Tuesday, December 18, 2012

DR JOHN LOTT - DICKWIT

 ,Cards on the table.   After some decades in the military and with some exposure to using guns to kill make no mistake about it, I am against the unfettered right of civilians to bear arms.    And so it is that I have no hesitation in awarding Dr John Lott, supposedly one of Americas leading gun experts, dickwit of the 'weak' award for his call in the light of the latest school massacre for a repeal on the Gun Free Zone (read Schools) legislation and for teachers to be able to carry concealed weapons as a matter of course.

According to the good Dr this would even up the playing field and make it less likely for events such as what has just occurred to happen again.

So, instead of one sided shootouts we can now progress to two sided battles with (presumably) the kids crouched in the middle caught in the crossfire.

I am amazed at such torturous reasoning.   I acknowledge the US Constitution confers upon Americans the right to bear arms but very few rights are absolute and the pro-gun lobby should run a mile from the likes of Dr Lott.   With friends like him they don't need too many enemies.  

37 comments:

Redbaiter said...

Men who were far far wiser than you wrote the American Constitution you shallow hill billy ignoramus.

Out of the many movie theatres in his area, the Batman shooter drove past several to get to the only one that posted a sign saying no concealed carry was permitted.

These cowards want to kill. They want to kill as many as they can before the cops arrive. To maximise the deaths, they need to attack unarmed people.

Its wet knee jerk liberal idiots like and your dumbarsed "gun free zones" who provide them with the environment and opportunity do this.

Paranormal said...

You're welcome to your opinion, however I think Lott is right.

It's not about turning government property (it's wider than just schools and includes military bases etc.) into a war zone. It's about making the potential shooters think twice about going there in the first place. At present they know there will be no-one able to stop them in the first place.

IMHO I think Waheloil might be on to something with his anti depressant medication post yesterday.

The Veteran said...

Paranormal ... well, at least I can respect your views, something I can't say of Redbaiter given his tirade of personal abuse which leads one to conclude he must be an alumni of the Timothy McVeay charm school.

If you are advocating for a society where it is the norm for teachers in schools to carry concealed handguns as a matter of course then sobeit.

I'm not.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

I think both sides of the argument have some merit.

Clearly, the places sign-posted or known to be 'gun free' are an invitation to cowardly nutters.

On the other hand why would you put firearms into the hands of teachers who can neither teach, spell nor count, let alone shoot straight. Not only that but a panicking teacher, untrained in keeping calm under pressure, would likely kill more kids than the gunman dared believe was possible.

Remember the spate of aircraft hijackings thirty years or so ago?

Trained and arme4d sky marshals were put on flights. Maybe there needs to be the perception put about that every school and cinema has a couple of these skilled people floating about the place at all times.

Anonymous said...

Veteran...If you would be kind enough to go through the argument posed by Lott and then dissemble his points?
Crossfire is generally not a sweeping problem with armed cowards of evil intent. They bail when on the receiving end or are taken out.
Yesterday a gunman in Texas chased restaurant patrons into a nearby movie theatre [screening The Hobbit!] His murderous foray was stopped at two deaths by an off duty woman deputy. She drew her legally concealed pistol and dropped him. Game over for the maniac.

George

JC said...

The US has a long standing problem of mass murder:

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/analysis-mass-multiple-murders-rates-constant-despite-overall-decline-in-homicides

Nearly 1000 such events 1980-2010 in which over 20,000 were murdered.. its not the incident rate thats so shocking but the average number killed (20 per incident) and God knows how many more injured.

Given that scenario, what is the most effective short/medium term action that can be taken, and the obvious one is to cut down the rate of killing by killing or frightening off the gun man.. that means armed citizens in public places like schools, theatres etc.

There are in fact many more incidences of potential mass murder than you see reported much.. that because the killer gets cut down or scared off by armed citizens or officials.. its something that happens to work.

There's powerful evidence that the killers seek out no gun zones to do their work and schools are getting increasing attention for that fact (and the absence of men). As in this case there's plenty of evidence that the killers kill themselves when they think *someone else* will kill them.. they want to be in control of their own death; so getting rid of gun free zones appears to me the only likely way of reducing the carnage.

In the recent case there were several teachers within spitting distance of the man before he killed them, ie, several chances that he could have been shot and the carnage maybe halved or more.

JC

The Veteran said...

errrrrrrrrrrrrr ... might it just be that that Aust or NZ style gun laws are the answer?

As I said the the post ... I acknowledge the US Constitution confers the right on Americans to bear arms ... but it is not an unfetted right and so the question becomes how much and to what extent are gun laws required.

Redbaiter said...

"well, at least I can respect your views, something I can't say of Redbaiter given his tirade of personal abuse"

"John Lott- dickwit of the weak"

Guess who is hypocrite of the day.

mark said...

I acknowledge the US Constitution confers the right on Americans to bear arms ... but it is not an unfetted right and so the question becomes how much and to what extent are gun laws required.

Indeed there is a right but not as some would imagine.

Contrary to the popular perception which imagines all settlers as hunters as well as farmers, the vast majority of those living in the British North American colonies had no use for firearms, which were costly, difficult to locate and maintain, and expensive to use. For those few Americans who did own guns--and the evidence from the militia records is very compelling on this point--a gun was an object which sat gathering rust.


http://www.common-place.org/vol-01/no-01/arming/arming-3.shtml

Redbaiter said...

I wonder do these ignorant of history lamers who attack the 2nd amendment understand that they are attacking an idea designed to give citizens their last line of defence against government tyranny.

That they wish to destroy such a noble idea is why I can't help regarding them with utter contemp.

Especially considering the way things currently are in the US.

JC said...

"errrrrrrrrrrrrr ... might it just be that that Aust or NZ style gun laws are the answer?"

Possibly, but when only 25% of the US population want tighter controls and the rest want either no change or even less regulation it isn't going to happen. In fact, the recent trend is for the states to reduce controls even more and the courts have been very favourable to that.

The proposal to abolish "criminal safe zones" may have wider appeal than you think, and its moving in accordance with the liberalisation of the states and the courts.

As I've said elsewhere, for the US the Genie is out of the bottle, they have over 30 mass shootings a year with a high average body count and they need to think of protection rather than just prevention.

JC

Shane Ponting said...

When you outlaw guns or anything up to that absolute you are turning a dial that only a law abiding citizen will respond to. It may not be obvious so let me state as much - people who shoot up schools or anywhere else have little regard for gun laws evidenced by the fact they are already violating basic fundamental laws that have been around for decades/centuries like criminal murder, misuse of a firearm, etc.


So you've got a situation which involves a school, teachers, students and law-ignoring crazymen. You have *NO* control over the crazymen and no amount of self-delusion will change that reality. Face the fact that the only people you can reach are the teachers - so tell me why you would do anything other than equipping them with the means to respond.

The Veteran said...

Ok Redbaiter ... whatever pulls your chain. But I am fascinated by your Pavlovian response to any suggestion of gun control ... you ignore of course the requirement to register handguns in the US and clearly you are opposed to that as constituting a form of gun control.

But if you want to align yourself with the Militias, the Survivalists and the Neo-Nazi leftists for whom any form of gun control is an anathema then who am I to stop you.

I will however sleep well tonight secure in the knowledge that those of your ilk who see life in terms of black and white and no shades of grey in between will never get their fingers on the levers of power and will die fustrated and angry and good riddance.

Anonymous said...

So Redbaiter, how long were you in the military?
Thought so, all cock and no balls.

Redbaiter said...

So the American Constitution was written by Neo-Nazis?

You pathetic blustering fuckwit.

One day you and your pseudo liberal ilk might realise that it is you and your totalitarian intent to make out that anyone who thinks differently to you is some kind of villain who are closer to the Nazis than anyone.

Liberty said...

That’s a change for Redbaiter. He has got off the fence and taken a stand.
But he is wrong. Allowing for the fact Redbaiter looks at the back blocks of Alabama
As some kind of utopia. What else can you expect.

Blair said...

Veteran - there is a reason why so many schools get shot up. It's that little sign on the front of them saying "Gun free zone".

It's no coincidence that, instead of visiting the cinema nearest to his house, the Aurora gunman went to the only one in the area that was a "gun free zone".

It's also no coincidence that you didn't hear about a mass murder in a cinema here in San Antonio on Sunday night. Why not? Because a private citizen had concealed carry and shot the bastard before he got any more than one round off.

But by all means, go ahead and call people who want to protect my children "dickwits". Personally I would rather have good guys returning fire when bad guys start shooting. It saves lives.

Anonymous said...

Teachers in Israel are armed.

And guess what?

Schools are no longer "soft targets" - as they were in the 1970's before this anti-terrorist measure was introduced.

Judge Holden said...

"Teachers in Israel are armed."

Source? Teachers in New Zealand are not. Guess what?

"It's no coincidence that, instead of visiting the cinema nearest to his house, the Aurora gunman went to the only one in the area that was a "gun free zone"."

How do you know? Is this the same sort of knowledge that enabled you to confidently predict a Romney landslide? That's know as Adolfian logic.

Anyhoo, arm the pupils as well! You never know when the teachers will go postal!

You guys are psycho. Thanks to the Veteran for doing a post such as this to draw you all out of your swamp. It's been very funny.

Blair said...

"It's no coincidence that, instead of visiting the cinema nearest to his house, the Aurora gunman went to the only one in the area that was a "gun free zone"."

How do you know? Is this the same sort of knowledge that enabled you to confidently predict a Romney landslide? That's know as Adolfian logic.


I know because it is a widely established fact - the targeted cinemas in Aurora were the only one of six in driving range that had a gun free policy. And I predicted no such thing, so don't go comparing me to the blogger who responds to people disagreeing with him by swearing at them and calling them names.

Noel said...

The Veterans said
"... might it just be that that Aust or NZ style gun laws are the answer."

Many of the victims died from multiple wounds.

The weapons used cannot be sold or possessed here because of Section 2Arms Amendment Act 1992.

Prior to that change there was much debate here on the need for automatic firearms with most sensible people clearly of the the opinion that there was no rational need for them apart from collectors.

Anonymous said...

"I will however sleep well tonight secure in the knowledge that those of your ilk who see life in terms of black and white and no shades of grey in between will never get their fingers on the levers of power and will die fustrated and angry and good riddance."

Look back in history. Its the politicians, wearing shades of grey at the start, or those they encourage that will kill you - not some one off idiot with a gun.

Govts are at their best when they respect the citizens and that respect requires they be cautious about more than election outcomes.

The bigger question is what the heck is wrong with these people. Something is rotten and its not, in my view, really about the guns.

3:16

Anonymous said...

I'm not surprised by the usual antagonisms from the foetid progressive wetlands from the likes of Holden. I am at a loss as to why theorists would deny kids about to die a protective avenue of last resort.
The cat is out of the bag in the USA as far as handguns go. The first resort is no guns. Another is no nutters...both hopeless dreams. But you can stop advertising no resistance targets as 'gun free zones'.
I don't share the veteran's disdain for civilians taking decisive action to protect lives either. The cavalry always arrives late.

George

WebWrat said...

Reality!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UhO0Pul_FcE

Redbaiter said...

BTW, when you big government liberals finish designing legislation to control gun massacres you better move on to suicide bombings as well.

Actually, how about wars too. Lets legislate to make wars illegal.

Gosh, just think of what a powerful tool politicians and regulations actually are.

All we need are the right politicians and the right legislation and we could have heaven right here on earth.

Judge Holden said...

So Blair, you didn't predict a landslide Romney win when you said this?

"I think there will be a late surge for Romney - I think he'll take all the current swing states and get 348, including Maine's Second District."

And now you're calling a nutbar theory "established fact". Give up now.

Russell Fletcher said:

"Lets (sic) legislate to make wars illegal."

By your Adolfian logic murder should be legal too, as it's been illegal for millennia and it still happens (a lot of it is done courtesy of your precious 2nd amendment). You're a first grade fuckwit who can't even use an apostrophe properly. When you going away to join the second American revolution like you're always saying you're keen on?

Anonymous said...

Holden, if you've got nothing to say, go over to The Standard.

George

Blair said...

Judge - that wasn't a serious comment. My actual prediction was on my blog.

Paranormal said...

@Noel - the weapons used are legally available here, and can be purchased for reasonable prices. You also need to understand the difference between semi automatic and automatic.

Anonymous said...

In another life, I was lecturer at a university. The country went through a period of violent civil unrest, and I was comfortable with the fact that I owned handguns and could use them well.

One day, a smarmy Creeping Jesus liberal academic of the Judge Holden genus approached me and meekly asked whether he could borrow one of my revolvers to "protect my family".

My reply took the form of a diplomatic invitation with the same meaning as a Russian word ending in "off".

Noel said...

Paranormal said
@Noel - the weapons used are legally available here, and can be purchased for reasonable prices. You also need to understand the difference between semi automatic and automatic.

I suggest you re read the act.
A Bushmaster was used in the attack on children.
Take a good look at the stock then read the act.

Anonymous said...

Paranormal said
"You also need to understand the difference between semi automatic and automatic."

Does it matter?

See "Bushmaster M4 Assualt Rife (rubber band trick).

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Anon @ 2:11

Well, yes it does.

Have you ever fired anything other than a Briggs and Stratton?

Judge Holden said...

"In another life, I was lecturer at a university. The country went through a period of violent civil unrest, and I was comfortable with the fact that I owned handguns and could use them well."

Blah, blah. That's an extremely boring and irrelevant little story you've dreamed up dickwad, but thanks.

Redbaiter said...

The Veteran is just such a typical National party loser almost indistinguishable from the hard leftists that control the Labour party.

Unread, ignorant of history, he's utterly worthless in terms of opposition to the creeping tyranny that the left are working on.

Here he is on this issue taking a POV that is so ignorant and so extreme left wing it is astonishing.

But that is John Key and the National party again and again, just hapless stooges who merrily dance to the tune of the Fabian socialists and can never score a victory. Just completely and utterly useless.

At the link below you can see Soledad O'Brian, one of the most far left media scum in the US "interviewing" John Lott and she takes the same view as the veteran.

(Read the text Vet, and you just might understand how badly your views stink to anyone who does know what is going on.)

Don't support National, don't give them money and don't vote for them. They are politcally incoherent losers who are only helping the left achieve the tyranny they desire.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/335891/soledad-obrien-vs-john-lott-patrick-brennan#

JC said...

Seeing John Lott is the subject of this post I thought I'd better read up on his area of expertise.. it looks like he knows his stuff:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=272929

He and William Landes evaluated something like 600 mass murders 1977 to 1997 in public places with some going into 1999. the dua also evaluated the thousands of murders where 2 or more died in the same study. They evaluated all the US state murders with their different gun laws and concluded that only effective check on mass murder was concealed weapon carry by members of the general public.

I've only skimmed the total report but the conclusion should not be surprising.. mass murders occur in gun free public places and maybe half the perps have a history of mental illness.. any member of the public who challenges them with a gun either kills them early in the rampage or the mass killer turns his own gun on himself.. that too is unsurprising because part of his narrative is to kill as many as possible and then himself, ie, go out in a blaze of misplaced glory and in control of his own death.

Common sense tells me that in a country where 30+ mass killings occur every year (way less than earlier in the 20th century) that you need to inter the potentially violent madman earlier and/or shoot him at the start of his rampage. Waving arms around discussing the politics of gun control is a waste of time.

JC

Judge Holden said...

"Common sense tells me that in a country where 30+ mass killings occur every year (way less than earlier in the 20th century) that you need to inter the potentially violent madman earlier and/or shoot him at the start of his rampage. Waving arms around discussing the politics of gun control is a waste of time."

More Adolfian logic and the application of commonsense whatsmore! What about Japan, Britain, New Zealand, Germany? Should all these countries abandon gun control in order to achieve the same levels of firearm fatalities the US has been able to obtain? You picked Romney in a landslide too didn't you JC? I'm seeing a pattern.