Showing posts with label conspiracy theories. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conspiracy theories. Show all posts

Friday, April 6, 2018

The Far-Right Continues To Attack The Parkland Teen Survivors

Today it was reported that an entire website has been started with the express purpose of trolling and hating a teenage shooting survivor who has dared to call for more gun regulation. It is only the latest of a long list of such attacks by Conservatives and pro-gun forces against him and the other teens who survived the Parkland shooting....

If a person survives a plane crash, then publicly calls for better air safety, do people attack their character? What about if their child dies in a building fire and they advocate for better building codes? Or their friend dies in a multi-car crash so they call for better speed enforcement?  What is the response from lawmakers and pundits?  Usually it is very understanding.

Are any of these survivors lambasted as "soulless liars"? Or compared to Hitler? Or told that they should be learning first aid instead of talking out? Or pronounced that they should have been smacked more as children? What sort of person says such awful things to victims, survivors, or their families?

And what if they are saying these things about child survivors who saw dozens of their friends killed and injured, and had to run past their bodies to escape? 

Yet I see this all the time when the issue is gun violence-related. Survivors and victims are ignored by the Conservative gun-loving crowd ... until they call for sensible regulation to keep the shootings from happening again.  And then the gun crowd comes out shooting, so to speak, attacking the character of those survivors who dare to speak out.  The right-wing hate machine starts up.  It happened to my friend Colin Goddard after he survived the Virginia Tech shooting and advocated for stronger laws.  It happened to Lucy McBath after her 17 year old son, Jordan Davis, was shot to death and she called for justice and change. It happened to David Wheeler, who lost his 6 year old son in the Sandy Hook shooting and testified for change. And so on....  Anyone who speaks out about gun violence and calls for change is immediately trolled, smeared, and threatened. It's even happened to me.

Sadly, we are seeing it again.  This time, they have come out to troll and hate on the survivors of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.  The fact that these are children makes the attacks even more pitiful.

These teen survivors are brave, well-spoken, and passionate, and we need to respect them, not tear them down.

There have been so many attacks on these teens by the far right that I've started to lose track. So I decided to make a sort of laundry list of them, here, though it is by no means complete (for instance, I didn't bother going to all the pro-gun blogs to see their reactions) and is just a sampling.  Read them and tell me if this is a sign of an intelligent reaction. When the facts don't support the extremists, they resort to name-calling, conspiracy theory, and outright hate speech.

How have the teens handled it?  Far better than many adults would. In fact, I'm impressed how they cope with the constant attacks and remain focused on the need for change.  In the words of teen survivor David Hogg, when asked what he thought of the attacks on his character and the conspiracy theories:

“I don’t care,” Hogg said. “I don’t. I have bigger, more important things to focus on than these stupid conspiracies that aren’t true in any way, shape or form, have no validity, and don’t hold their weight. At all … these people are going to keep trying to take us down but that’s how we know what we’re doing matters … whenever someone tries making a change that matters, and a change for the better, there’s always someone that tried stopping them.” 

And the teens have been wildly successful in their effort: The nation's largest-ever one-day march and rally; State legislation pushed forward; Conversations on gun violence in nearly every living room. Their passion, honesty, and progressive attitude is very much at the heart of it all.

Here's the list I have so far (which I will update when I find more), more or less in chronological order, of some of the major attacks on the Parkland teens. As you can see, a great many of them target Emma Gonzales and David Hogg, the two most outspoken teens:

This sort of hatred, trolling, and conspiracy theorizing isn't just rude and disgusting, it's dangerous. Weak-minded (and armed) people who listen to this may believe it and act out violently as a result. It's happened plenty of times before (remember the "Pizzagate" shooting?).

I think you can see how toxic these extremist Conservatives are to their own cause.  I applaud the Parkland teens for their courage, and thank them for trying to make a new trajectory for our communities and nation away from gun violence.

.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, June 26, 2014

The Gun Bubble Has Burst

Do you remember the massive rush on guns and ammo? 
(source)

Who could forget?  After the Sandy Hook shooting, the NRA whipped gun owners into a frenzy of fear that assault weapons, and guns in general, would be banned and confiscated.  Their followers immediately ran out and purchased all the ammo and rifles they could manage to afford.  In many places, guns and ammo couldn’t be stocked fast enough.  AR-15’s were the hottest items, since they were the item of most loathing of anyone who was shocked at how many children had been killed so quickly.   Gun manufacturers made record profits.

The NRA made sure to blame President Obama as the figure most responsible for the firearms confiscations that were sure to be just around the corner, and the NRA followers responded amazingly.  As I blogged about a little over a year ago, the sales of these guns and ammo weren’t to new owners, but rather already-existing gun owners, for the most part, as the percentage of homes with guns continues to fall, and factors such as less interest in hunting and competition for interest in younger generations are making guns less appealing of a market.  In other words, gun owners are becoming a minority. 

When the gun guys wound up buying up all the available ammo, guess who they blamed for the problem?  That’s right, they blamed President Obama.  It’s a government conspiracy to buy up and stockpile the ammo, in order to drive up prices!  Another pro-gun conspiracy theory had it that government agencies were buying up the ammo in order to declare martial law and take away gun rights!  Of course, none of the gun guys pointed their fingers at the real source of the ammo and gun shortage:  themselves, for buying them, or the weapons manufacturers, who controlled the production.

When the gun ban and confiscation boogeyman didn’t materialize, the NRA was quick with another conspiracy theory:  in their twisted mind, the LACK of a ban and Obama's lack of action was evidence that a ban would be coming and that the Second Amendment was under attack.  (Don’t you love how Obama is always the focus of pro-gun conspiracy theories?).

Flash-forward to today.  Gun owners have bought all they can afford, and the market is once again saturated.  Ammo can be used up, but guns sold these days are most likely to outlive their owners.   Yes, some people with a real fetish for them will continue to build their own personal arsenal, but most gun owners don’t care to waste their money on it, just to titillate their trigger fingers.

As the Huffington Post recently reported, gun owners aren’t as worried about the old NRA line about the government banning all guns or confiscating them. 
After a year and a half of stockpiling weapons and ammunition, a buying binge that sent gun company stocks soaring, weapons enthusiasts seem to have realized that President Barack Obama and his allies in Congress are not, in fact, going to take away their guns.   …. 
But even the most paranoid gun buyers are starting to understand that Washington will be unable to do anything anytime soon to stem the flow of school shootings -- of which there have been 74 since Sandy Hook.
According to a CNN article:

After that [Sandy Hook] shooting, demand got crazy, said John Reids, owner of JT Reids Gun Shop in Auburn, Maine. "We couldn't keep up with it."
Reids had to hire extra workers to handle the sales spike. Guns were sold as soon as they arrived from the distributors.
Now, assault rifles are available for as little as $375 at some of the top online gun retailers like Gunbroker.com and CheaperThanDirt.com.
"Nearly all firearms have returned to prices seen prior to the Sandy Hook tragedy," said Dennis Pratte, owner of My Gun Factory, a store in Falls Church, Virginia. At the time, he recalls, customers were calling about assault rifles "every 10 seconds." ....
"I believe what happened is that everybody who wanted to buy one did," said Fernwood Firearms' John Kielbasa. "Now it's a buyer's market."
And now, after the gun bubble has burst, stocks for the gun manufacturers are sliding:

In its financial report released last Thursday, Smith & Wesson reported a 4.6 percent decline in profits for its fourth quarter, compared to last year. The company is also predicting lower demand for the coming year.
According to Bloomberg.com, financial analysts think that fears of tighter gun legislation have stalled, which is leading to fewer people buying guns. 
"Demand for modern sporting rifles has fallen off significantly following the post-Newton [sic] legislation-driven demand and the ensuing post-surge period," said Chris Krueger, an analyst at Lake Street Capital Markets, in a note to clients. "Long gun sales will decline about 25 percent in FY2015 and become a smaller percentage of Smith & Wesson's sales." 
Dean Lockwood, a weapons systems analyst at the market research firm Forecast International, told The Huffington Post that gun owners "have gotten over the panic buying stage and are back to a more normal level."

Now, gun stores are losing sales.  Those who invested heavily during the boom are now about to go bust.  Consider the case of one Texas gun store, in the little town of Katy.  Tactical Firearms now faces foreclosure as a result.  But instead of blaming themselves for poor management, or trying to appeal to their customers, they blame it on, of course, President Obama:
Tactical Firearms, the Katy gun store known for its snarky marquees that mock everything from President Obama to gun control could soon be out of ammo and out of business.
“Right now our second amendment is under attack,” said Jeremy Alcede, co-owner of Tactical Firearms. 
Their latest marquee claims Obama and Icon Bank are “trying to end them” on July 1st.
“We’ll lose everything, 150 people will be affected,” said Alcede. “They count on this job, we’re one big family.” 
Icon Bank is set to foreclose on Tactical Firearms next week. The bank said the gun store’s loan is in default, but the gun shop said this is about politics. ....
 But KHOU learned of a new twist. Alcede, the same man accepting donations online is being sued by his business partner Coe Wilson for allegedly taking money from the business an using it for personal purchases like a Caribbean vacation and jewelry. 
“He’s blamed the President of all people for his problems, when he should be blaming himself,” said Richard Nguyen, who represents Coe Wilson. “Jeremy has mismanaged funds to the detriment of the company.” 
Tactical Firearms denied the allegations.

Hmmm….. allegations of mismanagement and poor financial conduct.  But, but…. Obama!  Second Amendment!

Hey, gun guys, instead of blaming President Obama, how about putting the blame where it really lies:  a runaway problem of gun violence and a culture that places more value on gun rights and gun sales than on protecting the welfare of our people.  We as a nation need to stop drinking the NRA Kool-Aid and wake up to the need for commonsense gun regulation.  100,000 shootings a year, with 32,000 deaths, are too many to ignore!


ADDENDUM:  Another blogger sums it up pretty well:
Bud buys a handgun, as his paranoid friend Ted tells him "Obama is going to take away all our guns!".   And Ted says that spending Saturday afternoon at the range is "a lot of fun".   So Bud buys a handgun and ammunition at the local gun shop and spends a few weekends with Ted at the range.   At first it seems like fun and all, meeting new friends, and the thrill of firing a weapon.
But eventually, the thrill fades, and the cost of ammunition (inflated by the "shortage") starts to spoil the thrill a bit.   And Bud starts to realize that Ted has a lot of scary friends, and moreover, he has better things to do with his money.   So the Buds of the world lose interest, over time, and eventually, Bud decides to sell his handgun on Craigslist, as he needs the money.
I know a few Buds, personally.   Heck, there is a little Bud in all of us - latching on to the latest trendy fad, if just as a dilettante, before moving on to the next trendy thing.   The golf clubs in my garage attest to that.  I've been meaning to get out on the course (we only have four here on the island) but it seems something always comes up.   And suddenly four years go by, with no golfing...
.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

Friday, November 22, 2013

Pro-Gun Activists Call For Assassination Of Our President, Even On The 50th Anniversary Of JFK's Death

This Friday was the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy.

There are many remembrance ceremonies, including in Washington D.C.’s Arlington Cemetery and at Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas.  From an article:
A half-century later, the assassination still stirs quiet sadness in the baby boom generation that remembers it as the beginning of a darker, more cynical time. The anniversary ceremonies reflected that solemnity, with moments of silence, speeches by historians and, above all, simple reverence for a time and a leader long gone. 
“A new era dawned and another waned a half-century ago, when hope and hatred collided right here in Dallas,” Mayor Mike Rawlings said at the largest memorial service, in Dealey Plaza, the scene of the Nov. 22, 1963, shooting.
These ceremonies for JFK are solemn reminders of the man who did so much for our nation to help its citizens be kinder to each other and less discriminatory, and to uplift our nation. 

But JFK’s death also serves to remind us how armed extremists with a bone to pick can too easily resort to violence to achieve their fevered goals.

When it comes to making our nation safer from gun violence, sadly not much has changed in the last 50 years.  Lee Harvey Oswald mail-ordered the rifle he used, which is now no longer legal to do thanks to the Gun Control Act of 1968, and we now have the Brady Bill to require a background check with every gun purchase from a gun shop (a law that has now stopped two million gun sales to prohibited persons since it was enacted), but you can still arrange for the purchase of a gun online in your state with no background check, and you can still meet a private seller on the street and pay cash for an assault rifle, with no background check.  As my blogger friend at Common Gunsense says, “Where is the common sense?” (see her latest post, also about JFK, HERE).

These days, extremist conservative forces try to hijack the legacy of JFK.  The NRA (whose publication, American Rifleman, helped Oswald purchase his gun) is even profiting off of JFK by selling a commemorative coin in American Rifleman magazine!  But we can’t forget how, at the time, these forces vilified every attempt by him to change our society for the better.  Consider the “Wanted for Treason” poster they made of him (to the right).  In that poster, they accuse him of “betraying the Constitution” by "turning the sovereignty of the U.S. over to the communist controlled United Nations."

Sound familiar?  That’s because those same forces now say the same things about our current president, another young, liberal, president who is making good with his ideals.  They stop at nothing to vilify him, including making up wacko conspiracy theories about him, particularly regarding gun rights. 

Compare the JFK "treason" poster from the 60's to this one made recently of Obama.

Once again, hope and hatred are colliding, as Mayor Rawlings put it, but now on a national scale.

Now, pro-gun activists openly state their desire for President Obama to be assassinated in Dallas.  That’s right:  these extremists, who consider themselves to be “patriotic” and “law-abiding,” are committing a felony by threatening to kill our president and treasonously calling for armed insurrection.  The pro-gunners dream about him being assassinated just like JFK, in the same plaza where, in October, they rallied with their assault rifles, in yet another public display meant to intimidate the public, or, as they put it, “exercise their rights” (just like others have).

Comments have been left to this effect at a couple of pro-gun Facebook pages.  The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence exposed them in a recent post.  Comments include:
“Drive him past the old book depository.” 
 “Take him via Dealey Plaza.” 
 “I wonder if he will get the same Texas welcome as JFK.” 
 “Maybe another president will be sworn in on Air Force One as in the past.  Everyone say’s that history will repeat it’s self [sic].”
The Second Amendment doesn’t give them the right to do many of the things they think it can, and certainly not to threaten the life of our President or dream about his assassination. 

But if they can’t assassinate him in Dallas, there’s always armed revolt.  In the extremist vision that they daydream about, a million gun owners will rally to the White House and call for Obama to come out and surrender himself to them in a “citizen’s grand jury.”  They even set a date:  November 19.  Of course, the date came and went and nothing happened.  Fringe groups like these are fringe precisely because they don’t have a following, but that doesn’t keep them from being dangerous.  In most countries, it would be illegal to make such threats of treason.  From the article:
On Monday, the same un-American, Larry Klayman, released a new declaration of independence and announced that on November 19th he and fellow Islamophobes, extremist Christian leaders, and right-wing gun fanatics will converge on the White House and depose the Obama Administration, members of Congress, and the Supreme Court. According to Klayman, President Obama is a “despot, socialist, ultra-leftist “Muslim” who, with his Democratic minions, passed a destructive piece of legislation”(Affordable Care Act) that Klayman claims is unconstitutional. Within the new declaration of independence is a laundry list of imagined slights that claims after “warning him and his administration of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us, we must acquiesce in the necessity, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.” Klayman’s group clearly holds the United States government and Barack Obama as “Enemies in War.”
It goes on with their rants, accusing Obama of all the usual ridiculous accusations (he’s Islamic, anti-Christian, tyrannical, etc.) and names some other fringe groups that associate with him, such as Gun Owners of America (they, and their founder, Larry Pratt, are certainly no strangers to wacko pro-gun conspiracies).  The article continues:
Klayman’s threat of a violent revolution if the President, congressional leaders, and the Supreme Court do not meet their list of demands and be “abolished from all allegiance to the current government’s regime, including political connection between them and the current government, is to be totally dissolved” is treason. Calling on, and inciting, millions of other Americans to join in the overthrow of the United States government is sedition, particularly under the threat of violent force, but it is glaringly obvious Klayman’s group eschews U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution.

Reading through the list of grievances against the President and the government exposes Klayman and company’s motivation is rank Islamophobia, hatred of minorities, and a desire to dissolve the Union into a collection of independent nation states. 

I wish someone could claim that this is just a one-time rant.  Unfortunately, talk like this is rampant among the pro-gun blogs and at their rallies.  You just can't get past their lunatic belief that Obama's coming for their guns, a belief reinforced by the pro-gun lobby until it is a fevered call for insurrection.  Consider, for instance, open calls for war at the recent pro-gun rally held at the Alamo, by conspiracy theorist and pro-gun voice Alex Jones.  From an article:
“If the people who died here can see us, and I believe they can, I promise you they’d be proud of each and every one of you,” he continued. “We’re not going to lay down if you offensively attack us. If it’s a war they want, it’s a war they’ll get.” 
These pro-gun activists aren’t, by any means, representative of the rank-and-file gun owners of America, who are actually quite moderate and agree with gun violence prevention activists, like myself, in a number of regards (such as the 80-90% agreement on requiring background checks for all gun sales, including private sales).  Like all extremists, though, these activists think they represent everyone who possesses a firearm.  Moderate gun owners need to speak up and demand an end to these extremist calls which make them all look bad in the eyes of the rest of Americans.

I think a fellow blogger over at a blog called Gunsense says it best, when he indicates that this isn’t just a problem with the activists, but with the militarization of our entire culture.  Referring to the recent case of pro-gun extremists ambushing a group of four Moms Demand Action women as they ate their lunch at a Mexican restaurant:
The Open Carry Texas group that converged outside of the restaurant broke no laws.  No one was shot.  No one was injured.  A group photograph was taken, of course, with the American flag and children and guns.  This particular optics—guns, men, women, children, flag, public place—has become a meme now for the open-carry enthusiasts, and an image of great hilarity for the gun-control folks.  I suspect Open Carry Texas will reconsider future actions of this sort—they are still being ridiculed across the country, even as I write this. 
But these images, and the actions that give rise to them, are part of the gradual militarization of our culture, and when you militarize a culture, you must expect military solutions to civil disagreements.  That in a nutshell is the problem.  
He quotes a celebrate French Writer, Albert Camus:  “Bloodthirsty laws make bloodthirsty customs."

Sadly, one of those social customs is to turn against the very government that has allowed, or even encouraged, carrying of guns in public, “standing your ground” against any perceived threat, and allowing treasonous talk without consequence.

It’s time for everyone to call out the extremists for what they are – people who are purposely calling for violence -- and then turn our attention back to the goals that JFK tried to instill in America – calls for unity and understanding.  As President Kennedy once said at a White House speech, 

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” 

Violent revolution is the goal of these extremists.  When you live your life for your guns, there can seem only one means by which to solve your problems. 

 Let's make a pledge for a peaceful revolution, and make a new trajectory for our community away from gun violence.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

Thursday, August 22, 2013

If Gun Owners Fear A National Registration List, They Need Only Look As Far As The NRA

Earlier this year, President Obama attempted to pass, at the Federal level as part of a package of sensible gun regulations, a universal background check bill, which would have required a 5-minute background check on all gun sales, including those from private sellers and at gun shows, to help keep guns out of the hands of prohibited people, without infringing on the right of law-abiding adults to purchase their guns.  Background checks work.  From 1994 through 2008, background checks on guns purchased from licensed firearms dealers prevented 1.8 million prohibited people in the United States, including felons and the mentally ill, from buying guns (according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics).

A much more scaled-down bill, the  Manchin-Toomey background check bill, would have at least required background checks at all gun shows, but not for most private transfers.  The bill failed when a minority of pro-gun, NRA-sponsored senators threatened to filibuster.

Despite the fact that an amazing and nearly unprecedented (for any political topic) 90% of civilians, including 75% of NRA members, support universal background checks, the NRA nonetheless opposed them.  As usual, the NRA pushed its own extreme agenda instead of representing their own members.  After all, the gun manufacturers who fund the NRA make money from all gun sales, legal or not.

The really ridiculous part is that the NRA claimed, as justification for its opposition, that background checks would create a (evil!) registration list of gun owners (notice that the word "confiscation" usually fell soon after the word "registration").  LaPierre is quoted as saying:

[Y]ou're creating a registry of all the law-abiding people in the country that own firearms. I know the politicians say, "Hey, we'll never use that list to confiscate." That's a pretty darn tall order to believe a promise from people in this town right now.

He wrote in one opinion piece:

Imagine if the biggest step in their confiscation scheme—“universal gun owner licensing and registration”—were a reality. Acquisition, transfer or continued ownership of firearms could depend on the whim of federal bureaucrats—just like the IRS operation—in analyzing questionnaires that gun owners would be required by law to answer.

Elsewhere, he's quoted as saying:
“As if that would somehow make us safer from violent criminals and homicidal maniacs? Are they insane?” he said, referring to the idea of a federal registry of gun owners. 
Mr. LaPierre, who received a series of standing ovations, speculated that any federal database could be hacked by the Chinese or given to other foreign entities. He said the Mexican government had already requested such a list, and warned newspapers would print the names and addresses of gun owners “for gangs and criminals to access,” adding that’s already occurred. 
“In the end there are only two reasons for the government to create that federal registry of gun owners,” he said. “To tax them or to take them.”

Of course, it's all fearmongering.  No one in the government has actually suggested the creation of a gun registry.  In fact, as pointed out in a recent Media Matters posting, the Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986 makes it illegal for the government to do so, and all records in the background check system are destroyed within 24 hours.  He knows this, but prefers to lie about it in order to continue stoking the paranoid fears of his loyal followers in his little "circus of fears."  The NRA is no stranger to making up wild conspiracy theories.

And that false talking point about registration of guns has been used over and over again as justification for fighting any number of gun regulations, at all levels of government.

BUT HERE'S THE FABULOUSLY HYPOCRITICAL PART OF IT: It's not the government that has a secret list of millions of gun owners, but the NRA itself!

That's right: it was revealed this week by Buzzfeed that the NRA keeps a secret database of tens of millions of gun owners, without the gun owners' consent.

And how did they create such a list?  By mining data from government hunter records, pulling information from attendees of gun safety classes, gun shows, magazine subscriptions, and other sources, as well as counting its regular members who pay dues.  They feel no shame in paying to get names and personal information of gun permit holders from state departments of public safety.

From the Buzzfeed article:
That database has been built through years of acquiring gun permit registration lists from state and county offices, gathering names of new owners from the thousands of gun safety classes taught by NRA-certified instructors and by buying lists of attendees of gun shows, subscribers to gun magazines, and more, BuzzFeed has learned 
.... 
NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam declined to discuss the group’s name-gathering methods or what it does with its vast pool of data about millions of non-member gun owners. Asked what becomes of the class rosters for safety classes when instructors turn them in, he replied, “That’s not any of your business.” 
.... 
The NRA won’t say how many names and what other personal information is in its database, but former NRA lobbyist Richard Feldman estimates they keep tabs on “tens of millions of people.” 
.... 
“We’ve been doing this since the old days,” Feldman said. “You could obtain from most states the listings of hunter licenses from the Department of Wildlife and Conservations. It was sort of amazing what we knew about people from that. There were early doe permit holders, black powder holders, so many different seasons. It was a lot of data.” 
Complementing this practice is the mining of data on the thousands who take gun safety classes from NRA-certified instructors. Arulanandam said there are 97,000 of them, a figure that impressed Quinn as a larger “army of organizers” than Obama had. 
In some states, those ranks are propelled by laws that specify that taking classes from NRA-certified instructors in order to obtain permits or licenses.

Naturally, the NRA isn't collecting this information on people for "safe keeping" or anything.  Follow the money.  They use this information to target gun owners for lobbying efforts and to push their own extremist lies and conspiracy theories -- such as government registration of gun owners.

And, I might add, there is nothing to keep the NRA from sharing or selling its secret database with whomever they choose, without consent from the people listed there.


Once again, it's not the government that gun owners need to fear, but rather the very lobby that purports to represent them.
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

Wacko Pro-Gun Conspiracy Theories About The Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre

UPDATE: There is now an entire blog devoted to wacko pro-gun conspiracy theories, called, aptly enough, "Pro-Gun Conspiracy Theories!" : progunconspiracytheories.blogspot.com


I’ve commented before about the wacko conspiracy theories hatched by pro-gun extremists, who, in their fevered gun-fetish minds, want to blame anything and anyone other than lax gun laws for the daily carnage of gun violence visited upon America.  HERE is a list of some of those conspiracy theories.

For instance, they felt that the Aurora theater shooting was somehow staged by the government.

Well, here they go again!  This time, a variety of conspiracy theories are revolving around the horrifying Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre of 20 children and 7 adults by lone gunman Adam Lanza, in Newtown, Connecticut.

One conspiracy theory suggests that President Obama is somehow behind the shooting, and that it was done to disarm Americans and put in place a totalitarian government.  Naturally, the pro-conspiracy theory website, InfoWars.com, is pushing this one.  According to the host, Alex Jones:

This man does not care about children he cares about disarming the American people to bring in a totalitarian government.
His “proof” is the suggestion that Obama has ordered drone attacks that have cost the lives of some children in other countries.  See the rambling video HERE.

A second conspiracy theory is that there were actually multiple shooters at the school.  The really gross part of this conspiracy theory is that those who suggest it are also saying that the police, media, and even the grieving parents are somehow complicit in the plot, covering up evidence of the other shooters and even faking their grief for the cameras, either purposely or as the result of brainwashing.  Says Alex Jones from InfoWars.com about Robbie Parker, the grieving father of a slain 6-year old:

It appears that members of the media or government have given him a card and are telling him what to say as they steer reaction to this event, so this needs to be looked into.

And in another article, Jones says of the father:

You can watch Parker huffing and puffing and pushing himself into what he thinks is a tragic and grief-stricken state of mind. He does it so badly you wonder why no one in the room calls him on it. It’s beyond strange. Yet reporters later talked about Parker “struggling through tears and suffering to make a heartfelt statement…” The reporters are just as deranged as Parker is.

So who were these supposed other shooters working for?  According to a third conspiracy theory, the shooters were actually a “death squad” from Israel!  According to one anti-Semitic commentator, Mike Harris (editor of Veterans Today, former Republican candidate for governor of Arizona, and GOP campaign finance chairman), Israel had a death squad kill those children because of America’s pro-Palestinian stance, or something.  He suggested these “death squads” were also responsible for the Gabby Giffords’ shooting in Tucson, the Aurora movie theater shooting, and the Norway mass shooting.  He goes on to blame “Jewish Senators” for wanting to take away guns from Americans, too, just for good measure. Here's a quote:
Racist commentator Mike Harris blames the Newtown shooting
on "death squads" from Israel

This is exactly what Israel did in Norway; the political party that voted sanctions against Israel was retaliated against by a “lone gunman” who killed 77 children. This is what Israel always does, they go after the children. It is what they do in Gaza every day. It is what was done in Norway. It is what happened at Sandy Hook. Nobody buys the “lone gunman” story anymore, not with the Gabby Giffords’ shooting, not with the Aurora “Batman” shooting, certainly not with Breveik, and certainly not in Connecticut.

He also suggests that the shooter, Adam Lanza, was really a “patsy” for the shooting.
A fourth conspiracy theory suggests that there is a connection between the Aurora theater massacre, the Newtown school massacre, and even the naming of Hurricane Sandy, because of a couple very brief scenes in the “Batman: The Dark Knight Rises” movie. 

The brief mention of "Sandy Hook" on a map
in "Batman: The Dark Knight Rises"
These brief scenes include the words “Sandy Hook” on a map of Gotham City used in the movie, and the statement “Drop me off in Old Town” (which supposedly conversely refers to Newtown).  These momentary mentions are supposedly used to “brainwash” the viewers into committing the Sandy Hook massacre.  And who is behind this “brainwashing”?  Why, the “Illuminati”, of course (anytime you see the word Illuminati, it’s safe to say that the user is a wacko conspiracy theorist).  Said one conspiracy theorist: 

I was denying to myself that this shooting was staged by the deep state and the Illuminati just like the last one in the movie theatre in Colorado. But not anymore. It’s impossible to deny now. These are huge red flags. The filmmakers of The Dark Knight Rises must answer why they dropped these hints in their film. Is this a sick game their playing with the public? Are they dropping hints to themselves?

A fifth conspiracy theory suggests that no assault weapon was actually used, only handguns, and that the assertion by "liberal media" that a Bushmaster assault rifle was used is just an attempt to demonize assault weapons for the sake of banning them.

 The problem arose from early, erroneous reports, minutes after the shooting hit the media, that the shooter had handguns and that the assault rifle was found in the car, instead of with the body of the shooter. This error was corrected within a day, but it nonetheless persists among conspiracy theorist, in part because of continued errors by media (such as an MSNBC report, which was also later corrected).

 The medical examiner and the CT State Police have repeatedly said that all 26 victims died from repeated, close shots from the Bushmaster assault rifle, and that the only person shot with a handgun was the shooter, when he committed suicide.  Here is a report of which guns were found and where.


A sixth conspiracy theory, which goes along with the second one and the supposed "faking of tears" by grieving parents, suggests that at least one young victim, 6-year old Emilie Parker, wasn't actually killed in the attack and was seen sitting on the President's lap during a televised visit with her surviving family a couple days after the shooting.  This also suggests that the entire shooting was made up, by the President of course, to further an anti-gun agenda.  The supposed "evidence" is that a dress that Emilie has previously been seen to wear was also seen on the girl in that video, who also looks like Emilie.

An article points out what is obvious to most people, but missed by the conspiracy theorists:
The crux of the theory is a photograph of Parker’s sister sitting on President Obama’s lap when he visited with the victims’ families. The girl is wearing the same dress Emilie wore in a pre-shooting photograph of the family shared with media, so she must be Emilie, alive and well. “BAM! I cannot believe how idiot these people are [sic]… That’s her,” one YouTuber exclaims as he watches the two images superimposed on each other. (Apparently missed by these crack investigators is the possibility that the sister wore Emilie’s dress and that they look alike because they are sisters, after all.)
And if the President and media were trying to make Emilie seem dead, why, then, would they nationally televise her sitting on the President's lap a couple days later?


A seventh conspiracy theory, from the ever-extreme "Truth About Guns" blog, suggests that the shooter committed his acts as a means to "bring gun control to the fore, so as to punish his gun-loving mother" after he had killed her:

Is it possible that Lanza reckoned that killing little children en masse would be the final act that would bring gun-control to the fore — so as to punish his gun-loving mother?  Obviously, other acts of violence (while similarly awful) had not created the groundswell of anti-gun rhetoric that has come about as a result of this event.  If true, anti-gunners are playing right into the hands of a madman — though I doubt they’d care.

 The author, "Rick F.", offers no evidence whatsoever, other than pure conjecture.  Even some of the traditionally pro-gun commenters on the page disagreed, for example:
I believe the writer’s lack of knowledge about psychology and total absurdity of his argument is providing exactly the image of what gun grabbers want to reproduce about us.

 But a few agreed.  Said one of them:
I had said that if someone really wanted to create enough backlash to ban guns and it meant enough to them that they would martyr themselves, they would need to shoot up an elementary school or a day care. I would really hate to think that I was right, but we see where it’s going.
Another took it even further, building on conspiracy theory number 1, that Lanza was somehow programmed to kill, by our government:
I’ve been saying for a while that due to the speed with which the Left and the Antis jumped on the gun control bandwagon after Sandy Hook that Adam Lanza was a tool of those self-same groups, set up to ignite the gun control debate. Who knows, the conspiracy could even extend all the way to the highest levels of our government.

 Another commenter took it further still, suggesting that those who advocate for gun regulation wouldn't have stopped the shooter even if they'd had a chance:
Hell, if gun grabbers knew what he was going to do beforehand they wouldn’t stop him. They would condone his actions. We are dealing with some disgusting people, do not put it past them to celebrate the death of anyone even children if it means furthering their agenda. Just look at how they praised Dorner.

Naturally, all of America is horrified at the deaths of 20 innocent children and 7 adults in Newtown.  The issue of gun violence weighs heavy on our souls.  Unfortunately, a few of these conspiracy theory nuts have trouble believing it can be as simple as guns getting into the wrong hands.  It happens all the time in America, and we don’t need “death squads,” obscure movie references, or government conspiracies to explain the obvious problem.

UPDATE (1/4/13):  James Fetzer is one of those who is pushing the conspiracy theory of "Israeli death squads" performing the killing at Sandy Hook Elementary.  He's also a long-time conspiracy theorist regarding the Kennedy assassination, 9/11, and other tragedies.  Here's a good article pointing out his extremism and distancing him from the University of Minnesota at Duluth, which he claims to represent with his conspiracy theories.

 UPDATE (1/15/13):  According to one article, which debunked some of the wacko conspiracy theories, the theory of multiple shooters likely stems from early mistaken ID of the shooter, the initial handcuffing and questioning of an innocent bystander, and a father of one of the 6-year old students who tried to enter the scene after the shooting to find his daughter.

 ADDENDUM (1/15/13):  Dave Leigh wrote a pretty good post at his blog, Ruminations, about the falacious arguments and conspiratorial "judo" of the pro-gun extremists, and how to counter them.

 ADDENDUM (2/5/13):  Snopes.com reviews some of these conspiracy theories, and gives them a rating of FALSE.

UPDATE (2/5/13):  Conspiracy theories five and six were added.

UPDATE (2/21/13):  Conspiracy theory seven was added.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

Monday, November 5, 2012

The Pro-Gun Extremist's Opinion On "Law Enforcement" (Part II)


In my last post, I illustrated an example of the disdain of pro-gun extremists for law enforcement with a recent article about how a group of gun-totin' yahoos in southern Oregon voted against measures to help fund their Sheriff's department and jail, then, citing a subsequent decrease in Sheriff's patrols due to cutbacks and a resultant increase in property crimes, decided to form their own posse to patrol their county themselves -- armed, of course, with none of the special legal, conflict, or investigative training that police receive.

Two more stories below....

Recently, in San Antonio, Texas, a clothing store owner, Debra Trejo, kept having her store broken into over the course of several years.  Instead of installing cameras, or keeping a dog there, or hardening her store with bars and better locks, she decided to do something decidedly more violent.  She decided to advertise a $10,000 reward for any law enforcement person to shoot to kill anyone breaking into her store.  Looks like a classy establishment, what with the trash in the lawn in front of the crumbling garage door / storefront.

From an article (the source of the image posted here):

Now Trejo is using a different tactic to deter crooks: A sign on the business offers a $10,000 reward to any law enforcement officer who shoots - and kills - burglars caught breaking into the store. 
There haven't been any break-ins since. 
I'm glad there haven't been any further break-ins, but this is the wrong way to go about it.  Now, knowing the potential for being shot, the robbers will bring guns of their own, and may expect to use it. 

First, I'm pretty sure it would be illegal for police to shoot someone to death simply because they are breaking into a store; they have to threaten the officer first.  Second, it would also be illegal for that policeman to accept money for doing the killing.  Sorry, Ms. Trejo, but you can't just offer to have police be your hired hitmen.

(by the way, go to the article to see some interesting comments from the pro-gunners, wishing the store owner would extend the shoot-to-kill reward to non-law enforcement people, and other extreme comments, including one directed at me, personally, wishing that I had died in the shooting I was in, and another accusing me of being a thief).


In other news, in a similarly gun-friendly state, Florida (the gunshine state), a Constitution Party candidate is running for Sheriff of Marion County.  A favorite of the Tea Party there, Bernie DeCastro debated with Republican Sheriff Chris Blair at a Tea Party-sponsored debate.  After Blair had said he would collect guns that had been strewn in the streets after a Hurricane Katrina-like disaster, DeCastro went on the offensive and accused Blair of wanting to confiscate everyone's guns (a common pro-gun paranoid fantasy):

While both men insisted they are ardent supporters of the 2nd Amendment, Constitution Party candidate Bernie DeCastro went on the attack to cast doubt about Republican Chris Blair's support for absolute gun rights. 
DeCastro said that during a recent interview the two men did with an Orlando news network they both talked about how they would have handled the crisis in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. Blair, DeCastro said, stated that he would have confiscated guns in the lawlessness that ensued following the storm. 
Blair denied the charge, saying that DeCastro had taken his words out of context. He accused his opponent of using sound bites to misrepresent his position. Blair said he only would have collected guns that had been strewn in the street by the storm and returned them to their "rightful owners," but that he would not have taken guns from any law-abiding citizens. 
DeCastro, meanwhile, left no doubt where he stands on gun rights. 
"If (Florida) Governor Scott said a major hurricane is coming and I want you to go collect all the guns, I am not going to do it," he said. "Once we lose our guns, you know what time it is, folks. It's all over."

Blair apparently WANTS unclaimed guns lose in the streets after a disaster, in the hands of whomever should happen to find them.

This is particularly interesting, given the background of these two candidates.  According to that article, Blair is "a 35-year lawman with the Marion County Sheriff's Office" who has a plan to "reduce the Sheriff's Office's "top-heavy" administration and put more deputies on the road."  Experience is good, and it sounds to me like a level-headed approach.
Blair spoke about traditional policing methods. He said he wanted to lower the county's violent crime rate, which he said is 15th worst in the state. And he preached about using data and analysis and street crimes units to target high-crime areas. 
DeCastro, on the other hand, has no experience in law enforcement ... at least, not from the good side.  You see, DeCastro is a convicted felon!  From the article:
Once sentenced to life in prison for armed robbery, he was pardoned by the governor in the 1990s and began running a re-entry center to help prison inmates ease back into society after their release. Besides sheriff, he has made unsuccessful bids for governor, the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate.

Yes, you read this correctly.  This convicted felon and pro-gun extremist wishes to lead the Sheriff's Department.
During the campaign, and again Monday, DeCastro dwelled on the need for citizens to arm and protect themselves rather than relying on law enforcement. He also railed against the United Nations, the federal government and drones that could be used to spy on American citizens.

But gun rights dominated DeCastro's comments.

You don't say.  Sounds like he buys into the pro-gun conspiracy theory about the U.N. wanting to take away guns, too.  He continued:
"I believe in the 2nd Amendment," he said, "If any of you want to get armed, I will host a class. We'll all get armed, if that's what you want."

I don't feel comfortable with this extremist being in charge of anyone, much less law enforcement, nor do I feel comfortable with the idea of him owning a gun or giving gun classes.

Rehabilitating ex-cons to better fit into society is a noble goal which has been shown to reduce recidivism.  I support a program here in Eugene, called Sponsors, which does exactly that.  But what I don't support is allowing ex-cons, particularly those with a violent past, to lead our law enforcement agencies or serve in political positions.  Sorry, but there are plenty of excellent people without criminal pasts who fit the bill, like Blair.  I can't imagine Blair could lose with such an extremist opponent.  But in Florida, who knows?
UPDATE (11/7/12):  Chris Blair won the race for Marion County Sheriff against convicted felon Bernie DeCastro, by a very healthy margin (73 percent to 27 percent).  However, an anonymous complaint about an election law has been filed which will delay the final victory until an investigation is completed.  DeCastro claims not to be involved in that complaint.  More later.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)