Orlando Shooting

After Orlando Attack, Obama Predictably Pushes Gun Control but Is Predictably Vague

Restrictions favored by the president, including a ban on gun purchases by people on "watch lists," are ineffective, unconstitutional, or both.

|

White House

Reacting to the horrifying mass shooting in Orlando on Sunday, President Obama predictably called for more gun control, but he was predictably vague:

Today marks the most deadly shooting in American history. The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle. This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub. And we have to decide if that's the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.

As is usually the case with mass shooters, Omar Mateen, the man who attacked the gay night club Pulse early Sunday morning, did not have a criminal or psychiatric record that would have legally disqualified him from owning firearms. We know that because he purchased his guns legally from one or more federally licensed dealers, passing a background check each time, and had been employed since 2007 by the security company G4S, which would have run its own record check. Hence "universal background checks," Obama's favorite gun control proposal, manifestly would not have made a difference in this case. Nor is it likely that the restrictions imposed by a new federal "assault weapon" ban would have reduced the death toll, since they have little to do with a gun's lethality and in any case would leave millions of the targeted firearms and "high capacity" magazines in circulation.

The one Obama-supported gun control that might have posed an obstacle for Mateen is a policy of prohibiting anyone on a federal "watch list" from buying firearms. The New York Times reports that Mateen, who was twice investigated by the FBI because of suspected ties to terrorism, "is believed to be on at least one watch list." Assuming that's true, a law that made inclusion on a watch list a disqualifying criterion for gun purchases, either automatically or at the discretion of the attorney general, could have prevented Mateen from buying guns at a federally licensed store. If the background check requirement had been extended to all gun transfers, it would have been illegal for Mateen to buy a gun privately as well—although that does not mean it would have been impossible, since it's not clear how the feds could possibly enforce such a mandate.

Both of the major-party candidates for president seem to agree with Obama that people on watch lists should not be allowed to buy guns. "If somebody is on a watch list and an enemy of state and we know it's an enemy of state, I would keep them away, absolutely," Donald Trump told ABC News last November. "We have to up our game against terrorists abroad and at home, and we have to take account of the fact that our gun laws and the easy access to those guns by people who shouldn't get them," Hillary Clinton said on ABC's This Week in December, complaining that Congress "refuse[s] to prohibit people on the no-fly list from getting guns." She dismissed concerns that innocent people could lose their Second Amendment rights based on mere suspicion, saying, "We have a list. If you are on that list and you believe you should not be on that list, we have a process to actually raise your objections about being on that list."

The problem is that it's easy to get on a watch list and hard to get off. The FBI's so-called Terrorist Watchlist, which is supposedly limited to individuals "reasonably suspected of being involved in terrorist activity," may include more than 1 million people, perhaps two-fifths of whom have "no recognized terrorist group affiliation." The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act, which the Senate rejected in December, would have given the attorney general essentially unlimited power to block gun sales, provided he "determines" that the buyers are "appropriately suspected" of involvement in terrorism and "has a reasonable belief" that they "may" use the firearms "in connection with terrorism." The bill did not even require that a blocked buyer appear on a watch list, and the criteria for upholding the attorney general's decision against a buyer's appeal were highly permissive: The government would merely have to show it was more likely than not that the attorney general had met the statutory criteria, meaning a low probability that someone is connected to terrorism would suffice to take away his Second Amendment rights.

Even in Mateen's case, there was little evidence that he was planning to carry out an attack. The Times says the FBI investigated him in 2013 "after reports from Mr. Mateen's co-workers that he, the American-born son of Afghan immigrants, had suggested he may have had terrorist ties." Nothing came of it: "The F.B.I. interviewed him twice, but after surveillance, records checks and witness interviews, agents were unable to verify any terrorist links and closed their investigation." The following year, "the F.B.I. discovered a possible tie between Mr. Mateen and Moner Mohammad Abusalha, who had grown up in nearby Vero Beach and then became the first American suicide bomber in Syria, where he fought with the Nusra Front, a Qaeda-aligned militant group." But "the F.B.I. closed its inquiry after finding 'minimal' contact between the two men."

Assuming Mateen nevertheless remained on the FBI's watch list (as the Times suggests), that means someone who was twice cleared of involvement in terrorism—someone who may have attracted attention based on nothing more than misconstrued comments and a passing acquaintance with a future suicide bomber—would nevertheless be deemed suspicious enough to lose his Second Amendment rights if Obama, Clinton, and Trump had their way. In retrospect, it is easy to say Mateen should not have been allowed to buy guns. But almost none of the people who face similar suspicions based on similarly meager evidence end up doing anything like what Mateen did. To block gun purchases by someone like Mateen, the net must be cast wide enough to ensnare lots of innocent people, who will lose their constitutional rights without anything resembling due process.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

154 responses to “After Orlando Attack, Obama Predictably Pushes Gun Control but Is Predictably Vague

  1. “And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.”

    Remember when Bush said, “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists” and “progressives” called it out for the sophistry that it was? Now Obama essentially says, “you’re either with us, or you support mass shooters” and the Left gets down on all fours and laps it up.

    1. my best friend’s step-mother makes $87 /hr on the internet . She has been without work for 9 months but last month her income was $12054 just working on the internet for a few hours. why not try this out??????? http://www.elite36.com/

    2. It says we either want to be a free country or a giant insane asylum where we don’t need to commit crazy people to take away their rights, since the entire country has lost their rights, with padded walls and controls on what you can own and watch. Though I suspect his wording will involve horrible logic like “if we can just save one child”.

    3. That’s not all they’re doing on all fours.

    4. Anybody can earn 450dollar+ daily… You can earn from 8000-15000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity..
      Go to this site home tab for more detail… Go this Website========== http://www.earnmore9.com

    5. Anybody can earn 450dollar+ daily… You can earn from 8000-15000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity..
      Go to this site home tab for more detail… Go this Website========== http://www.earnmore9.com

    6. Make 14500 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website.._________ http://www.earnmore9.com

  2. We need to be able to deny the right to keep and bear arms to people who’ve been put on a list without being able to exercise the right to due process.

    1. You know who else kept a list?

      1. Steve Buschemi in Billy Madison.

      2. Preet Bharara?

      3. Madame Defarge?

    2. That list is next to Obama’s secret kill list, which is just below his award for “Most Transparent Administration Ever.”

      1. But he is running out of room on his fridge for all that. Maybe if he removed some of his crayon drawings of the whitehouse?

  3. “And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.”

    Ah, yes. The logic behind the spectre that is ObamneyCare: Inactivity is a deliberate action, and can be taxed and regulated. In fact, inactivity might just make one culpable for the results of a given choice of inactivity.

    Obumbles has already decided for you, as has Skullduggery Rotten.

    1. Refusal to participate or engage has more and more under attack. The right to remain silent, the right not to engage in economic activity, etc. All under attack as government insists they not only have the authority to direct the behavior of those who play the game but also have the authority to insist that we play along.

  4. ‘Well,the AR-15 is the actual culprit here. It’s a ‘HIGH POWERED ‘ gun whose only use is for war.This is no hunting rile.It’s HIGH POWERED. ‘ So says Obama,Hillary,Sanders and all the other gun grabbers. Simple ballistics are hard.

    1. So… what would they make of my .308?

      1. Well,the cop that was shot in the helmet would be dead and would most likely pierce a vest. I have only owned my .22 Marlin.Here in Ohio it’s shotgun slugs only for deer.My 20 gauge Winchester works well for that.

      2. That’s a pussy gun compared to a sooper dooper terrifying .50BMG sniiiiper rifle

        1. They would probably say the .308 and .50BMG, and .22LR, are “point and click death.”

          1. “point and click death.”

            Any gun in my wife’s hand is point and click death.

        2. The .50 cal,It kills every thing it front of it and wounds every thing behind it

          1. “This will kill you. THIS kills you and everyone else in the room!”

        3. The longest range at the local range is only 100 yards.

          I believe the club rules don’t permit .50bmg rifles because the facilities are not built for it.

          And since I don’t even have a yard, let alone vast acreages, I have to make do with the range.

          1. Just get a Shiloh Arms reproduction Sharp’s. No need for a background check since it not classified as a weapon. Sure, its a lever-action breech loader, but a fucking 550 grain copper-jacketed lead bullet and cartridge with modern smokeless powder will end someone’s day in a bad way no matter what……

          2. I was at an outdoor range when some dude shot a 50. The shock wave set off a car alarm in the parking lot at least 30 yards away. $5 a cartridge. He was trying to sell it but no one was interested.

            1. A. The car alarm is set too sensitive if it really was 30 yards back, 30 feet sure but 30 yards no way no how.
              B. I just bought 200 rnds @ $2.50 ea, so while expensive there are still deals available (thanks to the war on terror mil production is up and surplus/out of spec have to go somewhere)

              If he still has it, all he needs to do is wait until Hillary is president elect then its a sellers market.

  5. Sullivan, you are still and always a treasure. *swoon*

    1. SULLUM. *grumbles at careless deference to autocorrect*

  6. FB and Twitter were overflowing with calls to enact “sensible” gun control and to decry the coming wave of Islamaphobia. Apparently this is how many folks deal with the sort of horror Mateen visited on the people in that club in Orlando. Politicians aside, the way most people deal with the pain and anger is to blame the easy targets of guns and bigots. To attempt to find a solution to preventing these events would require a long and difficult debate in which everyone would have to abandon their long held and pre-determined beliefs. Nah, blame your boogeyman of choice and move on. It’s easier and feels better.

    1. If only we had unlimited immigration this would not have happened

      If only we had dealt with Climate Change this would not have happened

      If only we had elected a woman as President this would not have happened

      (fill in the blank)

    2. Somebody I know on FB suggested that while we mourn the 50 murdered people in Orlando, we should also mourn the millions of Muslims who will inevitably suffer “backlash” in the days to come.

      1. Perhaps actual “backlash” would help encourage Muslims to more actively cull the extremists out of the midst.

        But we’ve never seen any backlash in the States. Americans, unlike xenophobic Europeans, rarely blame entire groups for the crimes of a few.

        1. Thank you.

        2. We just haven’t been properly trained yet.

      2. You should reply that we should also mourn for the 100 million law-abiding gun owners who will also inevitably suffer backlash in the days to come.

        1. The attempted moral equivalence of 50 real murdered people and some hypothetical future “backlash victims” caused me to vomit on my keyboard.

        2. Isn’t this sort of death toll a weekly occurrence in Chicago?

          1. 50 x 52 = 2600. no

  7. So, someone does something terrible, and the major party statists running for president want to use it as an excuse to abridge the rights of those who did not commit the crime?

    1. I feel like i’ve seen this movie before.

      1. And it is awful. I hear more sequels are in the making, as we speak.

        1. Dumb and Dumberer

        2. And Uwe Boll will be directing.

  8. “If you are on that list and you believe you should not be on that list, we have a process to actually raise your objections about being on that list.”

    Obviously the solution is to put every potential terrorist on that list.

    1. Not a process to get removed from the list, mind you. A process to “raise your objections”.

      1. Of course objecting to the list is a reason to go on the list, and objecting to being on the list is a reason to move up the list for higher scrutiny.

        1. +1 Kafka

          1. I’d have gone with +22 catches

        2. Since the NSA is watching us, aren’t we all on the list already?

    2. Except for Muslims cause that’s racist

    3. Just put everyone on that list and the onus is then on you to get yourself removed in order to have your “rights” back.

      I hear woodchippers are on sale at Lowes.

      1. Kind of like telemarketing.

  9. Mika is on morning Joe right now about to cry over how mean trump is. It’s hilarious

  10. I’ve already lost track of how many people have said “I don’t care whose toes we step on, we have to do SOMETHING!”

    Because something is better than nothing… There’s a phrase for that thought process but I can’t remember it and google hasn’t been any help. It’s the something something paradox. When you tell someone that something can’t be done and they immediately ask for something to be done. Maybe someone recognizes what I’m talking about and I’m not just a blathering idiot.

    1. You’re not a blathering idiot. I was just having this conversation five minutes ago. I pointed out that you will never prevent this sort of thing and the best you can do is be prepared to defend yourself. The response? “Well, what would you do to prevent it?”

      Rocks are smarter than these people.

    2. This guy had no criminal record,bought the guns legally and told no one,as far as we know,what he was going to do.So what is this ‘something’ they want to do? Facts and logic are hard.

    3. The blathering idiots are the ones who think that we can have NerfWorld safety simply by passing a bill or Obama using his pen and phone. They want a simple answer, supplied by somebody else. Preferably one that doesn’t oblige them to do anything. Or think.

      So when you tell them the basic truth that such an answer doesn’t exist they throw their rattles down and cry.

    4. I’ve already lost track of how many people have said “I don’t care whose toes we step on, we have to do SOMETHING!”

      Of course, the fact of the matter is that they most certainly do care whose toes they step on. They’re more than willing to step on the toes (actually the rights) of people they don’t particularly care for in the name of advancing their agenda. Surprise. Surprise. The fact that it isn’t their rights or the rights of anyone they particularly like getting violated means they can afford to be as careless with whether their policy is effective or not. Even if it does no good, they’ve still fucked over THOSE people.

    5. You are absolutely right, it’s called Deterministic-Centralized mindset, something that mist people have been shown to exhibit. They see no role for randomness in creating a pattern in the aggregate (the deterministic part) and they see aggregate patterns as examples of centralized control, rather than the outcomes of distibuted decision making.

      We ought to emphasize that having tge government do nothing is not doing nothing, everyone ought to do their best to limit the spread of violence. That is far more effective than anything else.

    6. I’ve already lost track of how many people have said “I don’t care whose toes we step on, we have to do SOMETHING!”

      If they are liberal remind them that something could be deporting all muslims. It’s hard to have Islamic terror if there is no Islam in a country. Bring up France mass shootings if they try to say ban guns instead. Obviously making guns illegal to purchase doesn’t fix the problem, so the solution is to try something new. Unless of course they are willing to admit that tragedies happen and mass violations of rights is not a proper reaction to said tragedies.

      1. It really doesn’t help when people act like even one tragedy still happening means that no prevention measures are worth the effort.

        Fact is, yes, there are things we can do. They can, have, and will stop many such tragedies from happening. Do they catch everything? No. But while 100% will likely never happen (that would require cultural changes, not legal/policy changes), we can *reduce*.

        And when people are saying “we should do *something*”, saying “we can never get 100%” isn’t useful. It just paints you as an extremist who says “well, we can’t fix everything, so we may as well fix nothing”.

  11. In hindsight, it should have been obvious that you-know-who would love the promoted comments system.

    1. Thanks to NoScript, I don’t see any promoted comments.

      (This comment brought to you by NoScript and AdBlock+)

      1. Is this spam though?

    2. At least now we know the character limit for promoted comments..

      1. The paranoid ranting about secret chatrooms is what takes it from A to A++. Magnificent.

    3. But the best part is how they’re now paying reason for a platform for their gibbering insanity

  12. “This massacre is a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon”

    And it is an even further reminder of how difficult it is for someone to arm themselves sufficiently to provide for their own defense (and the defenses of hundreds of others in this case.)

    1. Excellent.

  13. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  14. Not to assume or act like I know anything about the shooter, but wouldn’t being singled out by FBI investigations twice with no proof of wrongdoing be the kind of thing that would make someone more resentful and violence-prone?

    Maybe I’m a naive dumbass and the “right” answer would have been to arrest him without due process, but maybe I’m not.

    At any rate, fuck that guy for being a cowardly, evil prick.

    1. I was thinking the same thing, but ultimately it does seem like being questioned twice and found innocent isn’t a super amazing reason for him to go ‘postal’ but it is a rather compelling argument that the FBI’s investigation wing can’t find things even when there are things there to find. Not saying they should have more power or anything crazy, but it’s worth pointing out that even the supposed ‘super cops’ of the Federal Government apparently saw nothing wrong with this guy.

      In other words, you can only trust yourself to defend yourself. No alphabet soup will magically protect you with their pre-crime division.

  15. this is a godsend for Obama. He’ll get to punish gun owners on one hand (that’s obvious though). But he now also as the gay angle to play as well. Those who believe in traditional marriage/gender etc are even more dangerous than we thought before. Let’s ramp up the bigotry talk and BAKE THE DAMN CAKE

    1. I reckon he’s been playing the gay angle his whole life.

      1. NTTAWWT

    2. So, a couple of a-holes walk into a bakery run by a gay couple. They want a cake with picture of Pulse on it that says “God’s justice was served”. Do they have to make the cake?

      1. Answer: arrest the customers for microterrorism, obviously.

      2. While this would hit jerk of the year status … I think legally yes. I almost hope it does to maybe, just maybe, highlight that you should never go full retard.

      3. Folks complaining about non-discrimination laws will be a lot more compelling when you actually read the laws, and the case law (or rather, the precedents set by the case law).

        Short answer: no.
        You can refuse a specific message. You cannot categorically refuse customers based on certain characteristics. So you cannot refuse the customer because they’re Baptist, even if you know they go to Verity Baptist Church in Sacremento?. When they request that specific message (after you’ve already said “yes” in the general sense) you can object to the specific message. But you need to be very clear that you would say yes to another cake, just not that message?.

        Same thing as the “Nazi” or “KKK” cakes.
        ________
        ?Verity Baptist Church is where Pastor Roger Jimenez said “The tragedy is that more of them didn’t die. The tragedy is ? I’m kind of upset that he didn’t finish the job!”
        ?And before you try it, wedding cakes do not automatically become a “message” when they’re for a gay couple. That argument won’t fly in any court.

    3. Let’s ramp up the bigotry talk and BAKE THE DAMN CAKE

      They all want cake…

  16. I’m still looking for someone to define “sensible” gun laws.

    1. If you don’t know ,your part of the ‘problem’.

      1. I think the answer you’re looking for is ‘absolute, total ban except for politicians and billionaires security’.

    2. You can’t even get them to explain what “well regulated” meant in 1791.

    3. Sensible laws include no guns on college campuses. Unless you are the daughter of the President, in which case a heavily armed detail is no problem. Some animals are more equal than others. Got it?

    4. Listen, if you can’t get on board with question begging, then I can’t help you.

      It’s real simple.

    5. sensible — something we think we can convince people is not a complete violation of their personal rights.

  17. If only Pulse was a gun-free zone, this never would have happened.

    (I’m guessing it was)

    1. They served alcohol. Under Florida law, alcohol-serving establishments are gun-free zones.

      1. Then again,it,was private property,so,if the owner doesn’t want people with guns in there it is his right ,as it is for any property owner.

        1. Have we heard a peep from the property owner?

          1. I’d say he’s laying low and keeping quite. Seems like a good move.

            1. It’s apparently a she. Learned on Facebook last night the owner was in the same sorority as my ex-wife.

        2. Right, but under FL law, if the property owner wanted to allow guns – which I would think would be a good policy for a gay club, you know, what with all those “X-tian homophobe bigots” under every rock and behind every tree – he can’t, unless he stops serving alcohol.

  18. Pink Pistols Saddened by Attack on Orlando Club

    “The Pink Pistols gives condolences to all family and friends of those killed and injured at Pulse,” began Patton. “This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence. At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many. A human being did this. The human being’s tools are unimportant when compared to the bleakness of that person’s soul. I say again, GUNS did not do this. A human being did this, a dead human being. Our job now is not to demonize the man’s tools, but to condemn his acts and work to prevent such acts in the future.”

    1. Now I know who buys up all the pink Magpul stuff.

      Too much?

  19. A Mohammedan Perspective

    “And if a man lie with mankind as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they surely shall be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” -Leviticus 20:13

    Sun Tsu emphasized the importance of knowing the enemy. To Mohammedans, we infidels are the enemy ? none worse than a homosexual.

    The Hebraic Bible is explicit. Homosexuality is an abomination demanding of capital punishment.

    In this age of secular relativism, such notions seem archaic and barbaric ? not to orthodox Mohammedans. They act accordingly.

    To Mohammedans, homosexuals have made a mockery of sacred beliefs. They view so-called homosexual marriage as, perhaps, the ultimate affront to the Almighty. To them, these United States of America have degenerated into an immoral cesspool of depraved degradation, and this nation has transformed itself into the “Great Satan”. We infidels’ calling Mohammedans names does not diminish the force nor negate the substance of their argument.

    Omar Mateen was willing to die for his beliefs. In doing so, he quickly has been characterized as “mentally unstable”. Was he?

    Meanwhile, we Americans hardly are willing to fight for ours. In fact, our first reaction is to diminish further the constitutional rights of patriotic Americans by confiscating their guns. By the way, what are our beliefs?

    See “Homosexuality From A Mohammedan Perspective” under …
    http://nationonfire.com/category/context/

    1. Liberals: the problem with putting Muslims at the top of your victimhood hierarchy is that THEY WANT TO KILL EVERYONE ELSE ON THE LIST.

      – Milo Yiannopoulos

      1. Thatza a gooda one.

    2. Everyone knows that homos are to be burned, thrown from high places, or stoned. That is traditional Islam.
      Shooting up a nightclub with a gun… Well, that’s just radical. It’s radical Islam I tell ya.

      1. I thought Radical Islam was dudes catching gnarly waves on their boards.

        1. That could be Islam’s main problem. Not enough access to tasty waves, brah.

  20. The real question is, who is Obama going to start drone-bombing? He’s running out of countries!

    1. Yes – we need to immediately bomb another country, then import as many people as possible from there as refugees. It’s a proven formula.

    2. Can’t decide between New York City and Orlando. Both I suppose.

    3. I’m guessing Canada. It’s more convenient.

  21. When you’ve got a ‘tarded brain, every problem looks like cake.

    1. CAKE?! WHY YES, I’D LOVE SOME!!!!!!

  22. ” a law that made inclusion on a watch list a disqualifying criterion for gun purchases, either automatically or at the discretion of the attorney general, could have prevented Mateen from buying guns at a federally licensed store. ”

    Why not just execute anyone on the watchlist? Wouldn’t that remove all threats those people pose? Oh wait I forgot Obama already does that with drones.

    1. But that’s uhh…the wrong list! Yeah?

      *shuffles through a large pile of lists*

      This one? Uhh…no! Maybe?

      *examines it closely*

      Well I’ll be damned, it is the same list!

  23. The Pulse attack is what the Second Amendment was written to prevent (or limit). We are the militia, we the people with the right to bear arms. The police can’t be everywhere, and I wouldn’t want to live in a country where they were, but armed citizens should be everywhere. We can’t stop a madman firing the first shot, but we should have a chance to get him before he gets off the next one. How long does it take to shoot more than a hundred people? Time enough for an armed response to cut him down!

    1. i keep having this same thought. that is a lot of people to shoot. he got almost half the people in the club.

      1. And people cowering in the floor to text their mother that they were going to be killed. Fuck that. Wouldn’t you rather have a gun in your hand and at least have a fighting chance?

  24. It’s the same problem as with San Bernardino – parents who refused to teach their children right and wrong. If you know parents like this (who spout extremist views online or otherwise) then definitely round them up along with their kids and tell them that killing is wrong and you’re watching them. As for Obama, he is at least better than Trump because Trump will restrict guns according to whoever he and his Trumpkins decide is sullying the Dear Leader’s Good Name.

  25. Shocked face.

    Is it really too much that he at least wait for the bodies to reach room temperature before jumping on his fucking soap box?

    I’m curious: was this nightclub a “gun free zone”?

    1. Florida has the guns and beers don’t mix law… so gun free.

  26. “E.J. Dionne: Will Orlando drive us from our corners?
    […]
    It is no day for partisanship,
    […]
    Why can we never include a reappraisal of our weapons laws as part of democracy’s arsenal of responses to terrorism and mass violence?”
    http://www.journalnow.com/opin…..e84d6.html

    “Reappraisal” = outlaw gun ownership.
    To repeat, I’m awfully sorry the killer was the only one armed in that club.

  27. Our President is a ‘tard. And he has managed to live a kick-ass life.

  28. I find it sorta funny that lefties are now clinging to the idea of “secret watch lists” as a wonder-device which protect Good People from Bad ones by stripping people of their rights without trial or any means to challenge their status.

    I have a very vague, distant memory of people suggesting it was just that sort of Imperious,Totalitarian thing which was so godawful about the Bush administration. But it may just have been a dream.

    1. I believe the simplest, best argument i’ve heard made about “Watch Lists” is that anyone who is considered dangerous enough to be on one (and consequently have their rights stripped from them) is probably dangerous enough to charge with a crime and attempt to send to jail (or deport)

      If the people in question have done nothing deserving of any formal charges, then what basis is there for administrative punishment?

      *there have been times i made this argument and added, “i myself was on a watch list”. I don’t say that anymore. it only had the intended effect about 1/3 of the time.

      1. They are probably dangerous enough to just shoot in the back of the head and get it over with.

  29. As is usually the case with mass shooters,

    Omar Mateen was not a ‘mass shooter’. Omar Mateen was a terrorist.

    1. Are you sure it wasn’t just workplace violence?

  30. RE: After Orlando Attack, Obama Predictably Pushes Gun Control but Is Predictably Vague

    If gun control works for the Dear Leader in the socialist paradise of North Korea, it will work for Dear Leader here in Amerika.
    That only makes sense.

  31. The solutions to gun violence

    While nothing can prevent all gun violence, here are four solutions, each of which would help.

    1. Yeah, I read the “solutions.”
      I have to agree with the first one. The Constitution made it very clear The State is the only entity that is allowed to own guns. We’ll disregard the “shall not be infringed” part. Otherwise the unwashed masses will be armed. We can’t have that. Allowing the little people to own firearms is always a catastrophic mistake.
      Only The State should own guns.
      Just ask Hitler, Stalin and Castro.
      They’ll set you straight.

  32. “Both of the major-party candidates for president seem to agree with Obama that people on watch lists should not be allowed to buy guns.”

    Wouldn’t we be even safer if we, you know, deported or imprisoned people who are on terror watch lists?

    But then there’s that nasty “due process” thing to deal with…

  33. No-Fly List or any Terror Watch List: Shades Of Nazi Germany – The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares, “No person . . . [shall] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Depriving an America citizen of his or her liberty to purchase a firearm.
    People in OUR government would never stoop to adding those with differing political opinions to a government watch list, would they? Like Hades they wouldn’t! They would, and they do.
    The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares, “No person . . . [shall] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Depriving an America citizen of his or her liberty to purchase a firearm (thus denying the fundamental right of self-defense) by the simple act of a government bureaucracy adding one’s name to a list (with no criminal conduct being committed) smacks of totalitarian regimes.

    http://www.newswithviews.com/b…..win886.htm

    1. The push is now on to pass Peter King’s backdoor gun-control legislation: H.R. 1076. I urge readers to contact their senators and congressman IN MASS and let them know that the American people will NOT tolerate this extreme violation of constitutional liberties. This might be Barack Obama and his gaggle of gun-grabbers’ last opportunity during his administration to enact more gun control. And, again, they are capitalizing on a mass shooting in a gun-free zone as impetus for their tyranny. It never dawns on them that these shootings always take place in a gun-free zone. Instead, they want to turn the entire U.S. into a gun-free zone.
      If the government can ban a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms (or any other constitutionally-protected liberty) by simply putting them on a list, WE ARE ALL IN SERIOUS TROUBLE.

      1. just refreshed my memory on h.r. 1076.

        it’s horrible.

  34. i realize people are more stupid than i care to admit, but not understanding that if you establish a precedent that being “suspicious” is enough to deny someone a constitutional right, that giving this inch will lead to them ripping the constitution to shreds is a special kind of stupid. it’s not even a slippery slope argument, it’s basic government and legal theory.

    “All cats have four legs.
    My dog has four legs.
    Therefore, my dog is a cat.”

  35. How can anyone be vague about gun prohibition when the results of alcohol and drug prohibition are so explicit?
    Wake up, people!

    1. This time it’s different!

      1. What’s different?

        1. A couple of things.

          Manufacture. Guns, to be accurate, reliable and safe (for the operator) require a fair bit of engineering. Home-made guns often fail at least one of those three. Home-made drugs (including alcohol), on the other hand, can be made with relative ease and relative safety. Well, except for meth labs.

          Another is how people seek to acquire things. People seeking drugs are probably going to be getting a regular fix. Using them might be impulsive, but acquiring them (in most cases) will be a more deliberate choice (until addiction kicks in, anyway). Guns, on the other hand, tend to be discreet well-planned purchases. So while drug prohibition just changes the way people get drugs, gun prohibition would greatly reduce the number of people getting them because if something is a one-off, you’re less likely to “normalize” the law-breaking.

          There’s probably a few other reasons, but long and short is that the logistics and psychology of drugs vs. guns are different enough that gun prohibition, in countries that have tried it, tends to be far more successful then drug prohibition.

          That said, you do have to be far harsher then American gun control laws have been willing to go. Quite simply, we are unwilling to commit to gun control at the levels necessary to let it work.

          And that said, 3D printers are gonna make gun control moot within a decade.

  36. And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be.

    Yes, we do. Only an ignorant fool would think that the alternative is better. Now, next question?

  37. Evan . if you, thought Gladys `s story is impossible… on saturday I got a new Alfa Romeo since getting a check for $5834 recently and-in excess of, ten thousand this past-munth . it’s definitly the best work Ive ever done . I began this 4 months ago and almost immediately started bringing in at least $80.. p/h . you could look here …
    ………………….. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  38. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK=====>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  39. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ??? http://www.NetNote70.com

  40. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  41. we have had ex military/cia come straight out and say all attacks are false flags.the orlando hoax is exactly that.waych the videos on youtube.the terrible acting,the walking to pulse instead away from it.carrying people until out of view and then they walk away.the woman with no blood on dress then later she has blood everywhere.the guy saying he saw the bullet sticking out of the guys leg etc.why is it tht nobody in our congress or someone with som power addresses this.what about the fat gut with the flag shirt and hat thats in every clip almost and is helping phony victims on the ground with what looks to be paramedics all over doing nothing.damnit in my heart and guts i know this is completely fake.this breaks my heart that americans hate thier rights so much they would do this.let us not forget they passed a law allowing propaganda to be used against us.for all our ancestors who have served and died for our country,IT IS OUR DUTY TO STAND AGAINST TYRANNY.THERE IS A PART OF ME THAT THINKS WE ARE OVER AS A COUNTRY.THE SICKNESS THATS BEEN SPREAD BY ILLEGITAMTE GOVERNMENT HAS TAKEN OVER

  42. my friend’s mom makes $73 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her pay was $18731 just working on the laptop for a few hours…..

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ???????

    http://www.Reportmax20.com

  43. my roomate’s step-mother makes 60 each hour on the internet and she has been out of work for seven months but last month her check was 14489 just working on the internet for 5 hours a day, look at ..
    Read more on this web site..

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.maxincome20.com

  44. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  45. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. – – – – – ????? ???????????? ???????

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.