Gun Sales Surge After Newtown Massacre


A Hello Kitty! Assault Rifle.

A Hello Kitty! Assault Rifle.

Good news for the armaments industry, folks. In the wake of the brutal murder of 20 little kids and 6 adults in Newtown, Connecticut, patriotic Americans are buying the shit out of guns, especially the weapon used to blow the heads off of the children on Friday. Sales are also booming for the ammunition used by those weapons as well as the high-capacity magazines that ensure a gunman won’t have to reload in the middle of systematically executing a classroom full of screaming seven-year-olds and their teacher.

People on the other side of this debate often ask, “Cars kill more people than guns, why not ban them?” I have three answers for this: 1. Cars fulfill a useful purpose in this society, whereas I believe that these fucking murder weapons do not. 2. All deaths are not equal. Death from a car accident fills us with sorrow and pity: we grieve and then we move on. However, the deliberate massacre of our children by a madman eats away at our collective soul, and we are permanently diminished. It may not be reasonable or fair, but there it is. 3. Every effort is made to make cars safer, while zero effort is made to make these killing machines safer. And that’s insane.

Enjoy your cool new weapons, America. Try not to let them be used to execute anybody’s children, okay? Thanks!

P.S. Here’s an article discussing how the rest of the world views our pathological addition to guns. Well worth a read.

Friends and family of the victims (AP)

Friends and family of the victims (AP)

Newtown Victim List

From the Huffington Post:

– Charlotte Bacon, 2/22/06, female
– Daniel Barden, 9/25/05, male
– Rachel Davino, 7/17/83, female.
– Olivia Engel, 7/18/06, female
– Josephine Gay, 12/11/05, female
– Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 04/04/06, female
– Dylan Hockley, 3/8/06, male
– Dawn Hochsprung, 06/28/65, female
– Madeleine F. Hsu, 7/10/06, female
– Catherine V. Hubbard, 6/08/06, female
– Chase Kowalski, 10/31/05, male
– Jesse Lewis, 6/30/06, male
– James Mattioli , 3/22/06, male
– Grace McDonnell, 12/04/05, female
– Anne Marie Murphy, 07/25/60, female
– Emilie Parker, 5/12/06, female
– Jack Pinto, 5/06/06, male
– Noah Pozner, 11/20/06, male
– Caroline Previdi, 9/07/06, female
– Jessica Rekos, 5/10/06, female
– Avielle Richman, 10/17/06, female
– Lauren Rousseau, 6/1982, female
– Mary Sherlach, 2/11/56, female
– Victoria Soto, 11/04/85, female
– Benjamin Wheeler, 9/12/06, male
– Allison N. Wyatt, 7/03/06, female

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , ,

13 Responses to “Gun Sales Surge After Newtown Massacre”

  1. julesagray Says:

    We’re a doomed society if this gun worship continues.

  2. Scott Says:

    As somewhat of a non-sequitur, may I add that an additional creep-out factor in all this is that the principal was born the same day I was.

  3. hoplite0352 Says:

    I don’t think people are “buying the shit out of guns” as some sort of trophy or homage to kids getting killed. It isn’t like they fantasize about that sort of thing. There is talk of making them illegal. It’s no different than when Hostess went out of business. People want to buy up the twinkies before they can’t get any more. Seems reasonable to me.

    And you have to understand that while you may not agree with the premise, people like me think that guns do have a useful purpose in society. 2A exists to keep the government in check. It may not be needed now, but if we find ourselves dealing with a Stalinist or Nazi-style dictatorship the people need the means to resist the government. That seems pretty useful.

    • Paul Murphy Says:

      Sure, I get that: I think it’s fantasy — a free press and the vote are the only defense against a Stalin or Hitler. If a dictator does get into power all the amateurs with guns and rifles will not slow the military up for ten minutes.

      • hoplite0352 Says:

        As a former infantry Marine and combat vet I’d disagree with that statement, but I suppose it’s for a different time.

        But a lot of people would agree with using the press and the vote first. There is a saying in the gun community, “The soap box, the ballot box, and the cartridge box: use in that order.” I know I question the electoral system (Bush v. Gore anyone?) and I think both sides would agree that the press is untrustworthy.

        I guess the point I’m getting at is that while we might agree on the effectiveness of 2A in modern society, some people believe in it and if you do believe in it it would be reasonable to want to buy the best firearms on the market before they are made illegal. It’s hard to have civil discourse when being demonized.

        I own a few firearms and ended up selling an AR15 a few weeks ago. I really regret it because now I’m concerned that my little girl won’t be able to own one when she gets older. I dunno, call me a softie, but I’m a good loving man, and it sucks to be spoken about like I just want to go buy toys used “to blow the heads off of children”.

      • Paul Murphy Says:

        Sir, thank you for your service. My guess is that you’d pass any reasonable gun safety course. I’m not so certain about everybody else who owns those weapons.

        I find it difficult to understand the concept of defending against the government. Do you think that your mayor or governor considers taking your property but desists because you might be armed?

        It’s a question of risk vs. reward. I’m sorry, but I sincerely believe that the risk your weapons pose to society far outweigh any protection they provide against tyranny.

  4. hoplite0352 Says:

    The funny part is that in many ways I agree with you. I’m a lawyer by trade now and I almost had a client shot by 5 police officers for a situation that even if I were the lone responding officer I’d have never considered drawing a weapon. I’m afraid of police officers carrying guns.

    But that said, no, on the micro level the government doesn’t care about whether or not I’m armed in its dealings with me. But that’s simply because they have more men with more guns than me: the cops. On the macro level however, yes, the government does concern itself with firearm ownership. This is why government do-gooders generally use the frog in the pot method with us rather than simply compelling us to their dictates.

    But the idea behind our republic was one where we didn’t have a standing army, which is today’s modern police force. It would seem to me that at a time when we suffer sundry Patriot Act abuses and an ever increasing government role in our lives, from whether we are allowed to grown certain foods in our garden or ingest certain chemicals, all the way down to warantless wiretapping and detention of “terror suspects”, and even how much water our toilet bowl is allowed to flush, it is more important than ever that the citizenry be versed in arms.

  5. Paul Murphy Says:

    Thank God these texts have stopped getting narrower. I would comment that perhaps you have it backwards: your possession of weapons gives you a false sense of protection against the government’s excesses. Anyway the decision will be made elsewhere than here.

    Thank you for reminding me that those on the opposing side aren’t all crazy, and some are quite thoughtful and intelligent people indeed.

  6. Scott Says:

    I don’t think we’re at risk of becoming a dictatorship any time soon. (Or if we do, it’s likely to be from a candidate who supports lax gun controls – not those namby pamby socialists.) Congress has trouble passing a bill to decide whether or not they can pass a bill; granting dictator-like powers to the POTUS is pretty well beyond them.

    I don’t think the 2nd amendment argument is keeping anyone in check except those of us who oppose the interpretation of it to mean we should all own assault rifles. We require citizens to pass both written and performance tests to get a license to drive a vehicle. What logical argument can be given against requiring similar tests (gun safety, especially) to own any sort of gun?

    I’m less worried about any given veteran (as Paul said, thank you for your service) with a weapon than I am about when the next troubled kid (defined: anyone younger than my decade) gets hold of grandpa’s poorly-secured arsenal (probably just before killing grandpa) and heads to the nearest school. Or shopping center. Or concert. Or anywhere I or my loved ones have the misfortune to be at. Better general gun controls, licensing requirements, and (especially) restrictions against (honestly) wholly unnecessary assault weapon possession by private citizens will help alleviate those worries a bit (although not entirely).

  7. No Name Necessary Says:

    Many people feel safer with guns. That is in part because they envision situations in which guns work correctly and solve otherwise unsolvable problems, like getting rid of home invaders. However, they tend not to visualize the more frequent cases in which something goes wrong (because that’s not the gun’s purpose): the gun is stolen, the teenager next door gets hold of it, you make a dumb mistake when cleaning it, you shoot your wife thinking she’s the burglar, etc… as in this horrible story of a man who was putting away an “empty” gun and shot his son this past week: wapo.st/UOG52Z . We tend not to think of such things, just as people didn’t think they would get into a car accident when drunk, and we had to pass laws making this really, really illegal.

    The more potent the weapon, the worse things are when something does go wrong. Surely we can figure out a way to allow hunters to use their (normal, non-automatic) rifles, but to discourage more dangerous situations from developing. No doubt it could be possible to use pistols on a firing range, but not to have them floating around we-don’t-know-where used by we-don’t-know-who.

    Laws and regulations are about tradeoffs, and it is hard to imagine that many people think that we have gotten this tradeoff right. We decided that the importance of drinking at social events and the fun that many people wanted to have (present company included) just wasn’t worth the lives lost in drunk driving, so we cut back on the first and gained on the second. We can make similar choices with guns, and that doesn’t mean that they’ll all be outlawed any more than we outlawed cars or alcohol.

  8. Notes To Ponder Says:

    What is wrong with you America? Guns do not make you safe; they make you paranoid. They make no sense whatsoever. An antiquated, colonial constitution gave you the” right to bear arms” as a means to readily raise a militia in defence of a fledgling nation. Not to put semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of any unbalanced citizen wishing to go out with a bang. Holy crap.

    • Paul Murphy Says:

      We have drills in schools in which little kids learn to hide from gunmen. “American Exceptionalism.” Woot!

      • Notes To Ponder Says:

        In Canada we have earthquake drills.Rifles are for hunting; they are not allowed to be automatic. Hand guns are forbidden.Our security guards aren’t armed, our border guards didn’t even get a weapon until a few years ago. Guess what? We feel safe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: