“Deadliest Mass Shooting. . .”

[redcliffsw]

The Establishment Department of History – you know, the people who inform us that the study of history began with the death of Elvis – are now informing Boobus that last night's slaughter – which killed 50 people – was "America's deadliest shooting." I will give these "experts" the benefit of the doubt and assume they mean numbers of Americans killed in one day at one location. Revisionist that I am, I must correct this false accounting. The numbers of soldiers butchered in the American Civil War reflect the following: [1] Battle of Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863) shows 7,863 dead; [2] Seven Days Battles (June 25-July 1, 1862) had 5,228 killed; [3] the Battle of Chickamagua (September 19-20, 1863) provided 3,969 dead soldiers; [4] the Battle of Antietam (September 17, 1862), accounted for 3,654 dead; while [5] the Battle of Shiloh (April 6-7, 1862), added 3,482 victims to the grisly total of that war. Even the battles that lasted for more than one or two days provided numbers of daily dead that ran into the thousands.

There are numerous other Civil War battles providing far in excess of the Establishment's newly-crafted record of 50, but these people tend to discourage any inquiries involving the harsh realities of the Civil War. Furthermore, space on the LRC blogsite is not unlimited: to list all of the 50+ daily dead in that war might pose logistical problems for Lew.

I have never been impressed by the assumption that the larger the number of victims of wrongdoing the greater the evil involved. I am reminded of scenes from two of my favorite movies: the first being The Americanization of Emily, in which Julie Andrews is being told of James Garner's heroism in being "the first American to die on Normandy Beach," to which she replies "oh, was there a contest?" The second film, Judgment at Nuremburg, has the wonderful line of the judge, played by Spencer Tracy, in which he lists three of the principles for which this war-crimes tribunal stood. The last of which is "the value of a single human being." The political Establishment – which, by its nature, values collectives more highly than individuals – is aroused only by large numbers of victims. For civilized men and women, the murder of 50 victims does not increase human suffering, but only repeats it!
-Butler Shaffer

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/deadliest-mass-shooting/

[redcliffsw]

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms "for their own safety and protection". The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

[Diane Amberg]

While I understand how everyone feels, can you tell me any other occasion when ONE lone civilian terrorist gunman killed more than 49 civilians in a civilian social location? All the others were either multiple gunmen, military, bombings, arson, or war time situations. These are simply not comparable.
In any case it was/is terrible. I'm not a gun control advocate, but easy access for everyone and anyone  to military style weapons has to be stopped.
There is no reason why shooting clubs and true licensed collectors can't have them, but there has just got to be better control, somehow, within the gun world to stop this. Change the laws so the seller could also be charged. Ask gun owners what could be done. They might have good ideas.
It will never be perfect, but something has to be done....and banning an entire culture isn't it.

[upoladeb]

Air bags blow up every day, the government forces us to have them.We don't outlaw them.Wether you are blowed up with a pressure cooker or shot with a gun you're just as dead or maimed.No one gets out of this life alive.We need to outlaw crazy.And live like Jesus may return at any time or God might call us home.

[jarhead]

"Change the law so the seller could also be charged"
Now that there is some brilliant liberal thinking. The dead bodies not quite cold and it all is about gun control. The killer passed a NICS at a gun dealer so if anyone is to blame it's the government for not having him on a no buy list. Then there's the ol "military style weapon"---what ever that means. The M-16 is an assault weapon because it has a selector switch where it can be shot semi-automatic or fully automatic, the AR-15 doesn't therefore it is not an assault weapon---it only looks like the dreaded assault rifle. All this talk about banning the AR-15 right now is a joke. The killer in Orlando didn't use an AR-15. He used a Sig Sauer MCX carbine ---but I guess it's black and shoots a .223 caliber bullet so it becomes a military style weapon. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people and wounded another 680 with fertilizer and diesel fuel. Did anyone call for the owner  the Co-Op that sold the fertilizer or the gas station owner,  where he bought the diesel fuel, to be charged ? What about that arsonist that killed a lot of people in an apartment he set fire to. Should the 7-11 owner be charged for selling him a BIC lighter ?
Why should only shooting clubs and "true licensed collectors" (whatever that means ) be the only ones who can own a 'military style weapon"---which I guess to liberal thinking the AR-15 and SKS would fall into that category. The AR-15 just happens to be an excellent hunting rifle. Hell, while we are at is just as well ban the BB gun because Ralphie "almost" shot his eye out with his.

[Diane Amberg]

I know exactly what that nut was using. One smart dealer had already refused him because he wasn't comfortable with the man. Good move.
Again with the twisted logic. Unless you are going to make planters for flowers, the weapon he used has no other use except to kill, whether its humans or in your case other animals. Bics, diesel and fertilizer all have other ordinary uses that don't involve death, but could if some nut case chose to use them that way. In areas or cases where certain weapons are forbidden, yes, the seller should be charged. If it's a legal sale, then of course not.
I think you will soon be seeing the laws change regarding certain kinds of weapons. A great many people have had enough. Sadly for the nut case segment, there seems to be some sort of romantic notion that they will get their point across with a scary looking long gun. I'd love to make being "crazy" illegal. But how does one do that? What about the unstable PTSDs? I'm sure you must have some solutions...please share.
I know what my active Marine friend Pugs said, but you wouldn't like it.

[redcliffsw]

Obviously you prefer central government power instead of individual liberty.

Government killing appears to be more suitable and legal to you than American liberty.

[frawin]

We saw the best thing yet on Facebook about this " the problem was not one man with a Gun, it was the people without one". I have had my Concealed Carry for years, as have my 2 Sons, and I we carry most of the time. Unfortunately we have IDIOTS in Charge in this once great Nation and their plan is to Disarm all, of US. Have a great day.

[Diane Amberg]

I'm afraid in this case, if they had all been armed they would have been accidentally shooting each other all over the place. As it is, I'm expecting to find out eventually that some of the victims were from "friendly" fire.   
As I have said many, many times, I'm not for control in general but, people have had enough. Twisted logic about using common objects to do harm doesn't help either. Obviously "they" don't ban cars and trucks, yet vehicles are involved in mountains of deaths every year.
I'm sure someone could use a tank to bring in the hay bales...but why?
If these particular type weapons are so useful in civilian life, why are the gun shops selling anything else? Why are the young military of today so willing to give them up and not replace them when they get home to stay? Have you noticed they aren't the ones advocating that we should become an armed society? Do they wear weapons wherever they go?   Nope.   
It's not the above board dealers and sellers that bother me, it's the unethical ones that will sell to any nut case with $. Yes, they should be held responsible in part, just as drivers who cause accidents are.
If bar folks can be held liable for a drunk that people can see shouldn't be driving, by extension couldn't that work for guns too? Think about it. Of course most people do have good sense about guns .other wise every bar would erupt into gunfire among drunks every weekend.(I know, I used to have to go get' em.Mostly beat to a pulp, but rarely shot.)
Do true accidents happen with Guns? Sure. We have a friend whose Mom was killed as she worked at a bar. A female patron had a gun in her purse. It went off, went through the purse, hit the bartender and killed her. Nobody went goofy and tried to have guns banned.
I have one long time friend who works at Miller's Gun shop and sadly another one, Tom Smith who had a gun shop near here and was murdered during a store robbery many years ago. He was always armed, but when 5 people from Philly storm the store, it didn't end well for Tom. .
Almost all our friends are hunters and most fish too. Guns and weapons are a topic of discussion quite commonly. The Constitutional issue rarely comes up. Sanity often does. They don't feel the need to carry all the time. They judge what they will be doing and where and decide from that.
Do we have guns? Of course. At least a dozen locked in the gun safe. Some to use, some are investment pieces. I still shoot best with my favorite 38 special.
When I was teaching at the fire stations in the roughest part of Wilmington, they would have me park in the fire station, so I didn't have to carry to be safe parking out on the street somewhere.
I think it will be quite awhile before all is known about the Orlando  incident. In the mean time, one more time, between the victims and their friends, families, and all the responders, and hospital workers, a lot of lives have been touched by a horrible event. Again.

[redcliffsw]

 
You seem to believe that your security is in the socialist government system rather than the Founders' system of individual liberty.