows. We’re all told how automatic weapons are flowing over the border and fueling the drug war in Mexico. We’re all told these things over and over by government officials, the media, and activists.

Yet three wannabe terrorists were unable to arm themselves with automatic weapons.

An Orange County man caught two burglars breaking into his house, so he pulled out his gun and shot them both Tuesday night. One of the burglars was killed and the other is in critical condition.

The deceased burglar was identified as 17-year-old Brandon Martinez.

The dead burglar pointed a gun at the homeowner and ran at him, so the homeowner fired. The 17-year-old will be included in the total number of kids reported killed by firearms in 2009.

Seems that the antis think the only way they can win is to lie. As usual.