"Suicide Shooters" - Going To "War" With Government
On Thursday, an individual who had "serious grievances with the city government" in the St. Louis suburb of Kirkwood, Missouri brought his gun to the police station and then a City Council meeting and killed five people - first two police officers, then two council members and the public works director - and wounded two others, including the mayor.
According to the killer's brother, the shooter "went to war tonight with the people, the government that was putting torment and strife into his life." News reports mentioned that the shooter "felt harassed" because police "cracked down on his parking of vehicles for his construction company outside his home...."
After two arrests for disorderly conduct at council meetings in 2006, and a subsequent conviction, the shooter continued to regularly attend and disrupt council meetings, making "inappropriate noises, heehawing like a donkey" and making "derogatory comments."
The shooter's brother said, "he has spoke [sic] on it as best he could in the courts, and they denied all rights to the access of protection and he took it upon himself to go to war and end the issue."
We also learned yesterday about an aborted "large-scale shooting rampage" at the Super Bowl from an individual who "purchased an AR-15 assault rifle from a Phoenix-area gun store on Jan. 29" along with 200 rounds of ammunition, and "planned a massacre as a form of revenge against the Tempe, Ariz. City Council - because it overwhelmingly denied a liquor license for his restaurant."
In a letter mailed before he decided not to carry out the attack, the gun buyer said that "I cannot outvote, outspend, outtax or outincarcerate my enemies ... but for a brief moment I can outgun them."
These two stories raise a number of issues - the weakness of our gun laws nationally, as well as in most of the states; the easy accessibility of assault rifles and large stores of ammunition; the non-deterrent effect of police carrying guns and the disregard by those who are willing to be "suicide shooters" for their own lives; and the highly-charged level of controversy involved in much of local government activity.
This last point deserves some more attention. One of the first times I got involved in a controversy with the gun lobby was when, as Mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana, I suggested that individuals not be allowed to bring guns into our City-County building. (The County, which owned the building, had just banned guns from the County Courthouse and I argued there were just as many contentious issues being discussed and decided by the legislative and administrative parts of local government as by the judicial part.)
The gun lobby saw this suggestion as an attack on their "Second Amendment rights" and responded strongly. As someone who had received death threats and been called a "dictator" because of other government issues, I knew that there were a lot of people who I did not want to see carrying guns into city meetings and the offices of city employees.
These incidents all highlight the tensions involved when individuals argue that their "personal liberty" outweighs the rule of law and trumps community policy as decided by our governmental systems.
These tensions are part of the legal debate about the Second Amendment in the D.C. v. Heller case pending in the U.S. Supreme Court. In the brief filed for Heller on Monday, his lawyers argue in favor of the "individual use of Second-Amendment-protected arms to check despotism" and the importance of "retaining the ability to resist tyranny."
The killer in Kirkwood and the would-be shooter at the Super Bowl both thought they had to act to "check despotism" and "resist tyranny." But encouraging easier access to dangerous weapons by dangerous people puts us all at risk. We need to value the rule of law along with the claims of individual liberty or we all suffer.
(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Some excerpts from the Introduction of Josh's book, "Every Handgun is Aimed at You: the Case for Banning Handguns."
http://www
"Fearful of becoming enmeshed in the gun lobby's "slippery slope" argument (that any gun control, no matter how limited, is the first step toward total gun confiscation), many actively voiced their opposition to a handgun ban, warning that ban proponents would marginalize the entire movement. They could offer no proof of this claim"yet the argument took hold."
-Josh seems to think that not supporting a handgun ban just because you are afraid of an eventual "all out firearm ban/confiscation is a ridiculous notion. Hum... is it??
"By 1993 the gun death toll in America reached an all-time high of 39,595.6 Many Americans rationalized away these deaths, focusing on the skin color of the most heavily impacted victims, and not on the handguns that made the killing so easy?If many Americans were able to dismiss the first wave of youth gun violence through the prism of race, this changed in the late 1990s with mass shootings in rural and suburban schools by white students. Ironically, these shootings took place during a period in which gun violence had reached its lowest level since the early 1980s, but they removed once and for all white America's false sense of security.
Oh yeah, here"s a chapter from Josh"s book: Chapter Eight: Handguns and Minorities details the disproportionate impact handguns have on minority communities"most notably blacks and Hispanics"by looking not only at national figures, but at three "snapshots" to gauge more accurately the effect on Hispanic America: California, Texas, and Chicago. The chapter also details the racism prevalent among high-profile members of the gun lobby.
So Josh, are we focusing on the disproportionate racial/soc
Contradictions a-plenty.
Oh yeah, and again, Josh is an FFL holder.
"Contradictions a-plenty."
Yessir! On the one hand, he's telling the IRS that he's running a tax-exempt, non-profit organization. On the other hand, he's telling the ATF that he's a business dealing in firearms.
Oh what a tangled web we weave.
All of this VPC FFL business is causing quite a stir. It has lead to a letter-writing campaign and phone calls to the ATF, who say they are looking into it.
Josh has had his FFL since '95, according to the GOA. His full license# is 1-54-000-0
The address on Josh's FFL is not zoned commerciallly. It is zoned residential/limited non-profit. That's against the law, right there.
The ATF requires that an FFL holder have a business premises, to conduct the business of selling, buying, or repairing guns.
The Collector FFL is a seperate license, and only applies to curios and relics. No "Collector Loophole" for Josh.
I wonder if it's legal to have his FFL address in DC, and his gun storage facility in VA?
Here's an interesting piece:
http://joh
Links to all govt. agencies, and news sources can be found in two threads on THR. One thread is in Legal, and another in General Discussions.
www.thehig
Link trouble. Sorry. Try again.
http://www
It's one thing to comment about someone's books or excerpts ... it's another thing to make these kinds of implicatio
K
Thank you for your concern, but it's unnecessary, I assure you. Click on a link once in a while. You can see the FFL. You can see ATF and IRS regulations.
Perhaps you should convey your warning to Mr. Sugarman, as I think he is about to have a close encounter with both of these agencies.
Complaints are being filed with both, as we speak.
Kelli, I join you in urging people to "tread carefully" with their implicatio
It's almost as bad as implicatio
Oh, wait.
Well, I'm not exactly out on a limb here. You really need to start taking advantage of some of these links.
If you read the IRS regs, an action group is not qualified for tax exemption. Or are you trying to say that the VPC does not try to influence legislation?
His FFL is all over the web.He is using his VPC address as the address of a business, engaged in the gun trade, buying wholesale, selling or repairing guns.
Complaints are being filed with both agencies.
It started yesterday. I did not file any myself.
At the very least, his FFL renewal application should be denied. At the very least.
Kelli, what say you about the head of the VPC having an FFL? Any speculation?
It seems that Mr. Sugarman's FFL qualifications might be a bit shaky. I'm pretty sure, to maintain a FFL, one has to be engaged in the business of selling, repairing, or collecting firearms. You also have to be zoned comercially, and can't be violating any local ordinances. Maybe that's why Josh stores his guns in Arlington, VA.
Maybe he got by via the "Collector Loophole".
http://www
ope you are correct the changed made by the BATF back during the clintonian era was to try and get rid of the kitchen table dealers. People that made some money on the side selling one or two guns a month to people they new or others. They were normal FFl01 but just had no storefront. The ATF has somewhat made that less attractive. Most companies now also want to see a storefront.
I seem to be having a problem with links lately. Try this.
http://www
It appears that the VPC may also be in violation of the law, regarding it's tax-exempt status.
This was on the IRS site:
To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.
http://www
I wonder why we haven't heard from the other side regarding this Sugarman thing? These crickets are becomming damned annoying.
Josh Sugarman's FFL brings to mind a serious question. When the Supremes find in favor of Heller, will it then be legal to sell firearms in DC, which is currently illegal? If not, those poor people will still be up a creek.
Kelli you had a very interesting post about at risk kids. I was speaking with some friends and some local people recently about getting a shooting team started for kids without dads, I was the dad that took snakes to elementary school so my kid’s class mates that would never see a snake outside of a zoo would be able to touch one and see one close up. My son and I will be going hunting this fall to help feed some raptors. Now neither of these will fall into the graces of the Bingo Groups idea of positive reinforcement they both involve guns but then again I think I could make an excellent correlation between the breakdown of the family group with societal changes that went away from fathers and sons hunting and fishing together.
As for stores of ammo if it is on sale I am buying some and well every time Helmke posts.
As for loaded guns in the home there are a couple and everyone knows where they are and how to shoot them. The rest depending on which need cleaning are in the locked gun closet.
Now if Paul really wanted to do something worthwhile he could try and come up with a self cleaning gun. There are many injuries each year from people cleaning their guns.
Guns & reptiles are two different things.
I won't even consider your remarks concerning encouraging a relationship between guns & children without fathers or "at-risk kids" ... or your obvious misunderstanding of Paul's and the Brady Campaign's views.
In the future, please waste someone else's time, dragn1, if you must!
K
That is right teaching discipline, concentration and sportsmanships is terribly out of fashion. I am pretty sure I know right where the Bingo group and VPC sit. There are scared to death of an armed populace and that populace havening the right of law behind them.
Kelli:
More hypocrisy from the anti-civil rights bunch! Apparently Josh Sugarmann of the VPC has an FFL! This exempts him from the handgun ban in Washingotn D.C. Is Paul going to now write a column criticizing him?
http://arm
Michael
Did you notice that Josh's FFL expires in March? It will be interesting to see if he has it renewed.
I have often heard this question asked :
If the DC gun ban is overturned, where would someone buy a gun, since DC has no gun dealers?"
Well, how about buying one from Josh Sugarman, of the VPC? It seems that Josh has a Federal Firearms Liscense, which, by the way, EXEMPTS HIM from the DC gun ban. Just him, not you.
Of course, I would not make a statement like this without documentation. To view Josh's license, which is a matter of public record, type 1 in the first block, 54 in the second block, and 00725 in the last block.
https://ww
What's your source? I would like to retain it for possible future use.
I saw this on a firearms forum. The one with three initials (they don't like to get involved in flame wars).
The link, of course, is to your friendly, neighborhood BATF. Michael has a nice picture of it in his post. The ATF site requires you to type in those numbers. I tried linking with the numbers already entered, but The site won't permit that.
DMeadows, on second thought, we're here fighting the good fight for their benefit as well. I saw it on Thehighroa
The High Road.
An FFL? My goodness!
Shouldn't we be up in arms about the possibility of such a poliically motivated individual having so many lethal weapons at his disposal?
Is he held to the one-gun-a-month?
Does this make him a "gun pusher"?
Doesn't he know that "guns rank among the 10 leading causes of death in our country"?
And that "feeling safer with a gun is not the same as actually being safer with one"?
Has he had proper training? Background checks?
Even if he has, I'm afraid its still not good enough. You never know when he might snap and go all murderous on society.
The Second Amendment simply doesn't apply to him.
Obviously he is insecure and paranoid because he has a license that would allow him to get his hands on alot of guns!
The sky is falling!
Oh the irony.
I beg your pardon, Mark. That's "gunpusher".
For everyone who feels safe leaving their protection, and that of their families, in the hands of the police....
http://www
After reading the page, please click on the "revelation" link. This will take you to an ABC News story with more details.
Let's all play the "Top of the Post" game to get attention.
We've all seen how honest Kelli and Paul are when using unlinked quotes. Did you actually read the study Kelli or did you just do a cutnpaste from the BC website? Can you provide a link?
From the UN:
"Compiling and comparing International Crime Statistics
It should be noted that the crime statistics reported to the United Nations in the context of its various surveys on crime levels and criminal justice trends are incidents of victimization that have been reported to the authorities in any given country. That means that this data is subject to the same problems of accuracy as all official crime data. The variety of potential problems with recorded crime statistics is illustrated in the diagram below."
http://www
Actually, I am very interested in hearing more data from the UN on firearms issues & comparisons of nations ... but not from you, thirdpower.
There are other, more credible, sources I can ask. Thanks anyway!
If you would click on, or at least read the link, you will see that it will take you to the UN's very own website.
Do you have a more credibe source than that?
No doubt Kelly will denounce any link I post, as well, but others may find this well worth their consideration:
It seems a defected Russian KGB agent is speaking about instances of corruption in the U.N., including several KGB operatives acting as officials within the U.N. to skim money (remember the oil-for-food program?) and influence the international opinons of the U.S.
http://www
“Nothing has changed. Russia is doing everything it can today to embarrass the U.S. Let me repeat this. Russia is doing everything it can today to undermine and embarrass the U.S. The SVR rezidenturas in the U.S. are not less, but in some aspects even more active today than during the Cold War. “
One addl. point before I sign off today, Paul & the BC ...
According to the United Nation's Report on Firearm Regulation, Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice, the U.S. had "weaker firearm regulations and higher number of deaths involving firearms than all other industrialized ~ and even most developing ~ nations" in the year 1995. As this study is older, I wonder what UN studies have found when comparing nations on similar firearms issues in the 2000s.
It would be interesting to discover.
K
On three issues, in particular, gun-control advocates are woefully misguided:
1.) Paul Helmke wrongly attempts to connect the Kirkwood shooter and other deranged individuals to those who argue in support of constitutional rights.
2.) Democracy ... Gun-control advocates think 'democracy' applies primarily to their supposed rights, but not to the rights & liberties of others who may support wiser gun laws which protect natural rights to self-defense and defense against tyranny along with safety from guns getting into the wrong hands. This is not what Democracy means & the lone gun-control advocate here has taken this term very far from its original intent.
Democracy does not mean that gun-control advocates have a right to take the law into their own hands, either ... no matter how 'fearful of guns' they feel. Moreover, I would add that in a society based on equality the fears of gun-control advocates were never intended to trump the natural rights of anyone else.
3.) For the past 30+ years, Washington D.C. has had the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. So, if the gun-control advocates/anti-gun lobby were correct in their claims ... having so many restrictions should make DC residents safer from gun violence & gun crimes?
NO.
In fact, guns in responsible hands rank among the lowest causes of death in our country.
Once again, feeling safer without a gun is not the same as being safer with one. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, without a firearm, you stand a 5 in 10 chance of being hurt by your perp. With a firearm, you drop your odds of being hurt to 2 in 10.*
----------
*"A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon."
http://www
Once again, Dmeadows ... taking my words/ideas & manipulating them in order to try and support your progun agenda, or to bash someone else whose ideas you oppose, or to get needed-attention in a very childish way, is VERY SAD.
And it's particularly sad, when I see you resorting to copying & twisting my words around ~ because you have nothing more to say ... or to offer. I feel sorry for you. I hope you get help someday, for your troubles.
K
The fact that he used your template as a basis does not make his statements incorrect.
It only more clearly illustrates your own twisting of the facts to form your intentonally false assertions.
What's this? An ad hominem attack? Say it isn't so!
Oh Kelli you are so mean. Someone has a case of the Mondays...
"Suicide shooters going to war with government
Hattip to snowflakes for the info.
Here are the members of congress(read government) supporting the DC gun ban.
Representative Robert A. Brady (PA-01)
Representative John Conyers Jr. (MI-14)
Representative Danny K. Davis (IL-07)
Representative Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Representative Sam Farr (CA-17)
Representative Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Representative Al Green (TX-09)
Representative Raul M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Representative Michael Honda (CA-15)
Representative Zoe Lofgren (CA-16)
Representative Carolyn McCarthy (NY-04)
Representative Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Representative James P. Moran (VA-08)
Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC)
Representative Bobby L. Rush (IL-01)
Representative Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Representative Lynn C. Woolsey (CA-06)
Representative Albert R. Wynn (MD-04)
Here are those who support Heller...
http://www
Truth hurts, don't it?
Kaveman,
You know Kelli will never look at an NRA site. She'll just claim they're lying.
Here it is from the involved counsels:
http://www
"In sum, historically Congress has interpreted
the Second Amendment as recognizing the right oflaw-abiding individuals to keep and bear arms."
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
