Sunday, December 16, 2012

Captain Capitalism's Super Awesome Political Analysis on the Shooting

  • Broken family
  • Kid obviously never had dad give him the asswhoppin' he needed to make him a young man and not the social outcast he was
  • On psycho drugs
  • Shooting only stopped when armed people arrived on the scene
  • Executions were carried out with pistols, not the AR 15 (last i checked) (it was the AR 15 according to more recent reports) OK, now the third update has it being the pistols.
  • Good thing guns were banned at the school
  • Good thing Norway banned guns too
  • Somebody remind me of my "Nerf" theory of gun control one of these days
  • Start buying guns now while you can.  Here's my dealer.


Anonymous said...

These shooting are a symptom of deeper problem - not guns.

Let's also look at "Dr Spock" on raising children, removing "God" and "prayer" from schools, this "everybody wins" and gets trophies - no life lessons learned and no value of life.

This is part of the collapse...

Matthew Walker said...

Late reports say it was an AR that he murdered them with.

Also, Reuters or some other halfwits described the pistols as ".9mm and .10mm". But the whole thing is much too sad to laugh, even at journalists.

Anonymous said...

And connecticut has the strictest gun control yet this did not stop him from breaking the law:

Also a more effective form of punishment for disobedience is the silent treatment:

However giving your son an ass whooping if used excessively or improperly or any at all in all cases leads to psychological problems down the line:

Izanpo said...

Forgot one, Cappy....meds.

If this kid was on Ritalyn since age 8, we'll never hear about it. I'm willing to bet he was on some form of antidepressants at the time of the massacre.

Can some readers from the medical field weigh in on this?

Anonymous said...

Medical Examiner said all victims were shot with "long rifle."

This case stinks.

CRAZYMAN704 said...

Its crazy the left going crazy about more gun control laws in this country. Did they know that Connecticut has gun control laws in place but it didn't prevent the crime.

Lanza, therefore, if you count theft, murder and breaking and entering, Lanza broke into the school through a window to circumvent a locked-door and intercom security system – violated a half-dozen laws in his crime, including the following gun-control statutes:

First, Connecticut law requires a person be over 21 to possess a handgun. Lanza was 20.

Second, Connecticut requires a permit to carry a pistol on one’s person, a permit Lanza did not have.

Third, it is unlawful in Connecticut to possess a firearm on public or private elementary or secondary school property, a statute Lanza clearly ignored.

Fourth, with details on the Bushmaster rifle still sketchy, it’s possible Lanza may have violated a Connecticut law banning possession of “assault weapons.”

Of course, these laws were violated because Lanza did not own any of the firearms in question, but rather stole them, and he clearly had no regard for the law in committing his crime.

The facts of the case mark one of the largest quandaries with cries for additional gun control: The guns already exist, and the criminals who have broken laws to use them have also demonstrated they’re willing to break laws to obtain them.

Unless the government somehow mandates and is able to effectively destroy the millions of guns already in circulation, gun-control laws primarily affect the already law-abiding, rather than the criminal element.

Yet legislators have been swift to suggest the answers lie in even more laws.

Ouroboros said...

It blows my mind that people are blaming anything but the fact that this kid is a product of our flaming wreck of a society. Like you stated, broken family with no father. Add that to the fact that our culture is a churning cesspool and you get individuals like the shooter.

Libertarian Conspirator said...

Every single shooter I've read about has been on psych drugs, even back to Whitman in 1966. We have a background check that prevents a person from buying guns if they have been treated by a psychiatrist, this tells me there should also be mandatory background checks for anyone seeking psychiatric treatment. If your background check says you own a gun then you can't get psych drugs unless you sell or turn in your guns.

Dan said...

You left out the obvious....mental illness.

Joe Bar said...

1. Looks like the pistols were used to kill, not the rifle.

2. Have you seen the blog post "I am Adfam Lanza's Mom" by another woman?

One guess what her marital status is.

3. I bought a nice M1 Carbine this weekend.

Breaker Morant said...

I don't think the main focus this time will be to go after guns. I think the anti-gun people have figured out that the weak link is bullets. That is the low hanging fruit.-High taxes on them or whatever.

I have lots of guns. Bullets are my concern now.

They will still go after guns, but you know what I mean.

Unknown said...

Adam Lanza STOLE three guns from his mother. Period. Bad parenting and an irresponsible family combined with mental illness lead to this tragedy. More right to carry laws in a combination of increased screening for the mentally ill and those on antidepressants sounds like an appropriate solution to this problem in addition to increase security at these public schools.

Anonymous said...

Given Obama's rhetoric, is anybody else thinking that this would be an excellent time to buy a lot of stock in Smith & Wesson, and Strum, Ruger & Co Inc, the only two publicly traded manufactures of firearms?

Would seem to me that there's going to be another spike in the sales of firearms and ammunition.

Seems to me that there's no reason not to enjoy the decline, AND profit from it at the same time...

Anonymous said...

You see: "Gun Free Zone"

They see: "Our patrons have been disarmed for your convenience"

Lib Arts Major Making $31k/yr said...

Got my Colt 6920 with Magpul furniture and a case of 5.56 this weekend.

Knew that savings was going to come in handy for something. Pretty sure that an investment in guns is beating inflation, and it's a better place for my money to sit than the bank where it's making less than half a percent. Get your stuff now because come January, the "fix" is in and will be rammed down our throats, congress be damned.

More to the point: Mom could have prevented all of this if the weapons were stored properly. Also an AR-15 platform is not an intuitive weapon to operate no matter how many video games you play.

The fact is the kid was trained to use it and had practice. Check Holmes and the mall shooter earlier in the week - both had jams and were unable to clear them because they were unfamiliar with their weapons. Again, knowing how to do remedial action drills, how to engage the bolt catch, forward assist, etc...This is shit that isn't as simple as "pull the trigger until it goes click"

Don T Tread said...

I fear this may be the archduke Ferdinand moment for the US domestically, although I have been pleasantly surprised by the comments on articles regarding gun control, even on

The dems are going to use this for their advantage not in the short-term - their eyes are on 2014. The repubs are doomed. We will have one party control in 2014, so plan on that.

Everyone thinks of ar-15s when they hear "assault rifle." I may be wrong, but I thought pistol grip shotguns (tactical) are considered assault weapons as well. So if you want an ar-15 or a tactical shotgun, now is the time to get them. I think the first thing to be banned will be the high capacity magazines - that may happen in the next two years, depending on the state you live in. They also will tax ammo to death.

I also do believe that the captain could make the case that this issue is an economic one - namely being, we have so many able-bodied people on the dole that there is no money left for things like state mental hospitals. The lanzas were rich, so they could've afforded to put their precious boy in a hospital, but most do not have that luxury.

Using Game may be a good way to combat the tyrants on this one - when they say they want to ban guns or confiscate them, "agree and amplify." Say, "Yeah, we should ban single motherhood too. And we should ban kids with autism. And violent video games and movies." Just keep going. If they're going to take our right to defend ourselves away, I want to live in a society free of danger, so we need to ban all the things that possibly create people like Lanza.

It's also getting around that the mom was a prepped. Look for this to gain traction.

cdw said...

We now see what happens when the mentally ill have rights more so than the rest of us. This fellow, with his aspergers, or autism, or ubernerdedness, was a danger to others and himself. If he had ever said anything about murder, at least where I live, he could have been held for 72 hours under the mental health act. But imagine, you are 20, as far as you know, you are the smartest person in the room, but you just cant get through the social norms mess you create everytime to appear in public, and of course, you have never kissed a girl. Shooting his mother in the face is a telling action, others can comment upon it later.

S. Harvey said...

Politicians never let the facts get in the way.

bigmo said...

Its the media coverage that is causing an increase in these types of shootings.

maxx said...

Sandy Hook is a perfect example of the flawed thinking behind unilateral disarmament laws.

beta_plus said...

We need to ask ourselves as a society (assuming we still have that):

"Is it worth the risk of having children slaughtered keeping the violently insane out of institutions?"

We used to lock these people up. Not because it was easy. We did it because it was hard.

Oh, BTW, Norway's Breivik was sexually abused by his mother:

And the Norwegian government knew about it when he was a young age and did nothing. As in did nothing and gave his custody to his mother instead of his sane father. Oh, and gave him the guns too.

But yeah, it's TEH EBIL GUNSSESS that cause all of this.

V10 said...

Gun control advocates are never satisfied, there's always just one more restriction ("For the chiiiiildren") that gun owners are expected to compromise on. It's the constantly shifting goalpost, and the constant denial of their end-game - "Oh no, we don't want to BAN guns, oh good heavens no, we just want to make things a little safer" - that offend my sensibilities the most.

I say bring forward the gun control laws. I'll sign on to anything short of a full ban, so long as 3 conditions are met:

1) Law-abiding citizens, who pass a background check and a competency exam, will receive a license (regularly renewed) declaring they are free and clear to own firearms.

And then you will get off their backs. There will not be an endless series of petty hoops to constantly jump through, whose purpose is to so inconvenience people that they give up in frustration. Having passed the check and exam, they are assumed to be responsible owners, capable of safely handling, storing and transporting their firearms in a sober manner that keeps them out of little hands or from accidentally discharging. I'm open to the idea of tiered licenses, that extra training and a spotless record over many years qualifies a person to, say, concealed carry, or own otherwise restricted weapons (eg. handguns in Canada).

2) Those who are licensed can own any firearm they like, within reasonable and logical limits.

And by 'reasonable and logical', I mean we set objective, quantifiable criteria (maximum rate of fire, magazine size, etc) to score a firearm as legal or illegal, and no fuzzy nonsense about how some models 'look scary', or 'have a reputation'. I think most firearms owners are willing to settle on fair numbers, assuming you're not going to try to set the bar ridiculously high.

3) You never, ever, ask for another gun law again, in any shape or form. You retire your crusade, in victory, and we never hear another fear-mongering word from you ever again. You explicitly acknowledge that we are adults, that you are not our nannies, and we will be treated with respect, not sneering condescension and veiled innuendo.

This of course would never work. It would all fall apart on the third condition.

I don't currently own a firearm myself, but have always supported the right to do so, and for all the reasons (sport, defense against criminals, and a ward against tyranny). I've never really needed one, or seriously looked at training classes, and getting out to a proper range to practice is inconvenient. Well, fuck that noise. I've found my News Years Resolution.

beta_plus said...

@ Matt

If you are looking for the Arch Duke moment for the USA, it will more likely be when George Zimmerman is acquitted.

Maybe it won't be him, but a similar event will happen soon, and 400 years of hatred and rage will explode. By that point our police and military, impossibly weakened by a hypergamous, soplipsistic, slutistic, and matriarchal entitlement welfare state will not be able to keep the peace.

Sorry Cap, but when the war lords with their gangs come a romin', you will no longer be able to enjoy the decline. I'd drink the Rumpie while you can.

Unknown said...

I really think that psycho drugs is the big one. I don't know of any school shooter who wasn't on them.

Don T Tread said...

Stock up on 30 round Pmags while you still can. Prices went up on Saturday just to keep pace with a huge surge in demand. People see the writing on the wall, and 30 round magazines and maybe even 20 rounders are going to be banned first. I see the republicans caving pretty easy on that one, assuming that it would show the left that they're being reasonable. 30 round magazines may be the best investment out there. As far as prices going up, thank god for price gouging, otherwise you wouldn't be able to even find them at all. There's an economic lesson there as well.

The left just does not get it. The surge in demand proves the fact that people do not trust the government. Not at all. The more they beat their chests and talk about banning weapons, the more weapons are sold.

Anonymous said...

Based on the media's constant "tougher gun control" mantra, it looks like their end-game is the total confiscation of guns, period, since they will say that tough guns laws "obviously" did not work in this particular state.

Anonymous said...

The societal infatuation with violent solutions to personal problems is very much in play. See Eliot Layton, "Hunting Humans" and other of his writings.

Hot Sam said...

I don't know what caliber pistols he had, but a .40 cal is equivalent to 10mm.

But yes, the dumb ass journalists moved the decimal points one and two places respectively. if I ever get shot, I hope it's with a .10 mm. ;)

Anonymous said...

How about teaching your children marketable skills so that they can become productive and entrepreneurial ?

Ass Whopping is not the solution. You cannot pound skills through violence, guilt and shame.

For example, facebook dad, who wrecked his daughter's laptop.

He is an IT specialist, her daughter had a laptop and wanted software installed. He wanted her to get a job.

Instead, he could have instructed her on how to install the software and supervise the installation, you know teach her some skills.

The laptop was absolutely necessary to teach her the skills he had.

Then, after he taught her his valuable IT skills, he could have taught her how to market those skills, how to spot opportunities to sell your skills, how to advertise her skills, how to negociate a service contract etc.

So instead of being a dumb wage slave she would become independent, proud, entrepreneurial.

Teaching your kids to shut up and obey at all costs is not doing them any service, it's preparing their enslavement and failure in life.

R7 Rocket said...

Germany also has gun bans. Germany has had multiple shooting massacres in recent years.

Ryan said...

Captain, right now is the time to short sell guns, if that's possible. These masacres and gun control debates always, always, always cause a temporary price spike in guns and ammunition. The best items to short sell are anything prominent politicians are specifically talking about banning.