search
top

Obvious Headline of the Day

Norway’s tough firearms laws prove easy to ignore” I’ve been watching some of our opponents over the weekend coming to terms with how this happened. How did he get the gun? You know, we’ve been telling you it doesn’t work. Either way, one thing is certain, Norway’s gun laws are about to get much tougher.

Even as an opponent of gun control, if you asked me what kind of potential killer gun control would be most likely to deter, I would have suggested mass shooters, since they usually come from law abiding backgrounds, and may not have the black market connections to illegally obtain firearms. But that doesn’t appear to be the case. These kinds of mass killings seem to happen in countries with strict gun laws as readily as those in countries with relatively free gun laws. The death tolls seem to be generally higher in the more restrictive countries as well.

16 Responses to “Obvious Headline of the Day”

  1. David says:

    What they should be cracking down on are the immigration laws that are allowing the islamification of Norway.

  2. And you notice how nobody is talking about how easy it was for him to obtain 6 tons of fertilizer so he could make bombs?

  3. Harry Schell says:

    The Los Angeles Times ran a front page article about fears of “the rise right-wing terrorism”. I didn’t read the whole thing, but I didn’t see any comments about diversity, government welfare funding or outreach to such people.

    Seems like terrorists are terrorists, and if it is good enough for one kind of terrorist, it ought to be fine for them all.

  4. Has anyone seen any reports on what exactly were the weapon(s) the gunman had on the island? I’ve heard anything between machine pistol to a handgun and automatic rifle (BAR?!).

  5. JR says:

    Norway effectively bans self-defensive carry, and this makes the entire country a massacre zone, just like the GFSZs were intended to accomplish, here in the U.S.

  6. ” just like the GFSZs were intended to accomplish, here in the U.S.”

    That was the effect, not the intent. Proponents of GFSZs are not trying to get mass murder; they are trying to get moral righteousness and smug self-satisfaction. Mass murder is an unintentional side effect.

  7. JR says:

    It’s the only possible side effect of disarming victims on behalf of criminals. There’s nothing morally righteous or self-satisfying about it unless you’re an evil, genocidal, bastard.

  8. GMC70 says:

    That was the effect, not the intent. Proponents of GFSZs are not trying to get mass murder; they are trying to get moral righteousness and smug self-satisfaction. Mass murder is an unintentional side effect.

    Always assume that the outcome of any particular act that happens the most is the intended outcome.

    Given that reality, just what else would one expect from GFSZ’s? The actual outcome was somewhat predictable; the lack of magic signs certainly did not prevent mass shootings before; and arguably has made them more deadly.

    You give our opponents a presumption of good intentions. I say they haven’t earned same.

  9. Ian Argent says:

    I don’t recall a lot of discussion about the “ease”of obtaining fertilizer after Oklahoma City, either, but I believe it was made more difficult as well.

  10. Sage Thrasher says:

    “…mass shooters…usually come from law abiding backgrounds…” That’s an interesting observation, and seems to be largely true, especially for those who decide to murder their families. Even with his nutbag ravings, Loughner of Tucson infamy had never previously broken a law to get himself onto the NICS list. There’s not a lot you can do to stop those bent on suicidal self-destruction, whether the motivation is terrorism or simple craziness, other than the obvious: arm the sane.

    I would think at least one change they’ll probably want to consider in Norway is arming regular patrol cops so the response time won’t be so unfortunately long.

  11. terraformer says:

    Sage Thrasher, this is not true wrt Loughner. He was well known to the police but it appeared his family connections and a corrupt, vacuous PD allowed him to stay off the NICS radar.

  12. Sage Thrasher says:

    You raise a good point, terrformer, but though he was “known to the police,” from what I’ve read the police never charged him with anything and never bothered to do their duty to protect the public by making a call to the NICS center to get him on the no-buy list. Ditto his family, the community college administration and just about everybody else who knew him. I’m sure he’d have found a gun someplace else if he’d really tried, but in this case he didn’t even have the minimal obstacles put in his path.

  13. “It’s the only possible side effect of disarming victims on behalf of criminals. There’s nothing morally righteous or self-satisfying about it unless you’re an evil, genocidal, bastard.”

    You are making the mistake of assuming that our opponents live in the same universe as we do.

    Remember that our opponents, by and large, are middle class and above people with only limited contact with bad people. They, by and large, would never break a law; it is therefore difficult for them to imagine that laws would not work pretty well for almost everyone.

    The smarter gun control advocates do recognize that there are going to be a few outliers who do not obey laws, but they behave as though these exceptions are so rare as to not significantly impair the functionality of their laws.

    More importantly, they believe that the relationship of crime and population is static; if you change the power relationships between prey and predator, it will not change the predator’s willingness to predate.

  14. “mass shooters, since they usually come from law abiding backgrounds”

    This may be technically true, but a very large fraction of the mass shooters have previous mental illness histories, and are usually well known to family, friends, neighbors, and police as being seriously ill.

  15. DirtCrashr says:

    His “manifesto” quoted that of the Unibomber extensively, and verbatim in places, so his working role-model wasn’t law-abiding or sane, either.
    And if you look at how he kitted-out his rifle, he did not have the aesthetics of a gun-nut as much as a Mall Ninja.

  16. Doc Merlin says:

    As far as I can tell, europe is doomed.
    Sigh.

top