Man tells son to lie about shooting sister, a tally of mass shootings since Newtown, and a letter from Starbucks saying Espresso's and guns don't mix.

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

A Wisconsin man is facing charges for allegedly telling his 6-year-old son, who had at least 3 years of firearms training, to lie after shooting his 4-year-old sister in the face with a shotgun. 

In late August, WKBT reported that Jackson County Sheriff’s deputies were called to a home in the Town of Alma, where the 4-year-old girl had been struck in the side of the head with a shotgun blast. 

According to the Jackson Country Chronicle, authorities in Jackson said this week that 48-year-old father Fred B. Maphis had told his son to say that the shotgun had accidentally gone off when he dropped it. But the son later admitted that the father instructed him to lie because he had pointed the gun at the girl and pulled the trigger. 

The boy told authorities that his sister had asked him to aim the shotgun at her, but he had made the mistake of putting it too close to her ear.

 A sheriff’s office complaint said that the mother told investigators that the boy had been training with firearms since the age of 3. She said that he had his own .22 caliber rifle, but he was only allowed to shoot with adult supervision. The father insisted that he had just forgotten to unload and secure the shotgun.

You know I am certainly not an expert in gun safety but you would kind if think that lesson one might be, "Don't ever point on at your sister." I'm just saying. 

And the father encouraging his son to lie indicates that he probably should not be allowed to have children, much less guns.

In other gun violence related news HuffPo has put up a graphic concerning mass shootings that should chill the blood of EVERY American.

Largest gun study ever finds that more guns in the community equals more murder. They needed a study for this?

Courtesy of Think Progress: 

The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic. 

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time. 

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent. 

To put this in perspective, take the state of Mississippi. “All other factors being equal,” the authors write, “our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.” Since 475 people were murdered with a gun in Mississippi in 2010, that drop in gun ownership would translate to 80 lives saved in that year alone.

This of course goes hand in hand with previous studies which proved that a gun in the home was FAR more likely to end the life of a family member rather than protect life or property in the event of a  home invasion.

I want to take a moment to clear something up about my own personal opinion on guns.

I actually DON'T think that nobody should have a gun. I live in Alaska where, for many people in rural areas especially, guns are a necessary part of life.

My complaint is that guns have been romanticized and mythologized to the point that everybody in the country feels they should own one or more and that by NOT doing so they are somehow not true Americans, or are spitting on the memory of our Founding Fathers.

Anybody who wants to subject themselves to a rigorous background check, take comprehensive guns safety courses, and limit their number of weapons to a reasonable amount, has my blessing. However since we know that the vast majority of gun owners have not met the above criteria, I will continue to express my concern, and fear, that our love affair with guns will continue to unnecessarily cost American lives, and attack the NRA for selling our fellow citizens a potentially fatal bill of goods.

Father arrested and charged with five counts of second-degree child endangerment after his 4 year old kills his six year old neighbor with a unsecured gun.

Courtesy of Slate:  

In April, a 4-year-old New Jersey boy accidentally shot and killed his 6-year-old neighbor with his father’s .22-caliber rifle. On Monday, the boy’s father, Anthony Senatore, was arrested and charged with five counts of second-degree child endangerment (for storing five unsecured firearms in places where they were accessible to his children), and one count of third-degree child endangerment (for storing one of those firearms in a place where it endangered the welfare of the 6-year-old who was killed). Each second-degree count could potentially bring 5 to 10 years in prison, which means that if Senatore is convicted, he could theoretically face up to 50 years in prison. (He won’t, of course, get 50 years in prison, but, if he is convicted, he will likely face some jail time—if you are convicted of a second-degree offense in New Jersey, it is presumed that you will face a prison term.)

This is the kind of gun laws that we need to enforce all over the country.

And in my opinion NOT just for parents who allow their guns to fall into the hands of children, but also gun owners who do not sufficiently lock their guns away in their homes to keep them out of the reach of burglars who may steal them and use them in crimes or sell them on the streets to other criminals.

In my opinion the purchasing of each and every gun by an American citizen should bring with it a whole slew of responsibilities, and potential problems, that would make the purchaser think long and hard about whether they needed that gun at all, and just how many guns they were willing to take responsibility for.

I can guarantee that if the laws surrounding gun ownership were tightened up we would RARELY see people with arsenals of weapons in their homes anymore.

Sadly it looks like America's love affair with guns is unlikely to end anytime soon.

Courtesy of Science Daily:  

Despite growing up in a post-Columbine world, more young people plan on owning a gun than had them in their childhood homes, according to a national poll of more than 4,000 high school and college students conducted by Jennifer L. Lawless (American University) and Richard L. Fox (Loyola Marymount University). 

This finding suggests a possible reversal of a trend that pointed to decreasing gun ownership. More specifically, one-third of young people report growing up with a gun in the household. And 36 percent report being "very worried" about gun violence. Yet nearly 40 percent of respondents plan to own a gun when they have their own household, and an additional 20 percent are considering it.

You know they could pass a law tomorrow making it illegal to create any new movies or video games that glorify gun violence and it would not make a bit of difference going forward. The damage has already been done.

And the fact is that neither one of those two things is EVER going to happen.

And the reason why is because the all volunteer American military depends on these games and movies to indoctrinate our children into becoming a military fetishist, who spends hours a week fantasizing about being in combat and firing incredibly destructive weapons at enemy targets.

Don't believe me?

Well I have already shown you in an earlier post how the military has helped game designers make sure that the weapons in the games are accurate, where they serve as playable advertisements for later purchase when the child becomes an adult. (Or earlier, let's face it many of these kids today are substantially smarter than your average gun dealer.) In fact the military actually has their own video game, which they make available for free on a number of platforms. A game that will periodically ask the player if they are interested in enlisting, and even provide links to websites providing information on how to do so.

As for the movies? Well there is a very long standing agreement between the Pentagon and Hollywood that if you scratch my back, I will provide weaponry and military personnel to cover yours.

Courtesy of TV Tropes:

If you're American producer and you want to get some impressive combat scenes in your movie, you can call the Department of Defense (DoD) and ask for some of their fancy equipment. Plus any soldiers who happen to be free. As the examples show, Uncle Sam can be very generous to filmmakers and help you avert tropes like Artistic License - Military, Improperly Placed Firearms, and Just Plane Wrong. 

One reason for this is, if the film is positive about the military, it is good public relations, and thus the movie supports the mission. If the movie is really good — both a positive portrayal of the military and a box-office success — it may even be a boon for military recruiting. Indeed, the Navy stated that after the release of Top Gun, the number of young men enlisting with a desire to be Naval aviators went up by 500 percent. 

There's a catch — a Department of Defense project officer will keep an eagle eye on the script and production phases. If they don't like the portrayal of the military in your film, they will yank the co-operation.

So just put the idea of movies becoming less violent, or games using fewer assault weapons right out of your pretty little head. It's NOT going to happen. Essentially because despite all of the current rhetoric to the contrary the Right Wing, the government, and the military will never let it happen.

I actually DO think that some restrictions can be implemented, but first we have to stop allowing ourselves to be distracted by red herrings and obfuscation.

Guns DO kill people. And guns that have extended clips, and are sold by individuals who don't demand background checks,  kill a whole LOT of people.

We may not be able to stop all gun violence, but we can at least reduce the number of casualties. And for right now at least, I will take it.

MAD magazine reveals the unabridged NRA statement from last Tuesday. Update: NRA President's speech today!

If image does not enlarge click here

You know the sad part is that this, though written by a humor magazine, is probably not at all far from the truth. In fact I would say that it is most likely spot on.

Later today, in just a half an hour or so in fact, the NRA is going to release a NEW statement. Get ready for the obfuscation and redirection, because you KNOW it's coming.

By the way you may be interested to learn that gun deaths are just about to surpass traffic deaths by the year 2015:

A disturbing new study by Bloomberg finds that by 2015, the number of people killed by guns in the US will likely surpass the number of people killed in traffic accidents. It would be a first. Vehicle deaths are on the decline (down 22% between 2005 and 2010), but gun deaths have been increasing since hitting a low in 2000. By 2015, shooting fatalities are expected to be at nearly 33,000, while traffic fatalities will be around 32,000. 

In 10 states, gun deaths were already outpacing traffic deaths in 2009, Slate reports. Those states range from Michigan, which had a high of 1,095 gun deaths compared to 977 motor vehicle deaths, to Alaska, which had a low of 104 gun deaths compared to 84 motor vehicle deaths. 

Do you want to guess at how many of those deaths by way of a bullet were considered a legitimate use of force to protect property or life? I think we all know the answer to that.

Update:  Wayne LaPierre just said that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to have a good guy with a gun.  He just literally demanded that the President allow his organization to put trained gunmen into our public schools to protect our children, this is beyond insane!

Update 2: Here is the transcript from Wayne LaPierre's speech, he is the President of the NRA. You are going to have to read it to believe it.

Here is one disgusting portion:

We care about our president, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents. Members of Congress work in offices surrounded by Capitol Police officers. Yet, when it comes to our most beloved, innocent, and vulnerable members of the American family, our children, we as a society leave them every day utterly defenseless, and the monsters and the predators of the world know it, and exploit it.

By the way if you want to see one of those monsters that LaPierre is talking about here is a picture of one. ANYBODY who uses a tragedy like this to insist on more lax gun laws around our public schools and demands that gunmen be allowed to walk around among our children as a deterrent to the crimes made possible by HIS lobbyists constant watering down of our gun laws, is the very definition of a monster.

Update 3: Do you remember that post I wrote on December 8th, about the fact that the NRA loves mass shootings because they frighten people into buying more guns?

Remember how some people thought that was an exaggeration?

Check out this portion of La Pierre's unbelievable speech this morning: 

Right now today every school in the United States should plan meetings with parents, school administrators, teachers, local authorities and draw upon every resource that’s out there and available to erect a cordon of protection around our kids right now. 

Every school is gonna have a different solution based on its own unique situation. Every school in America needs to immediately identify, dedicate and deploy the resources necessary to put these security forces in place, though, right now. 

And the National Rifle Association, as America’s preeminent trainer of law enforcement and security personnel for the past 50 years -- we have 11,000 police training instructors in the NRA -- is ready, willing and uniquely qualified to help.

Still think it was an exaggeration? 

Governor Sean Parnell supports "stand your ground" law in Alaska. Apparently there are not enough gun fatalities in the state for him.

"look I am a tiny, pasty face, loser, living in the shadow of Sarah Palin. Of course I need to encourage the passing of dangerous gun laws to feel masculine."

Courtesy of the Fairbanks NewsMiner:

 Gov. Sean Parnell supports a proposal that would expand Alaskans' right to use deadly force as a means of self-defense -despite concerns raised in the past by members of his administration. 

Current law describes a right to use deadly force in self-defense only when a person is at home or work. Rep. Mark Neuman, R-Big Lake, the sponsor of HB80, would extend the right to any place a person is legally allowed. 

Supporters claim there is a "duty to retreat" imposed by current law that puts people's lives at risk and could send them to prison for defending themselves. 

Opponents say the bill is a response to a problem that does not exist, as no Alaska prosecutor has gone after someone under those circumstances, and the effect would actually be giving violent criminals a self-defense claim to avoid prosecution.

Interestingly enough Parnell's own  ex-Attorney General spoke out vehemently against the bill back in 2010, when it was first introduced.

Former Attorney General Dan Sullivan wrote a scathing review of a 2010 bill that is nearly identical to HB80. 

"This bill would encourage the needless taking of human life," Sullivan wrote in a March 15, 2010, letter to then-House Judiciary Chairman Jay Ramras. "In the (Dimond Center), Sears Mall, McDonald's or any other public location, a person is no longer required to walk away from a confrontation, but instead may kill another citizen even if they could have walked away with complete safety." 

Assistant Attorney General Annie Carpeneti also spoke against the 2010 bill. 

"We're confused and concerned about this bill," she said in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on the 2010 bill. She also said the state already has strong self-defense laws and the bill would only encourage violence. 

The proposal died that year. Neuman introduced a slightly retooled bill in 2011. 

Already Alaska has some of the most lax gun laws in the country, and we certainly do NOT need to be encouraging assholes to pick fights so that they can overcompensate for their shortcoming by shooting people in the streets.

It also should be no small consideration is that Alaska currently leads the nation in gun deaths per capita.

The state of Alaska leads the nation in per capita gun deaths, a new analysis by the Violence Policy Center shows. 

The study released Monday indicates Alaska has a household gun ownership rate of about 60 percent and a gun death rate of about 20.64 per 100,000 people, nearly double the national rate.

Did you see that statistic?  60 percent of Alaskans have guns in their possession.

Currently they are encouraged to walk away from trouble. But if this law passes they will have every right to pull out their weapon and end the life of a fellow human being.

In the aftermath of what we have seen with the Trayvon Martin case, how can ANYBODY be this ignorant of the potential outcome if this law was to pass?

We call Parnell, Captain Zero.  We have usually used that nickname in response to his lack of personality.  After this we will use it to indicate his lack of intelligence, his lack of compassion, and the obvious lack of balls that he needs to stand up to the NRA.

San Parnell is a coward, and like ALL cowards he wants to hide behind a gun, or in this case a gun lobby, to make himself feel more like a man.

Nothing says "Christmas" like children posing with Santa Claus while clutching an AK-47. Please tell me this is just a sick joke.

Family Pictures Taken With Santa, Machine Guns: MyFoxPHOENIX.com

Courtesy of My Fox Phoenix:

The Scottsdale Gun Club is inviting people to enjoy Santa and Machine Guns. 

The family event allows people to take a holiday card picture with St. Nick -- and a high-powered fire arm. 

Santa poses against a backdrop of an $80,000 Garwood minigun. 

Families can choose to pose with other firearms, ranging from pistols to modified AR15s. 

They also get a chance to test out the machine guns. 

“I thinks it’s going to be all in fun from those who support the second amendment and those who don’t. Whether you’re a gun advocate or not, you should have a lot of fun with it,” said gun club member Richard Jones.

This has NOTHING to do with the second amendment,  and everything to do with promoting violence to our children.These are not hunting rifles, or BB guns, these are the weapons of war. Why would ANYBODY think they belonged in the tiny hand of a child?

According to the CDC over a thousand children between the ages of 0 to 17 years of age were unintentionally killed by guns in this country between 2000 and 2008. And that number will only increase as children are taught that guns are toys, something to be looked for under the Christmas tree, instead of instruments of death.

Our entire society is obsessed with violent video games, violent movies, and waging war on other countries for the flimsiest of excuses.  I would hope that at least Christmas, the holiday of peace and love, would be a sanctuary from this particular fetish.

Clearly that hope is misplaced.

I ask once again, what is wrong with people these days?