The Gun Lobby

The big story in Australia currently is the undercover video of senior members of the far right anti-immigration party One Nation attempting to gain money from pro-gun lobbyists. In a distinctly Australian twist, their defense has been that they were drunk at the time:

I was a bit wary of the story initially, as it was presented as a kind of video ‘sting’ operation. That sounded too reminiscent of the antics of James O’Keefe in the US whose MO is to create highly edited video of meetings with people form organisations that the right is targeting. However, there’s a lot more to the story.

An Australian journalist working for Al Jazeera spent three years undercover within the world of pro-gun campaigners. Rodger Muller established a fake Australian gun rights group and with little more than videos and a website became seen as a minor but important broker between US gun organisations and Australia. The full Al Jazeera story is here:

Australian TV has been running the in-depth investigation over two nights on the ABC and it has been fascinating (part two is tonight). The political fallout is not large currently — One Nation didn’t receive any money and it appears that as far as their attempt at a deal with the NRA went it wasn’t sufficient to break electoral law. The scandal is unlikely to lose One Nation any votes but it is helping to denormalise the extremist party and it makes it harder for the Liberal Party to be seen to be co-operating with them.

Pauline Hanson herself, the unlikely personality at the heart of One Nation’s cult of personality, was also captured spreading conspiracy mongering about the infamous Port Arthur massacre — the 1996 mass shooting that led to Australia adopting stricter gun laws:

In the wake of the Christchurch murders, the issues of both guns and anti-immigrant extremism and Islamophobia have become more prominent in Australian politics. People are very aware that the shooter was an Australian but also that he could only access the weapons he used in New Zealand. The gun lobby in Australia is not high profile but they spend large amounts of money attempting to influence politicians to soften gun laws:

“Australians may be surprised to discover the gun lobby in Australia rivals the NRA in size and spending, according to Australia Institute research commissioned by Gun Control Australia.”

A key strategy is access to right wing minor parties who lack both cash and ethics. Such parties are unlikely to ever form government at either state or federal level but they often have a few seats in upper senate-like chambers of parliament (either state or federally) to either hold the balance of power or be influential in helping controversial legislation through.

Lastly, doubling back to question of journalist ethics, there’s a longer discussion about that aspect here:

83 thoughts on “The Gun Lobby

  1. There was a case a couple of decades ago here in the US where two reporters got work at Food Lion and recorded their coworkers taking expired stickers off meat and putting fresh ones on, etc. In a spectacular bit of working the refs, the hue and cry became over whether the reporters had violated ethical boundaries and we suddenly got a media consensus this sort of thing is never acceptable. I still think that verdict was bullshit.
    And while they may have lied about their agenda, as far as I know they did do the work Food Lion hired them for.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. That’s very much the tactics the famous German investigative reporter Günter Wallraff used in the 1970s and 1980s, only that Wallraff actually went under cover under an assumed identity, complete with make-up, etc… He came to fame as “Hans Esser”, a faux reporter for the rightwing tabloid Bild and later spent several months as the Turkish immigrant “Ali Levent Sinirloglu” to uncover everyday racism. He continued doing that sort of thing well into the 1990s and 2000s, working as a door to door salesman and call-center agent. When he tried to repeat the “Ali” stunt by pretending to be an African refugee, he found out to his (but nobody else’s) surprise that passing oneself off as a different race or ethnicity, complete with make-up, was no longer acceptable, though no one had any problems with Wallraff pretending to be some other white dude.

      Ganz Unten (All the Way Down), the book Wallraff wrote about his time as “Ali” was a huge bestseller and cultural phenomenon in the 1980s, which always stunned me, because I found the conclusion that (West) Germany was racist as hell towards Turkish immigrants not exactly surprising. By the time I was at university, the book had fallen so far into obscurity that when it came up in a class, only the students who were old enough to have been teenagers or older in the 1980s had ever heard of it. And our reaction was a boggling, “What do you mean, you’ve never heard of Ganz Unten? That book was huge. Totally stating the obvious, but huge.”

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Coincidentally, one of Wallraff’s lesser known exploits was working at an industrial bakery that provided bread and rolls for a discount supermarket chain and uncovering all sorts of violations of hygiene and health and safety regulations, i.e. similar to the Food Lion case.


      2. Oh yes, we still call it “wallraffing” in Sweden when someone works undercover. Even if we have our own previous history, no one had done it on the level of Wallraff before. Buy I’m not sure if people still know where the name of the method comes from.


      3. And before him, Walter White passed as white to provide eyewitness reports of lynchings in the South (the inspiration for the graphic novel Incognegro).


  2. I’m kind of okay with the hidden camera stuff. Given the horrifying shitshow of the things Hanson and co say out loud and in public, I was actually kind of surprised that there are things that they feel are so objectionable that they need to keep quiet about them.


  3. “An Australian journalist working for Al Jazeera…” who obviously would adhere to the highest journalistic standards, and couldn’t possibly have any ulterior motives or anti-Australian agaenda… particularly following the Christchurch shooting…

    Sure, floppy. Who paid that guy?

    Oh, and while we’re on the subject of assholes in Australia, who paid 150 “vegans” to invade a guy’s cow farm?

    Tell you what, floppy. If you want to see something sketchy, check out the flow of money on the anti-gun side of the conversation. I looked into it. No doubt you’ll lie about it if you even look, but I already know what you’re going to see. Enjoy.


    1. //who obviously would adhere to the highest journalistic standards, and couldn’t possibly have any ulterior motives or anti-Australian agaenda… particularly following the Christchurch shooting…//

      He started this three years ago and what’s “anti-Australian” about it?

      //Sure, floppy. Who paid that guy?//

      Al Jazeera. It’s right there in the text Phantom. We know who paid him.

      //Oh, and while we’re on the subject of assholes in Australia, who paid 150 “vegans” to invade a guy’s cow farm?//

      Unless the farm was in Greenland, I don’t know and I’m not sure what that’s got to do with anything.

      //If you want to see something sketchy, check out the flow of money on the anti-gun side of the conversation. I looked into it.//

      Well if you’ve already done the research, by all means share it right here now. Usual rules apply though Phantom: be interesting and you get to post, start being dull and repetitive then it’s back into the Trash Filter. Look we all believe in you Phantom – if you try REAL hard you can string an intelligible argument together.


    2. Have you ever actually watched Al Jazeera, Phantom? Because their reporting is remarkably good, at least the English language version (I obviously cannot follow the Arabic version). A lot better than CNN, let alone Fox News and their ilk.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Comments I’ve seen elsewhere are that Al Jazeera English is pretty good, but Al Jazeera Arabic is Fox News for Sunni Muslims. (I’m not qualified to judge whether this is true.)


    3. You criticize the journalist “who obviously would adhere to the highest journalistic standards” since he’s paid by Al Jazeera (ignoring the fact that you couldn’t read that far) but why did James Ashby claim he was drunk when he was soliciting donations? That makes no sense unless he actually did solicit the donations.

      Then you attempt to distract us with a pointless non sequitur about vegans. Sure, they’re likely to be loons. So what? I guess this is an admission that you don’t have anything but innuendo.

      I don’t know, Cam. Not entertaining.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. ” ‘who paid for the vegans’ is the funniest thing I’ve read in ages.”

        You think they all showed up like that for free? Interesting. You didn’t wonder who paid for the t-shirts, the signs and the buses? Stupid teenagers don’t usually spend their own money on stuff like that.

        You’re okay with home invasions now? The farmer lives there.

        Found a cattle feedlot operation in Greenland yet?


      2. Phantom, what you’re trying to do there is called “deflection”. It’s a silencing technique, and it’s typically employed when the arguer doesn’t have an answer to the argument.

        We all see it for what it is.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Yes. YES I AM FUNDING THE VEGANS. In exchange for their superior technology, I have traded some underutilized portions of the world, like certain parts of Ontario. Soon they’ll start raising their domes and pumping in the toxic gases they breath and acidifying the water. The domes never leak, they say.

        The money I make from my monopoly on unlimited energy will be used to make everyone eat halal food through their rainbow niqabs. Or something like that; I haven’t really thought it through.

        Wait, what’s all this nonsense about farms?

        Liked by 2 people

      4. @Cora: Nothing! Notice how the poor little guy has dropped the original topic entirely. But he has to go on the attack about something! So what if it makes no sense and no one but him cares? He’s winning! You’ll see some day!

        If Cam keeps letting him through he’ll move on to some other bullshit.

        Liked by 1 person

    4. //You think they all showed up like that for free?//

      I’ve never found I needed financial incentives to get vegans to preach at people. But please do explain who you think is funding them. Is it Big Tofu or is it the nefarious Lentil Lobby? Inquiring minds want to know.

      //You’re okay with home invasions now? The farmer lives there.//

      The farmer doesn’t live in a field. You might want to do some background reading about trespass. I don’t know how it works in North America but in Australia and the UK, the actions described weren’t criminal (that doesn’t make them ethical of course).

      Liked by 1 person

      1. @Cam —

        “The farmer doesn’t live in a field. You might want to do some background reading about trespass. I don’t know how it works in North America but in Australia and the UK, the actions described weren’t criminal (that doesn’t make them ethical of course).”

        I don’t know the specific story you guys are talking about, and you are probably already aware of this, but private property laws in the US are apparently much stricter than in places like the UK. We would not take kindly to random cross-country hikers and so on entering our properties without prior permission, and people can easily be charged with trespassing even if they aren’t doing anything particularly objectionable.


      2. Apparently some vegans protested at a farm in Queensland. As they didn’t damage anything and left the QLD cops didn’t charge them with anything because they hadn’t actually broken the law (no, that doesn’t mean you are allowed to trespass).

        Phantom thinks this is part of a big conspiracy and somehow connected to extremist trying to get cash off the NRA. I have yet to ascertain whether the NRA is funding veganism but

        Liked by 1 person

      3. After all this time he’s still screeching into your trash filter? Holy fuck. He’s persistent, I’ll give him that.
        … Anyway …
        I was a vegan protester once, but the pay was peanuts.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Not only that but screeching indignantly about being there. It’s the weirdest thing. I think he genuinely doesn’t know why his posts end up there.

        Anyway the vegan conspiracy was too good not to share.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Nothing about the description of what James Ashby did (that he sought money from the NRA, and that he’s now saying “oh, but I was drunk when I did it”) really surprises me. The guy is a phenomenally incompetent political manipulator – the sad bit is his phenomenal incompetence serves as his one redeeming quality (as does his rather pathetic belief in himself as a political mover and shaker).

    For those who aren’t aware: James Ashby first came to the wider attention of the Australian public when he tried to bring down the then-Speaker of the House of Representatives (Peter Slipper) back in about 2012, saying that Slipper had attempted to sexually harass him (he was a staffer for Slipper at the time – if the harassment could have been proven, it would have been politically lethal), and also oh yeah, he’d overcharged the government for some cab fares. In the context of the times, it was an attempt to nobble the Federal Government under the leadership of Julia Gillard, and it succeeded in that Slipper had to give up the office of Speaker, and the ALP under Gillard had to find an ALP back bencher to act as Speaker for the rest of that parliamentary term, thus losing her the 1-seat majority she had on votes of confidence. Unfortunately for the Liberals under Tony Abbott at the time, Slipper quit not only the job of Speaker, but also the Liberal party, sat on the cross-benches, and voted in the ALP’s favour on votes of confidence for the rest of the parliament, so their daily attempts to bring down the government with a vote of no confidence kept on failing.

    Either way, Ashby’s attempts didn’t work – what came out instead was that James Ashby has a long history of attempting to blackmail, betray and scam his way into “the power behind the throne” status, and was therefore approximately as trustworthy as a three-shilling-bill.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Not to mention the guy behind the One Nation plane furor, and currently banned from Parliament House for punching an elderly senator…he’s a charmer…

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Apropos of nearly nothing — The other day there was a news story about how several vegan “influencers” on Youtube who have recently been outed as eating meat. Gave me a big laugh. They were making big bucks touting the health benefits of vegan diets and showing off their trim physiques and glowing skin and so on, all the while they were actually not following the diets themselves.

    Gave me a big laugh. And I was vegetarian (not vegan) myself for more than 20 years.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I will never get food fundamentalism of any kind, whether it’s vegans, folks who only eat meat like Jordan Peterson, low carb folks, keto diet folks, anti-sugar evangelists, anti-gluten evangelists (unless you have celiac disease – in that case my sympathies), etc….

      Eat whatever you enjoy, unless you have food allergies or other health issues that prevent it. Go a bit easy on things like sugar, soda, alcohol, heavily processed ready-made meals, etc…

      Liked by 3 people

      1. If a diet can help someone get to and maintain the weight and physique they want to, more power to them. I wish the keto bros and carbophobes would quit telling me about their diets though. It’s actually not helpful to me, someone who has struggled to get *up* to a healthy weight, to be told not to eat carbs or I’ll get fat.

        Liked by 3 people

  6. 49 comments, you’ve done well.

    Is it still funny?

    See, this is why you get to do your own research. The fact that you refuse to make a connection between banning firearms ownership and the following appearance of mobbing tactics is revealing. Twice. Once in Canada, once in Australia. To be clear, this was their opening shot. They had great success. More to come.

    Just for fun, lets play inversion. 150 white supremacists show up at a black guy’s farm, in uniform, swarm the place and scream hateful slogans at him and his family. When the cops finally show up over an hour later, there are no arrests. Because they didn’t actually kill anyone or break anything, they just pretended they were going to. For an hour.

    Still funny? Still don’t care what organization paid for the bus and the uniforms? Or is that “different”?

    Then floppy said: “I think he just wants to shoot people to be honest”

    That’s what you got out of all this? Interesting notion. Lets consider that these types of things never stay static, they inevitably escalate. Other political groups will start using the same tactics. Confrontations will get rougher. It will not be long before farmers and other targets of mobs get tired of being swarmed, vandalized, injured, robbed.

    What will they do, floppy? Will they meekly lie down and let vandals wreck their farms, businesses and homes? It seems unlikely.

    Much more likely they’ll break the law and defend their property and families. People will die. Government will fall into disrepute and become the enemy of the populace. Examples from this week’s news are Venezuela and South Africa, previously free and wealthy Western nations that are becoming humanitarian catastrophes. This is how they got that way. Hate and stupidity.

    Is it still funny?

    Look up who paid for the gun control lobby, look up who paid for the PETA swarm, look up who backed that ominous automobile black-box deal in the EU. Self-defense, food, transportation. Possibly worth an hour on Google to find out who wants a food-impoverished populace that can’t run away and can’t fight back.

    You can even lie about it and keep mocking me at the same time if you like, floppy. Doesn’t bother me.


    1. //See, this is why you get to do your own research. The fact that you refuse to make a connection between banning firearms ownership and the following appearance of mobbing tactics is revealing.//

      As of yet, you haven’t made a connection between “banning firearms ownership” and “mobbing tactics”. Are you saying the vegan-extremists wouldn’t have protested on the farm if the farmer could own a gun? If so, then I have news for you….step a bit closer…are you listening? Guns are legal in Australia and firearm ownership isn’t banned. Obviously, I don’t know for a fact whether this particular farmer, owned any firearms but it’s highly likely that he did. Australian farmers often own guns for shooting animals.

      Of course, in Australia, you aren’t allowed to murder people for trespass (which isn’t a criminal offence anyway, if it is just walking onto farmland). This is because murdering people is a BAD THING.

      I suspect this maybe the point you are struggling with because your next example shows you missing that point also:

      //Just for fun, lets play inversion. 150 white supremacists show up at a black guy’s farm, in uniform, swarm the place and scream hateful slogans at him and his family.//

      White supremacists have a long established track record of murder and violence and their objective and ideology is based on murder and violence. Your inversion is the difference between an innocuous person knocking on your front door (eg a Jehovah’s Witness – annoying but not a threat) and somebody advertising that they love serial killers knocking on your door. If an acolyte of Charles Manson knocks on your front door (which, you know is actually legal for people to do) that’s a damn site more alarming than, say, somebody offering to do a house valuation.

      A “black guy” knowing the track record of white supremacists has very credible reasons to fear for his life when confronted by them. White supremacists *REGULARLY* murder people. Vegans? Not so much.

      //Lets consider that these types of things never stay static, they inevitably escalate.//

      Trust me Phantom – people in Australia and New Zealand are VERY aware that the anti-immigrant right has been escalating their tactics. The mass murder in Christchurch isn’t an exception. I don’t need to imagine your comrades adopting tactics more extreme than trespass on farmland because MURDER has been an active tactic of the right for DECADES.

      //People will die. //

      People *HAVE DIED*. The right is *ALREADY* murdering people.

      According to the ADL in the USA:
      “In fact, 2018 saw the highest percentage (98%) of right-wing extremist-related killings since 2012, the last year when all documented killings were by right-wing extremists. Right-wing extremists also killed more people in 2018 than in any year since 1995. ”

      What does the non-Nazi right do about this? Pretend it isn’t happening.

      //Look up who paid for the gun control lobby, look up who paid for the PETA swarm, look up who backed that ominous automobile black-box deal in the EU. //

      If you’ve looked it up Phantom then please stop being so coy about it. Tell us who do you think is behind everything.


      1. If you’ve looked it up Phantom then please stop being so coy about it. Tell us who do you think is behind everything.

        He won’t. Phantom loves to throw derailing, Gish-Gallop crap like this out, but he never backs it up.


      2. I think in this case he knows that if he reveals his answer as to who is behind the secret conspiracy he imagines connecting governments, leftwing protestors and big business, he’ll reveal just a teeny-tiny too much about himself and the source of his ideas.


      3. As Camestros has pointed out, even in countries with strict gun control laws, farmers often own gun, because they have a good reason to need a gun. Germany has very strict gun control laws and nonetheless, many of my neighbours in the rural village where I grew up had guns because they were hunters or members of the local target shooting club. If I ever felt the need, I’d have no problem getting a gun licence, though I’d have to join a target shooting or hunting club.

        However, people trespassing on your land or even breaking into your house to steal your TV is NOT a valid reason to shoot anybody. It’s only self-defense, if your own life or that of someone else is directly threatened. Someone stealing your TV or vegans holding a protest on your land or even the Klu Klux Klan deciding to burn a cross on your lawn does not mean your life is directly threatened (though if the Klu Klux Klan comes in, noose in hand, your life likely is in danger). What you do in such a situation is call the police. And if you shoot someone when your life or somebody else’s is not directly in danger, it’s murder or manslaughter or – if you’re very lucky and have a good lawyer and an understanding judge – accidental killing. And yes, there have been court cases along those lines. I remember someone in the UK shooting a burglar and a case in Germany of an elderly man shooting at noisy kids (luckily, he didn’t kill anybody). And just in New Year’s Eve, someone shot out of his window, because he was annoyed by noisy fireworks and killed a woman. That person is facing murder charges now and rightfully so.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. You’re still trying to derail, Phantom. We still see what you’re doing. You’re not as clever as you think you are.


    3. @Phantom —

      “Still funny?”

      What is really funny — except it’s more sad than funny — is that you apparently think the best solution is to allow the farmer to shoot a bunch of unarmed idiot protestors.

      As Cam already pointed out — plenty of people have ALREADY died, thanks. And no, it wasn’t dumb vegan protestors who have been responsible for it.


      1. Seriously.

        When I was a child, a crazy lady with a legally-owned gun shot five members of my family, killing four of them, and then shot and killed herself. I am firmly in the Anti-Murder Party.

        But it shouldn’t take that kind of experience to realize that A Gun In Every Home is not the way to keep everyone safe.


      2. Long time ago. But they would still be alive if the crazy lady had not had a gun.

        And yes, before Phantom starts screaming about “good guys with guns”, of course my family members also had guns. They were living on a farm in rural Arkansas, for heaven’s sake.

        Guns do NOT keep people safe. They are mostly just a security blanket for fearful people who don’t have enough imagination to think of better solutions.

        (Speaking of fearful people: My mother died recently, and my father — 86 and with declining mental function — has started telling me he’s going to buy a gun. This despite the fact that their house has rarely even had all its doors locked in the last 20 years, and it has never been burglarized even when they’ve been out of town. He may have already bought it, I don’t know. Imagine how thrilled I am at the prospect of going over to visit him and getting myself shot because he decides in his confused and fearful state that I must be a burglar. Shudder.)

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Good heavens, Contrarius. That is scary. Can you maybe enlist his doctor’s help to talk him into giving it up, if he has in fact bought it?


  7. And now I’ve just read a news story saying that a black teenager has been shot and killed in Georgia because he knocked on the wrong door while looking for his girlfriend’s new apartment.

    Seriously, what is WRONG with these people??

    Liked by 1 person

  8. “However, people trespassing on your land or even breaking into your house to steal your TV is NOT a valid reason to shoot anybody. ”
    Depressingly, stand your grand laws in the US say it’s an acceptable reason. And they’ve been interpreted to an insane degree, to the point people get away with shooting even when they’re not in imminent danger or being pressured to retreat (people get excused even when these laws aren’t invoked, I should note). Unsurprisingly use of the laws skews heavily with race and gender — a woman shooting at her abusive ex in Florida was found guilty even though he was attacking (the jury thought she should have run). A South Carolina prosecutor specifically said a few years ago that stand your grand defenses don’t apply if a woman’s being attacked by her husband/boyfriend.


  9. I see you’ve fully reverted to silencing the conversation again. It’s very you, floppy.

    Funny how you almost physically refuse to connect things like Occasional-Cortex’s Green New Deal with Leftist nut groups swarming farms. Part of the GND was proposing to end cattle farming. Still no connection forming in the flopping brain though.

    Do you think its possible that the same people funding Occasional-Cortex are funding PETA and the gun control lobby? Google is right there, waiting to tell you.


    1. Phantom, why are you always trying to bully Cam into proving your points for you? If you’re making the assertion, post your own damn proof.

      If it exists, that is. Since you conveniently tell other people to “go Google,” please forgive us for doubting that your so-called “evidence” is there at all.

      Also, “Occasional-Cortex”? Grow the hell up.


      1. Oh, spam filter open again? Still insisting I do all the work though. [rest of the comment deleted]


      2. Yes, same rules still apply. Post something interesting and it gets out. Yes, you are expected to research and document your own points. It is not up to other people to do your work for you. I presume you must be used to having servants or something but the expectation is that YOU do things for yourself not others and that includes putting things together into a coherent argument that is on topic rather than vague hand waving at whatever the contents of your head are this week.

        If you can’t cope with that level of responsibility then don’t waste your time typing 🙂


      3. @Phantom —

        I don’t have time to look up precise numbers right now, but here’s a very rough starter:

        1. A very large number of those “armed citizens” were actually professionals, like off-duty cops, security guards, and military;

        2. At least two armed citizens were shot and killed BY COPS at active shooter situations within the last 12 months. Both were black — can’t have black guys running around with guns, now, can we?

        I’ll look up cites later, either late tonight or sometime tomorrow.


      4. Okay, #2 first, because it’s simpler.

        11/18 — Legally armed black bouncer apprehended a man who was shooting up a nightcub. Cops killed the bouncer.

        https ://abc11. com/officer-shot-bouncer-who-took-down-nightclub-shooter-witnesses-say/4680032/

        also 11/18 — Legally armed black citizen, former military, runs towards victim of a mall shooting. Shot and killed by cops.

        https ://www.washingtonpost. com/nation/2019/02/06/you-call-this-justice-no-charges-against-officer-who-killed-black-man-he-mistook-mall-shooter/?utm_term=.ab8a1af191fd


      5. #1 — a lot of the “armed citizens” credited with stopping shootings are actually pros or former pros, like the guy I mentioned above. Additionally, these cases are often much more complicated than gun nuts would have us believe.

        For instance, cases 2014-2017. These are the cases recognized by the FBI either in their report or after —

        https ://crimeresearch. org/2018/09/new-fbi-report-claims-that-8-of-active-shooter-attacks-during-2014-17-were-stopped-or-mitigated-by-concealed-handgun-permit-holders-but-misses-at-least-half-the-cases/

        1. Schlenker Automotive
        — The shooter was shot and held at gunpoint by the manager.
        — note that the shooter also had a permit.
        — no pro history that I know of

        https ://www.floridatoday .com/story/news/crime/2017/12/01/black-friday-schlenker-shooting-what-we-know/911335001/

        2. First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas
        — the shooter had already left the church (the shooting had already ended) before he was confronted.
        — the shooter actually killed himself.
        — the shooter had a previous domestic-violence conviction and therefore should not have had access to guns, but the Air Force failed to record his conviction.
        — the shooter had extended magazines
        — the “armed citizen” was actually a former NRA firearms instructor.

        https ://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Sutherland_Springs_church_shooting

        3. Townville Elementary School
        — the “armed citizen” was actually a firefighter

        https ://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Townville_Elementary_School_shooting

        4. Burnette Chapel Church of Christ
        — the shooter accidently shot himself in the chest during an UNARMED struggle with the supposedly “armed” citizen
        — ***After*** the shooter was already down, the “armed citizen” had time to go get his gun out of his car.
        — no pro history that I know of

        https ://www.tennessean. com/story/news/crime/2017/09/24/nashville-police-identify-hero-usher-who-confronted-church-shooter/698311001/

        5. Multiple Locations in Clearlake Oaks, California
        — the “armed citizen” didn’t actually stop anything; the shooter started at one location, drove to a second location (where the “armed citizen” was), then proceeded to mutiple other locations.
        — no pro history that I know of

        https ://sanfrancisco.cbslocal. com/2017/10/23/authorities-search-for-active-shooter-in-lake-county/

        6. Sister Marie Lenahan Wellness Center
        — the “armed citizen” was actually a psychiatrist who’d had previous run-ins with the shooter, who was his patient.
        — no gun-related pro history that I know of

        https ://www.nbcphiladelphia. com/news/local/Mercy-Fitzgerald-Hospital-on-Lockdown-268489642.html

        7. North Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago
        — the “armed citizen” was an Army vet

        https ://www.chicagotribune. com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-murder-victim-shot-by-ccl-holder-20190325-story.html

        8. Conyers, Georgia, Sunday, May 31, 2015, The Rockdale Citizen
        — the “armed citizen” who stopped the shooter was actually a sheriff’s deputy.
        — another “armed citizen” didn’t stop anything; the shooter shot two more people before being shot by the deputy.

        https ://www.rockdalenewtoncitizen. com/news/customer-who-returned-fire-at-rockdale-county-murder-suspect-called/article_4ee4f1bf-8f25-5969-8360-0b9eb21e6c98.html


        1. many of these “citizens” are pros.
        2. in many cases, the citizens’ guns didn’t actually stop anything.
        3. any of these cases that do fit the definition must be weighed against the many thousands who are **killed** by “armed citizens” every year.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. Quoth the flopatron: “If you can’t cope with that level of responsibility then don’t waste your time typing”

    No problem, floppy. I keep copies. You play fuckaround, I point and laugh.

    I take it from the extra effort that you did the research and didn’t like what you found, so now you’re trying to take it out on me. Disappointing to find yourself on the bad-guy side, eh?


  11. @Contrarius

    3. any of these cases that do fit the definition must be weighed against the many thousands who are **killed** by “armed citizens” every year.

    In other words, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”

    Even if a few if these shooters (very few) had been stopped by “armed citizens”, I would far rather have the sorts of robust gun laws New Zealand is now implementing, which reduces the chances of having shooters in the first place.

    Also re: #2: We must never forget Philando Castile, who was killed by the police in spite of having a permit to carry. Notice that the NRA said bupkis about this. I wonder why?

    (I picked the Fox News site because that’s likely the only one Phantom will regard as “truthful”)


    1. Heck, a black man doesn’t even have to be armed to get shot by police. But yes, white gun nuts in the US tend to have very different reactions when the “armed citizen” is black!


Comments are closed.