New York's Governor Blames Nevada's 'Weak Gun Laws' for the Manhattan Mass Shooting
Kathy Hochul's focus on "assault weapons" is puzzling, since the perpetrator easily could have killed the same number of people with a gun that did not fall into that politically defined category.

This week's mass shooting at a Manhattan office building has predictably provoked contending commentary that follows a familiar script. According to critics of gun control, the fact that such crimes periodically happen in jurisdictions with strict firearm laws shows those laws do not work as advertised. But according to advocates of tighter restrictions on guns, the problem is that other jurisdictions refuse to enact them.
"New York has some of the strongest gun laws in the nation," Gov. Kathy Hochul said on Tuesday. "We banned assault weapons. We strengthened our Red Flag Law. We closed dangerous loopholes. But our laws only go so far when an AR-15 can be obtained in a state with weak gun laws and brought into New York to commit mass murder….Congress must summon the courage to stand up to the gun lobby and finally pass a national assault weapons ban before more innocent lives are stolen."
Hochul's focus on "assault weapons" is puzzling. It is true that the gun used in Monday's attack, a Palmetto State Armory PA-15 rifle, falls into that category as New York defines it. But that definition has little to do with a weapon's utility to mass murderers.
New York's "assault weapon" ban covers semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines and have any of five prohibited features: a folding or telescoping stock, a protruding pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, a second handgrip or protruding grip that can be held by the non-shooting hand, or a bayonet mount. Needless to say, Shane Devon Tamura, the 27-year-old Las Vegas resident who killed four people before committing suicide at 345 Park Avenue on Monday, could easily have done that with a rifle that lacked those banned features. He also could have done it with a handgun, the type of firearm used in most mass shootings.
Unfazed by that point, New York Times reporters Stefanos Chen and Jonah Bromwich think it is relevant to note, in a story headlined "Even New York's Strict Gun Laws Couldn't Prevent the Midtown Shooting," that "a federal ban on assault rifles ended in 2004." That law, like New York's, left would-be mass murderers with lots of equally lethal alternatives.
More generally, Chen and Bromwich portray the federalism that allows states like Nevada to deviate from the New York model of gun legislation as an intolerable threat to public safety. "A piecemeal network of looser regulations nationwide enabled a lone gunman with no criminal history to drive undetected across several states on his way to the city," they write. "The attack underscores the limits that even a dense web of gun safety laws and private security precautions can have in a country flooded with inexpensive weapons."
As evidence of Nevada's laxness, Chen and Bromwich note that Tamura would have been able to buy the rifle without "additional background checks" because he "had a permit to carry a concealed weapon" issued by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. Tamura obtained that permit on May 14, 2022, which means he did not have a disqualifying criminal or psychiatric record at that point.
Did that change? New York Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said Tamura had a "documented mental health history." Citing "law enforcement sources," ABC News reports that Tamura "had two mental health crisis holds" in 2022 and 2024. But KTNV, the ABC affiliate in Las Vegas, says "it's not clear if Tamura was ever admitted to a mental health facility after those holds." If not, he would not have been disqualified from gun ownership under Nevada or federal law when he bought the rifle last month.
Judging from the note he left, Tamura suspected he had chronic traumatic encephalopathy caused by injuries he suffered as a high school football player. "We have reason to believe he was focused on the NFL agency that was located in the building," New York Mayor Eric Adams said on Tuesday. "He appeared to have blamed the NFL for his injury."
Given his psychological issues, might Tamura have been stymied by a "red flag" law like New York's, which Hochul cited as further evidence of her state's determination to prevent mass shootings? Such laws authorize court orders that temporarily bar people from possessing firearms when they are deemed a threat to themselves or others. But that system can work only when an authorized party files a petition. That does not necessarily happen even when people display what in retrospect look like obvious warning signs, as illustrated by mass shootings in states with red flag laws, including California, Illinois, and Indiana as well as New York. In any case, Nevada is one of the 21 states that have enacted such laws, which demonstrably did not prevent Tamura from carrying out his murderous plan.
Chen and Bromwich allude to another New York law that could more plausibly have made a difference if Tamura had been required to jump through its hoops. To legally buy a handgun or semi-automatic rifle, New Yorkers need a government-issued license that is available to anyone 21 or older who is not legally disqualified, provided he is "of good moral character." That last requirement means the applicant has "the essential character, temperament and judgement necessary to be entrusted with a weapon and to use it only in a manner that does not endanger [himself] or others."
To aid in the assessment, local licensing officials conduct background investigations, which typically include fingerprinting, an interview, and three or four character references. Given those requirements, Chen and Bromwich say, "David Pucino, the legal director of Giffords Law Center, a gun safety group, said Mr. Tamura would almost certainly have been unable to legally obtain a gun or a permit for it in New York."
That's assuming Tamura, had he applied for a rifle or pistol license as a resident of New York, either would not have been able to muster the requisite references or would have struck local officials as lacking "good moral character." While that's possible given his "documented mental health history," the potential benefits of New York's licensing requirements have to be weighed against the costs they impose on law-abiding residents who pose no threat to public safety.
In addition to fees and documentation, that frequently arduous process requires a lot of time. Orange County, which is part of the Hudson Valley area near New York City, reports that obtaining a purchase permit "takes approximately 6 to 12 months but is dependent upon the applicant's diligence and timely submission of documents." Erie County, in western New York, offers the same estimate. Ontario County, also in western New York, says six to nine months. Upstate in Onondaga County, the sheriff's office says applicants should expect to wait three to six months.
New York, in effect, requires residents to obtain a government license before they are allowed to exercise a constitutional right. Obtaining that permission is time-consuming and contingent on a subjective standard. Whether or not you think that legal regime is consistent with the Second Amendment, most states, including Nevada, have rejected this approach. Hochul thinks that's self-evidently outrageous, and the Times seems to agree.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Why no Luigi treatment here?
Even if he were alive, Tamura wouldn't qualify for it because the N.F.L. only sacrifices the health of a few thousand pro football players for its advancement while United Healthcare execs like Brian Thompson take in huge quantities of a Kool-Aid that lets them believe greedily disregarding the health of millions of Americans makes them truly special people, as confirmed - to their small, poisoned minds - by shareholder accolades.
He "could have" done it with a bazooka... but he didn't. He did it with exactly the type of weapon she said he did. I'm not even a gun grabber and I think this reporting is inane.
Question, why did so many New Yorkers do/say nothing as a man walked down the street carrying a rifle out in the open?
Was anyone else looking to 'blame' anyone other than the shooter for this tragedy? No, just her.
Hochul is simply trying to deflect attention away from NY State as much as possible - there's almost nothing that can stop a committed individual that drove over 2,000 miles to accomplish their self-assigned task.
He double parked right in front of the building. Had there been an NYPD officer right there they would have shot him on sight. NY doesn't allow Open Carry. But he was smart to note that there no officers around. He was smart enough to not take the rifle on a subway. In most of the US there could have been a thousand officers and they could have done nothing until he actually opened fire.
Perhaps disarming your citizenry from protecting themselves if you cannot do so is a horrifyingly evil move.
"He had a concealed carry permit" she whined. For a weapon that cannot be concealed. What a feckless cunt. Shame he did not open fire on Hochul.
Why didn't NY State's gun laws stop the shooter at the border?
Maybe if NYPD officers could stop and frisk, oh, I don't know, suspicious brown people walking down park avenue carrying an automatic rifle this could have been avoided?
He was not carrying an "automatic [sic] rifle," for fuck's sake.
But that is the assertion from the misnamed Liberty Belle.
NYPD would not have probable cause to stop and frisk they would have probable cause to shoot him on sight.
Are you making a case for strong borders and enforcement that would have stopped this?
And you can not read.
Even if AR 15's did not exist the dude could have grabbed a mini-14 or any of a hundred different types of small caliber semi automatics.
What does a concealed carry permit have to do with a very non-concealable rifle? That is her claim.
New York's BS gun laws also reduced the number of armed people who might have been available to stop him. A good example would be how the person who stabbed those people at a Michigan Walmart was stopped by a man with a handgun.
New York's "assault weapon" ban covers semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines and have any of five prohibited features: a folding or telescoping stock, a protruding pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, a second handgrip or protruding grip that can be held by the non-shooting hand, or a bayonet mount.
OMG you guys don't get it. Features that make a gun scary-looking increase its lethality. Duh.
Especially if it’s all black and has a shroud!
Shoulder things that go up are chopped liver now?
She is dead right. The reason we need universal gun laws, such as background checks is that a killer can buy his gun in one state and then go into the other and kill. MOst guns used in crime in Mexico and Canada come from the US, for this lack of universal gun laws, where criminals and terrorists can go to gun shows in 41 states and without anything but cash buy assault type weapons, makes local gun laws meaningless. If there were national gun laws, as nearly all other advanced nations have...with 90% lower gun murder rates....the murder rate would plunge, but the gun makers, their lobby, and Republican politicians have block universal background checks from even coming to a vote, because while Republicans are paid or bribed the the NRA to block gun regulation, they do not want to vote for bills that over 90% of American support including 3/4 of NRA members. So by keeping these bills from being voted on, they insure profits for the gun makers and avoid being targeted by their lobbies, while since 9//11. there have been over 800,000 gun deaths, with over 300,000 gun murders. IN other nations, there is 90% less and in the UK, 99.7% fewer gun murders and in Japan, 99.99% fewer.
You are free to immigrate to North Korea and bask in the warmth of their robust gun control laws (but just the ones for the citizens).
Cuba is closer.
What an incredibly stupid remark. It’s just baffling.
“If pigs could fly, they would definitely be supersonic.”
The antecedent, the “if” part, is patently impossible. This country is never going to accept Japanese-style gun laws. It just isn’t going to happen.
And if, per impossible, it did happen, it wouldn’t have any effect on murder rates. For one thing, the mechanism that anti-gun idiots are imagining — that Japanese-style gun laws in the US would resulting in Japanese-style low gun-ownership rates among criminals — is not going to happened. There are 100 million guns in the country right now and probably 50 million people who have the skills to make more. Second, and doubly impossible, if guns were successfully taken from criminals, that would barely move the needle on murder. The top three mass-murders in the US did not involve firearms. Death, like life, finds a way.
Last I checked it was 400 million guns, based on sales reported by the ATF. Given how durable guns are, there are likely more than a few around from before gun sales were tracked starting in 1968-ish, so it's quite possible we're pushing 500-600 million, maybe more.
"The reason we need universal gun laws, such as background checks is that a killer can buy his gun in one state and then go into the other and kill."
Where in the 50 states can a person legally buy a gun WITHOUT a background check? No where. There is no state a person can just walk into a gun store and buy a gun without a background check. Please, prove me wrong - prove you are right, just tell me where I can go to avoid existing federal gun laws...
I think it's chirping about "the gun show loophole" AKA private sales. What he fails to address is thefts and straw purchases. I am surprised it didn't squawk about ghost guns.
Nevada has a universal background check law on the books, so that doesn't even apply in this situation.
Honestly, I want red states to become "sanctuary states" for gun laws and simply ignore all federal gun laws. Refuse to do background checks. Force the ATF to have agents in every single gun shop and do it themselves.
Ah, the old "gun murder" analysis. The US has a lot of guns and shitload of urban youts. What happens to gun murder counts when we remove the urban criminal element?
Remember it's the 13% that commits the 55% of all homicides.
Cincinnati Councilman comes out in favor of Blacks attacking white people in the streets:
https://www.fox19.com/2025/07/31/victoria-parks-stands-by-controversial-post-fellow-council-members-condemn-comments/
we remove the urban criminal element
Good plan. Let's start building the camps.
Fuck off, slaver.
There is no authority for Congress to enact universal gun laws.
---
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;–And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Are you making a case for strong borders enforcement? That the borders with Canada and Mexico keep those countries safe from American violence?
And Americans safe from fentanyl overdoses. And young American women and children safe from predators from Venezuela.
Oh, you mean like Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968 under which this clown would have been adjudged a prohibited person for his two mental health crises. But laws must be invoked to be enforced. Nevada also has a state level '5150' law which governs the restriction of adjudged mentally ill persons from acquiring firearms. But laws must be invoked in order to be enforced. Mental heath practitioners are loathe to invoke such mandates, local law enforcement is often kept in the dark on mental health issues and cannot act when they have no basis. Nicholas Cruz is a prime example of someone who was shielded from mental health intervention under Florida's Baker Act, also a 5150 statute, which if invoked would have made him a prohibited person at the age of 13. Read Andy Pollack's excellent work on the Parkland shooting and the incompetence leading up to it: "Why Meadow Died." Failure to invoke standing law is the problem, not the gun. Do some reading before you do your posting.
According to the Violence Policy Center’s analysis of CDC records, firearm death rates (per 100,000 people, age-adjusted) are:
Nevada: 18.4 per 100,000
New York: 4.7 per 100,000
Bloomberg School of Public Health
If you're comparing firearm homicides between the two states:
Nevada’s gun death rate (~18.4–18.9/100K) is among the highest in the country.
New York’s rate (~4.7–5.3/100K) is several times lower and among the lowest overall.
Because we lack national gun laws, criminals in Canada, Mexico, and states with stricter gun laws, go to states with loose gun laws where in 41, criminal and terrorist can buy assault type weapons in unregulated "private sales' with nothing but cash. That is why local gun laws are inadquate and lead to the highest gun death rate in the advanced world of 35 nations by over 90% more gun deaths. In 2022, the US had 45,000 gun deaths, the UK had 28, and Japan had 1.
Terrorists get their assault weapons in places like Afghanistan and Somalia.
My longtime Usenet ally, Christopher Charles Morton, pointed this out.
https://groups.google.com/g/talk.politics.guns/c/s9896yKUz5o/m/xm1VZbF0cFkJ
Oh, and while you're at it, explain why Al Qaeda would buy
semi-automatic rifles in the United States for $450 when they could
buy fully automatic weapons in Somalia for $12?
Or for free - we left a million there.
Per Bloomberg School of Public Health- 2023 stats:
Nevada- 185 homicides, 491 suicides- population 3.2 million
New York- 430 homicides, 417 suicides- population 8.3 million
You threw in suicides for Nevada in your “gun deaths” and apparently not New York. At any rate, homicides rates are similar.
Would not assisted suicide reduce suicides by gun?
Not if the assistant shoots you.
Thank you for taking the trouble to point that out.
He did say it was "Bloomberg School of Public Health" along with the "Violence Policy Center," so you can expect the figures to be conflated, skewed, and distorted in order to prop up their agendas.
The usual false talking points of these organizations and "ruffsoft" is clearly here to push that agenda.
And naturally the NYT will promulgate it.
You’re welcome.
The site, in addition to the clues you mentioned, also declares gun violence is a public health problem.
To a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Chicago stats for 2024:
Shot and killed: 538
Shot and wounded: 2444
Total shot: 2982
Total Homicides: 610
To date:(2025)
Shot and killed: 203
Shot and wounded: 900
Total Shot: 1103
Total Homicides: 246
These are the type of figures that account for our inflated "gun homicide" numbers and somehow or other we suburban and rural dwelling gun owners, who never commit any crimes, share the responsibility for it. I suppose if NO ONE could own a gun, the persons who hell bent on violence would have to resort to knives, axes, hatches, crow bars, etc. and the rest of us would still be responsible for the actions of those who supposedly have no agency; no, they must rely on virtue signaling and self righteous Democrats to advocate for their skewed homicide rates
Bombs! Don't forget the bombs!
Ban the bombs!
Europe's murder rate is 14 time higher than the US once you add in genocides. That doesn't even include state sponsored murders.
I'll keep my guns, thank you.
2/3rds of gun violence is suicide. Suicide is a tragedy no matter how it's performed, getting rid of guns won't change that.
2/3rds of the remainder is black-on-black violence. Getting rid of guns just means they'll use machetes and trucks and bombs - as they do in Europe.
Of the remaining 10 percent, less than one percent involves the use of rifle.
Nevada's homicide rate is of course percapita.
Chicago, however, leads the nation for the 13th year in a row for total homicides....2024/ 610.
Unless the gun is a P320, the gun cannot commit an act of assault.
That shit with the 320 is nuts.
New York's laws proscribing aggravated assault and homicide couldn't prevent the midtown shooting either. Criminals intent on ignoring those laws are going to ignore your gun laws too.
They can be arrested and punished if caught.
Thats the point of these laws, just as immigration laws enable ICE to catch illegals!
Damn that silly constitution!
Of course, there is no way a street full of armed citizens would have stopped/prevented this action.
No chance at all.
That sort of stuff only happens in other states with lax gun laws.
Again missing the forest for the trees. So postmortem apologetics reveal that a fully rational, fully-informed, would-be mass shooter could have committed the same atrocity with a less glamorous, less badass firearm. But in Nevada, you can get the one specifically designed for mass murder of humans. The sexy one. So our guy does just that, and his doing so proves Hochul right. As for mental instability: two mental health holds IS a big deal. Nobody is held absent an overt display of behavior threatening imminent harm to self or others. Then, before hearing, they're medicated and show up calm. Case dismissed. After 21 years as a probate judge, I ought to know.
I wonder if Tamura knew that murder is illegal in all 50 states?
Does Hochul?
in Nevada, you can get the one specifically designed for mass murder of humans.
Could you please identify the gun specifically designed for mass murder? There are 393 million pistols, rifles and shotguns in the U.S., I want to make sure I know the model to stay away from. Should I avoid all guns in Nevada just to be safe?
This is facetious. Generic pistols, rifles, and shotguns are not "specifically designed" for mass murder, and you know it. "Military-style" rifles are the ones specifically designed for the most efficient possible killing of human beings, with civilian versions being mildly tamer. The Sandy Hook Elementary shooter used a fully legal Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle and fired 154 bullets in less than four minutes What shotgunner, pistolero, or varmint gunner can match that? You damn well know the answer. As I say, just more apologetics. Like the church of Rome, forever refuting straw men in defense of the indefensible.
Literally any of them. That is a round every couple of seconds sustained. Any of those guns allow the same rate of fire in short burst and take very little time to reload.
I have a Ruger 10-22 - semiautomatic. Can e.lry a 10 round magazine in three seconds of your magdumping and it's two seconds to reload.
Revolvers have speedoaders - open the cylinder, slap the cases out, slap new rounds in all 6 chambers at once.
Shotguns, lever guns, bolt actions all can be reloaded before their magazines are empty, topping off as you go.
I've seen a guy kill 7 feral hogs, running through the woods, in 14 seconds with 10 rounds.
You claim to have been a probate judge - that isn't even criminal law. You have absolutely no knowledge of firearms.
"This is facetious. Generic pistols, rifles, and shotguns are not "specifically designed" for mass murder, and you know it."
What makes the design of the rifle "specific for mass murder"? Can you cite it? Semiautomatics are not rare nor unusual.
I'd rather we silence speech over remove guns. Because once guns are removed, as we are seeing globally, your speech is silenced anyway.
Fuck off slaver.
Like the church of Rome, forever refuting straw men in defense of the indefensible.
I asked you a simple question: which gun model is designed for mass murder? You avoided it and chose moral preening instead. Are you accusing every soldier who carried a "military-style" rifle of mass murder?
The Sandy Hook Elementary shooter used a fully legal Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle.
Which he stole after murdering his mother. What's your point? Do you think you're the first person who discovered that evil people do evil things? Do you believe you have the moral authority to use agents of the state to deprive an individual of the tool he or she believes best provides for the exercising of the natural right to self defense? Which part of shall not infringe is unclear to you?
Sorry, I DID answer the question, which is "all semiautomatic rifles modeled on military versions." I even distinguished these from other firearms NOT so designed. Take the ten US highest-fatality mass firearm murders and tell me how many were committed using pistols, shotguns, or direct-aim rifles.
As to the Bushmaster, you miss the point. Civilian ownership of such weapons is NOT a constitutional right, and my moral authority is irrelevant. McDonald v. Chicago found a 2A personal right to keep a PISTOL IN THE HOME for SELF DEFENSE, and did not extend that right to Bushmasters or anything equivalent.
"Shall not infringe" was for 200 years understood to apply to the "militia" clause, not a personal right. Only when latter-day NRA lobbying took a more aggressive stance did the right-wing justices buy into the "personal right" position.
What people here forget is that for 200 years you could LEGALLY own firearms without this being a FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. For decades before McDonald v. Chicago I legally owned a .22 varmint gun.
Sorry, I DID answer the question
You believe all "semiautomatic rifles modeled on military versions" are "designed for mass murder of humans", you're sticking with that?
Take the ten US highest-fatality mass firearm murders and tell me how many were committed using pistols, shotguns, or direct-aim rifles.
Per Copilot, of the top 10 "mass firearm murders", 8 involved exclusively or in part, pistols and/or bolt-action rifles.
my moral authority is irrelevant.
If you wish to infringe upon an individual's natural right to defend themselves it would be helpful if you had at least some moral justification. But you don't.
We get it, your desire to prevent people from buying certain weapons makes you a better person than the rest of us who already know murder is wrong, and a great way to prevent being murdered is to be armed.
>Civilian ownership of such weapons is NOT a constitutional right, and my moral authority is irrelevant. McDonald v. Chicago found a 2A personal right to keep a PISTOL IN THE HOME for SELF DEFENSE, and did not extend that right to Bushmasters or anything equivalent.
McDonald didn't say anything about Bushmaster rifles because that wasn't the question before the Court, you nitwit. In any event the Court *has* spoken on the matter, in Heller: "The Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
>"Shall not infringe" was for 200 years understood to apply to the "militia" clause, not a personal right. Only when latter-day NRA lobbying took a more aggressive stance did the right-wing justices buy into the "personal right" position.
This is exactly backwards. For the first 150 years of the Republic the Second Amendment was understood by everybody to protect an individual right to arms. We see this over and over again in court decisions and legal commentary: until the early part of the 20th century (when gun-grabbers realized that the Constitution was a significant obstacle to their political project), not a single person argued that the Second Amendment was limited to militias.
>The Sandy Hook Elementary shooter used a fully legal Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle and fired 154 bullets in less than four minutes What shotgunner, pistolero, or varmint gunner can match that?
That's about a round every 1.5 seconds. Literally anybody with a semi-auto firearm and an adequate supply of ammunition can shoot that fast; it's not a challenging speed at all.
Gun-grabbers learn something about firearms and shooting challenge: impossible.
You’re a judge?
That explains so much of your posting history.
How so? Do legal ignoramuses know something that experts don't? Maybe in the deranged minds of those inhabiting the RFK universe.
I thought he used an AR-15. Which is semi-automatic and is no more capable of mass murder than a .38 special revolver.
"But in Nevada, you can get the one specifically designed for mass murder of humans."
I'll bite --- do you know what the rifle is? What ammo it uses? How, precisely, was it "designed for mass murder"? How is it "sexy"?
And why did NY's strict gun control laws not stop a guy from walking in Manhattan with a damned rifle?
Just last Sunday a crazed idiot stabbed 11 people at a WalMart in Traverse City, Mi.
Obviously, we need more knife control.
Almost forgot, a former Marine with a CC(concealed carry) stopped the lunatic before he ran off.
Which freedoms are to blame for the New Orleans speeding truck attack on new year's eve?
Trucks are evil implements of climate changey global catastrophe and won’t be needed once you are in your 15 minute city.
Did someone say guns are the only means of killing people? No. We only say automobiles, baseball bats, kitchen knives, etc., are not specifically designed for that purpose, which is why they invented automatic rifles. Easily carried and ruthlessly efficient. Go take your straw man out and introduce him to the tin man. Serious discussion has no use for him.
And what other purposes are they?
Automatics - which this guy didn't have - were not invented by or for the military.
Neither were semi-automatics for that matter.
Neither were, well, *any firearm type*.
RE: guns are not the only means of killing people;
Riddle me this, your honor; What kills more Americans, and I mean homicides, than all of "long guns" including shotguns and rifles of all types and calibers [including your weapons "designed" to commit mass murder]?
Hint: this is easily available on the CDC website
I said MASS ATTACKS, not "toddler grabs handgun in mommy's purse at grocery store." Although yes, I certainly agree that carrying firearms of any kind into public gatherings, public buildings, or commercial buildings should be strictly forbidden -- as it was for 100 years.
You're quibbling.
Let's take a look at some accepted facts and the math:
Approximately 32% of American adults, roughly 84 million people, own a firearm. Additionally, about 40% of American households, or 52.8 million households, have at least one firearm.
Approximately 16 million Americans own an AR-15 or a similar rifle, according to a poll cited by NPR. This figure represents about one in 20 U.S. adults, according to The Washington Post. Another survey estimates that 24.6 million people possess an AR-15 or a comparable firearm. A survey from Georgetown University indicates that 24 million individuals have owned a total of 44 million AR-style rifles. [note this does not include "AK style rifles, "AUG" style rifles, FN "SA 58 FAL" or "SCAR" or "M1A" or "SKS" any number of semi automatics that accept a detachable magazine...]
Per the Pew Research Center: In 2023, the most recent year for which the FBI has published data, handguns were involved in 53% of the 13,529 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available. Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 4% of firearm murders. Shotguns were involved in 1%. The remainder of gun homicides and non-negligent manslaughters (42%) involved other kinds of firearms or those classified as “type not stated.”
So if we may conclude from this that of approximately 13,500 gun related homicides [not suicides, which comprise over 60% of gun deaths] 540 died from various types of "rifles" which includes those who consider to be "designed for mass attacks." As for mass shootings, "the FBI collects data on “active shooter incidents,” which it defines as “one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.” Using the FBI’s definition, 105 people – excluding the shooters – died in such incidents in 2023 [which is quite a variance from the numbers promulgated by the Gun Violence Archive--722--which counts every shooting that involves 4 or more people, whether anyone was killed or not].
As for other means of killing, for 2023 the CDC tabulated that "4,902 homicides (21%) were committed using other methods like knives, suffocation, or poisoning."
After handguns and various other means of killing people, your "mass attack" weapons come in at a very distant last place, after kicking, hitting, choking, bludgeoning, and various other means.
I am not saying such weapons are not dangerous, as all guns are designed to inflict mortal wounds on living targets. It is what they all do, and some are better at it than others. At the same time we need to keep a perspective; if 26 million US citizens own over 40 million of such weapons, what percentage of them are used to cause harm, and [aside from media hyperbole] how much damage do they actually cause in light of the total number?
If you are generally concerned about homicides, focus on the crimes and the criminals who commit them, not millions of Americans who do not. This macro approach is why gun control efforts have failed abysmally, and will continue to do so.
And, while you're at it, tell us just how much money the NRA has spent in payments to "buy off politicians?" Hint: very little. Most of their influence and that of other organizations comes through member advocacy, not "buy offs."
Those who tolerate the proliferation of guns are very much like those who tolerate the proliferation of illegals.
Please elaborate.
That is about as intelligent as it is asinine.
Obviously this crime never actually happened. Gun free zones like where people say this took place work. They work so well, nobody has ever been shot in a gun free zone. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Don't something like 94% of all mass shooting incidents occur in specifically gun-free zones?
Like fish in a barrel
The firearm he used is an AR pistol because it had a forearm brace. Even if the barrel length was a minimum of 16" it is still a pistol per the ATF. The ATF has recently signed a consent decree with the plaintiffs in the 5th Circuit which had published a permanent injunction against the ATF's pistol brace makes a firearm a Short Barreled Rifle rule.
Additionally a Clinton AWB compliant AR doesn't comply with NY's law passed after the federal ban expired.
NY's good moral character and affidavits from x no. of adult NY resident is surely unconstitutional because there are no historical tradition analogs from pre 1868 period that don't violate the 14th Amendment's due process clause. Per Heller v. DC & NYSRPA v. Bruen since it is obvious that the the law impacts a person's 2nd Amendment right, since there are more than 10M AR-15's kept by the people of the US they are in common use. Therefore the plaintiff's burden in court is met. Then burden shifts to the state to prove the states regulation is an analog or similar traditions in 1792 (BOR's adopted) and/or traditions from the period 1792 through 1868 that clarify the limits of the 2nd Amendment. So called proof from period after 1868 doesn't meet the Bruen test.
A brace does not make it a pistol. A brace prevents a pistol from becoming an SBR.
Pedantic, yes, but accurate.
Oh dude, like you needed to give me an excuse to head to Vegas?
Oh and check it out! They've even got upcoming gun shows!
- Nugget Casino Resort Gun Show: Scheduled from August 15 to August 17, 2025, with hours from Friday 9pm to 5pm, Saturday 9am to 5pm, and Sunday 9am to 3pm.
- Ahern Hotel Gun Show: Occurring from August 23 to August 24, 2025, with admission at $13 for adults and free for children 12 and under.
- Tuscany Suite Hotel Gun Show: Taking place from September 6 to September 7, 2025.
I feel like taking three weeks off just to go head out and buy a bunch of Nevada guns!
Reason dot com community meetup? (NGL, I can honestly say that a gun show is the only place I'd feel comfortable doing that.) I'll get us all some commemorative orange LOLertarian T-shirts!
If the stuff they sell in Nevada isn't legal in your state of residence then they can't sell it to you (and everything except full-size rifles and shotguns has to be transferred though an FFL in your home state) and if it is legal then you may as well by it down the street.
OK, so stick with me. We find a Nevada resident and he goes and buys all the guns.
Then he meets us for a fishing trip at Lake Mead where, omg no his boat sinks and all the guns are lost.
Then we all go our respective ways and just keep our mouths shut.
"Kathy Hochul's focus on "assault weapons" is puzzling, since the perpetrator easily could have killed the same number of people with a gun that did not fall into that politically defined category."
Seriously? There is nothing "puzzling" about her grandstanding and capitalizing on this to push a foregone agenda. She no doubt keeps those talking points in her top drawer, readily available at the next opportunity.
If Sullum would stick to guns and drugs he would be a well respected journalist.
The failure is not enough Police on the streets and this is a "gun free zone".
People there are as susceptible to these sorts of attacks as the elderly who dropped their guns off to be cut up in New Zealand when they forced the gun buy backs and were murdered in their beds a couple weeks later as violent home invasions, assaults and murders exploded.
Had people been allowed to carry then this guy would have been down soon after exiting his car.
Gun controllers would have us believe there is just no such thing as "a good guy with a gun" but of course there are. Just this past Saturday in N MI we had such a person, a USMC veteran, who used his concealed carry to stop a mass stabbing incident [11 victims] at the WalMart in Traverse City. Two weeks before a church security team [comprised of volunteer members] took down a guy who was attempting a mass shooting. And of course there are the well known incidents such as Eli Dicken [Greenwood Mall, Indiana] et al.
Bottom line is there are around 40 million US gun owners, 99.99% of whom are law abiding, and some bad actors. The police cannot be everywhere and it falls on us to deal with the immediate situation.
That attack didn't surprise me in the least. I know that town and it has quite a group of homeless people they're dealing with. Not to mention the drug problem and rising crime.
I lived there back in the mid seventies attending the local community college and it wasn't anywhere near the town that it is now.
Total population for the entire metropolitan area is estimated at 153,000.
I have about a dozen firearms amassed over the past 45 years or so, pretty much evenly split between long guns and handguns. I have semi autos, bolt action, revolvers and shotguns. Not a single one of them has ever upped and harmed anyone on its own.
Firearms don’t harm or kill anything; humans are responsible for that.
Kathy Hochul is your typical brainless leftist airhead who blames the gun instead of the shooter.
I dislike her and her ilk as much or more than you do; recalling a press conference in which she was typically bashing gun owners, a reporter pointed out that her numbers were based on those who "are not the problem" and her response was "I know the numbers, I've seen all I need to know." It was classic political posturing. I don't doubt that she knows the truth but in the interest of placating her voting base just chooses to lie about it.
Like her predecessor, the objective is getting into, advancing, and staying in power.
Hochul's response is exactly the sort of response one can expect from a liberal perspective.
If only, if only..... blah, blah, blah.
It's always the gun's fault and not the shooter. So next time blame the vehicle some drunken fool is driving when he plows into another vehicle on the opposite side of the highway.
The gun is not the problem.
What was it John Kennedy said the other day, " We don't need more gun control, we need more idiot control."
He's correct and what is needed is to bring back the mental institutions that kept these mentally unstable people off the streets instead of letting them roam freely.