Hammers should be banned...

survives??? Something is not right there, like maybe she fired through the door to the crawlspace significantly slowing the velocity of the bullet is my guess.

Irrelevance noted.

Most children are killed by abductors/molesters, rarely via gun. ...Jim Thompson

There is a huge difference between an idiot, and a homicidal maniac. The problem isn't the weapon, it's that these freaks are allowed to roam freely. Since a hammer makes no noise, he could have possibly killed even more by picking them off, one by one. It looks like you need to be removed from society, and locked up for everyone's safety because of you high power rifle fetish.

No, we get your 'point'. It is you who don't get the math. There are more people murdered with hammers (actually, blunt objects in general) than the thing you want to ban so it would seem you don't mind killing one by one. You only get exercised if it passes some temporal threshold count but, eh, to the other 500... which is 19 times larger than the only thing you will mention.

Even more are murdered by hands, fists, and feet but I suppose even the left sees a problem with banning those.

And at 1690 the number of murders by knives and other cutting instruments dwarfs all three.

Of course, the largest, by far, is handguns; which raises the question "why go for rifles?" (and only a fraction of them at that).

The reason is that for decades, culminating in the recent SCOTUS ruling, the left has completely 'lost' on the firearm issue and need 'something' to point to as precedent before moving on to the rest. Something that can be pointed to and say "That's legal so anything is" and, as Rahm Emanuel explained, (paraphrasing) 'never let a serious crisis go to waste'.

What the heck does he mean? He explained "that is an opportunity to do things that you didn't think you could do before."

In other words, people panic in a crisis and become irrational, confused, so while they are not thinking straight, and vulnerable, you can get them to do things they would never do otherwise; what "you didn't think you could do before." That's when you can take them.

This, btw, is why virtually everything in politics these days is stated in terms of a 'crisis'. The last thing you want is for people to 'think', so panic the herd, and if there isn't a 'crisis' then make one. Like plan a 'financial cliff' a year ahead, stuff it in your pocket, and then wait to the last hour for the 'crisis' you created

But back to the 'crisis' at hand. The murder of 26 is certainly a horrible, horrible thing; no question about it. But so is the murder of the other 500, 1690 and, indeed, the entire 12,664 (2011 FBI stats). They had mothers, father, friends and family too and, of course, they're just as dead. But to obsess over one event, to the exclusion of the others, is panic mode herd irrationality which, of course, is precisely what the 'never let a crisis go to waste' crowd preys upon.

Let's look at the math again. According to FBI 2011 stats the entire murder count by rifles, at least as reported, was 323 out of a total murder count of 12,664. Even if we presume the irrational 'ban' logic of 'if we remove the rifles then those lives would be saved' (despite the obvious fact that many, if not all, would simply switch weapons and, of course, we're also ignoring all those who defend themselves), you're looking at round off error. For example, from 2008 to 2009 the number of murders went down by 1043. That's a reduction 3 times greater than the entire proposed 'ban' on rifles (actually, only a select group but we're giving the 'ban' folks all the advantage here), but with having done nothing at all. And it's 40 times the incident you're obsessed with. Or, to put it bluntly, with NO ban we saved 40 TIMES, not just 40, 40 TIMES the number that allegedly precipitated 'the crisis'.

Does this really justify infringing on the Second Amendment? Do we think so little of the Constitution and fundamental rights that we shred them for round off error?

That sure sounds like irrational herd panic to me.

The truth hurts, does it.

You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass and announced itself in five languages.

Yes, and you keep coming back for more. Too bad it never sticks.

Although he would ask to be bit again, and again and...

You're a more likely to be a target than the US. The weapon is just the first part. The second is the delivery system.

Shipping containers will work just fine.

If you hadn't snipped it, you might have realised that was a joke about the OP getting the country wrong.

Or not.

Yes, I was.

Guns have the most most useful use possible--protecting your life. The right of self-defense is a basic human right.

It's hard to imagine a more basic, more important use for anything, or right to it. Such uses happen all the time. All the time.

Indeed. Far more teenagers kill themselves and others in car crashes. That's bad for our life expectancy stats too. So, let's ban that.

Or ban all 'Know it All teenagers'!

Cross-posting idjits should be banned.

No problem. PLONK

Why not "know it all leftists?

I plonked Bogle a long time ago... all whine and no produce. Plus, clueless to how good readers don't double display. ...Jim Thompson

A FEW 'Know it All teenagers' aren't Democrats.