New Terrorist Threat: Active Driver

Send to Kindle

Fact: The kinetic energy for a 55-grain projectile traveling at around 3,000 fps is 1098.9 foot-pounds of force.

Fact: The kinetic energy for a 4,000-pound car traveling at around 20 mph is 53,475.0 foot-pounds of force.

The takeaway? Both objects are deadly. The question, however, is why we are so concerned with the former when the latter presents an equal, if not greater, threat (at least from a physics standpoint)?

Let’s take a look at a real world example. Just this past week a woman repeatedly rammed her car into a cluster of people on the Las Vegas Strip Sunday night, killing one person and injuring 37, six of whom were critically injured.

In case you're curious, here are example muzzle energy levels of different types of firearms.  (Photo: Wiki)

In case you’re curious, here are example muzzle energy levels of different types of firearms. (Photo: Wiki)

It’s not clear on why the woman, identified as 24-year-old Lakeisha Holloway, opted to mow down innocent bystanders. But police maintain that it’s not an act of terrorism.

“This was not an act of terrorism,” said Brett Zimmerman, a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department deputy chief. “We are treating this as an intentional act.”

Sorta puzzling, isn’t it? Holloway intentionally runs over people — killing one, maiming others — but it’s not terrorism? Okay, maybe it doesn’t fit within the strict domestic terrorism parameters, but let’s not kid ourselves, it was attempted mass murder! What we had on our hands was an active driver situation!

Yes, part of what I’m saying with the “active driver” is meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek (an obvious play on “active shooter), but part of me is also serious because Holloway’s 1996 Oldsmobile sedan was indeed a deadly weapon as it was barreling down the crowded sidewalks of Sin City.

“The car rolled right in front of me. By the time I looked over to the right, all you could see was (her) driving away, and people were bouncing off the front of the car,” witness Antonio Nassar told CNN affiliate KLAS.

“She rode the sidewalk, she came to a stop at the Paris intersection, people are punching into the window. … She accelerated again and just kept mowing people down.”

Police charged Holloway with murder with a deadly weapon, leaving the scene of an accident and child abuse or neglect — oh yes, she had her 3-year-old daughter in the back seat as she was crushing people under her car. Pleasant thought, huh?

Following the incident, Gov. Brian Sandoval released a statement hinting at a desire to increase public safety.

The perpetrator of the attack.

The perpetrator of the attack, 24-year-old Lakeisha Holloway. (Photo: AP)

“The state stands ready to help and will provide any assistance needed to ensure the safety of our visitors and residents,” Sandoval said. “Kathleen and I extend our deepest sympathies to all who are affected by this shocking and tragic event. Additionally, I would like to thank the first responders and the medical professionals who are caring for the victims this evening.”

However, what can possibly be done to stop an active driver situation? Are we going to ban all automobiles? Are we going to require universal background checks before one is allowed to possess or drive or rent a car? Even if we did, would that keep bad people from using automobiles to take the lives of innocents?

Let it be known that this is not the first time this has happened on the Las Vegas Strip. In Sept. of 2005, 27-year-old Stephen Ressa intentionally drove his car into a group of people in from of Bally’s Casino. Ressa killed three people and injured 11. For that vicious act, Ressa was sentenced to hundreds of years in prison.

Ultimately, what these incidents illustrate is the great flaw within the anti-gun doctrine. Despite what the gun-grabbers argue, banning firearms (or cars or other tools) will not make the public any safer because it doesn’t address the fundamental cause of violence: the will to kill. Bad people want to do bad things and there are any number of ways for them to carry out their craven schemes in a free society. Firearms are one way, cars are yet another, makeshift bombs yet another. And if one doesn’t think that mass murderers and terrorists are aware of the multiple ways in which they can use common tools and household items to take innocent lives, they ought to examine this excerpt from Norway spree killer Anders Behring Breivik’s 1,500-page manifesto, “2083: A European Declaration of Independence.

IF they take away our AN-fertilizer, we will use AN from Ice packs! If they take away our ice packs; we will hi-jack propane trucks and use them as secondary explosive charges! If they take away our propane trucks; we will fight them with conventional weapons! If they ban the sale of weapons; we will smuggle in AK-47s from the Balkans and the Middle East!

They cannot prevent us, the European conservatives from eventually seizing political and military power. We will succeed even if we have to create our very own improvised guns.

You’ll recall that Anders killed 77 and injured 319 in shooting and bombing attacks in Oslo and Utøya, Norway, in 2011. The island of Utøya was a gun-free zone. It wasn’t until the police finally arrived on the scene, and he was confronted with armed resistance, that Anders surrendered.

If that’s not a wake-up call I don’t know what is. As it’s been said time and time again, gun control is good for one thing and one thing only: disarming the law-abiding. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. If we continue down a path that accepts gun control as a solution to violence we will only become less free and more imperiled.  I don’t know how to say it any clearer than that.

{ 62 comments… add one }
  • ejharb January 7, 2016, 11:53 pm

    Stating the obvious but if some prep was coming at you with a pistol or ar15 you stand a chance with your 9 or 45 if the perp is in a crown vic you might not fare as well

  • W. Boswell December 31, 2015, 11:51 am

    WE, as gun owners have a great weight on our shoulders to bare. During WWII, Japan was trying to figure out a way to INVADE the U.S. with as few casualties as possible. They used balloons that were timed to drop their payload. Well, THE
    REAL REASON THEY DID NOT, BECAUSE THE CITIZENS WERE ARMED TO THE TEETH.
    Now we as owners have to defend our rights against the Democrats in OUR OWN Government to retain the those rights.
    I leave you with one thing to think about….Democrats or Communists, HMMMM, what’s the difference????

  • Ed December 31, 2015, 2:18 am

    When I was 7 years old . I knew who to buy illegal fireworks from , in my neighborhood . Every year he would smuggle hundreds of pounds to sell on the street. I’m smarter and have more money. Every time the US has outlawed a product the black market fills the need. We as armed citizens do not stand a chance against our own armed forces when that day comes, but the status of ownership gives us the belief we are greater as a nation than any other people have ever felt.

    ” the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” – Abraham Lincoln

    • ejharb January 7, 2016, 11:56 pm

      So armed citizens stand no chance against a army? 3 mighty army’s tried to tame Afghanistan,,,,,,tried

  • joe K December 29, 2015, 4:51 pm

    maybe not terrorism how about racism.

  • Vernon Rosa December 28, 2015, 7:54 am

    One person with a gun (rather than beating on her window with his hands to get her to stop) could have saved many people that day. I’m just sayin’.

  • Chris December 27, 2015, 12:05 pm

    Two years ago during firearmageddon i proposed nearly this exact scenario to the indoctrinated left. Their reply was that guns were deadlier and needed to be banned. The evidence is all around us that this isnt the case and that many many things are just as deadly if not more so than guns. So where does that leave us? It means that the government wants power over us and they WILL use any and every excuse to gain that power. The anti-gun crowd are the indoctrinated foot soldiers of that government, they have been brainwashed into believing lies. If they really wanted to stop gun violence they could start by cleaning up their own inner cities. But no they would rather stand on a pile of bodies and preach against guns for the rest of our society. If you dont vote you are helping them.

  • Jack December 26, 2015, 2:51 pm

    It’s scary how much like sheep the people of this country have become. Some day if the right to bear arms is taken from us then these sheep will realize how important it truly is. Too many of us are blind to the way the world really works and are too willing to give up their rights simply because they are told that they would be better off without them. Humans will always kill each other, as you describe in this article “terrorists” will always find a way, and we the people shall too find a way. If our guns go then people will realize their importance but it will be too late. So we will carry swords and bows, when they take that we will carry rocks to throw. The sheep will believe what they want to in order to think that they migh be safe someday, “we” know that safety is a matter of perspective and never an attainable reality. I cant scratch the surface of this topic in a paragraph and I am just as frustrated as all of you. The only reason law makers will not make guns illegal is because they make billions of dollars on it, sad as it is- thats how our fine “democracy” works today. I say good riddance to them, let them stuff their pockets with our money then denounce our cause, buy more guns and they will have no reason to make th illegal. If they stop making money on us then it will become a different issue. Buy guns and flex your rights, prove to people that gun owners are not inherent killers or criminals but good neighbors and friends. Teach someone new how to shoot and respect a firearm, we have to teach the people through experience. Most of the people who are anti-gun have never shot a gun, they denounce what they do not understand. They find safety in blind persuasion and we find safety in our own hands.

  • Mahatma Muhjesbude December 26, 2015, 1:34 pm

    Interestingly, when the spox for the governor’s office announced the charges against this woman on TV, the phrase was “…murder with a deadly weapon.”

    So they now classify cars as ‘weapons’ with deadly potential. Instead of what they used to call it…’vehicular homicide’. then sub categorized as manslaughter or intentional murder, or accidental.

    Yup, I would not be surprised if they include universal background checks in future drivers license renewals. And of course charge the licensee/applicant a ‘service fee’ for the process for a little double banger on the tax payers. Vehicles are already universally ‘registered’ and licensed, unfortunately, but we don’t need ‘permission’ to own them?

    But they get away with this because of One humongous difference. The 2nd/A does not speak about your type of transportation vehicle. What kind of horse or buggy you traveled around in wasn’t subject back then to the government scam of license or users fees and taxation. Your horse was like your clothes. A piece of your personal private life and not something for the government or anyone else to be actively concerned with. This was a later result of the avaricious societal disease of political employees using their power corruptly enrich themselves. But now they gained a bonus as having universally licensed registered cards gives them another tangent into your privacy and an additional opportunity to track and keep tabs on you. (Search license plate scanners on public vehicles).

    The Second/A does, however, GUARANTEE PROTECTION for Firearms ownership AND, this protection SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED for Any reason.

    I smell their scheme like a bad whif of dog shit in a dark alley. After universal background checks on car ownership, they’ll use this to further justify the universal background (aka universal registration) checks on all firearms)..whining and braying something like “see, it’s not so baaaaaad having universal registration, if we already have it on cars, it might help having it on guns, too?!

    Only thing is, you leftist reprobates, Registering, licensing and certainly Universal invasions of your privacy have never kept the ever growing vehicular death count from diminishing. Only changing people’s innate propensity to resort to bad emotional and psychological behavior will change car, gun, or bar fight statistics.

    Since they already have a National I.D. card Law (‘Real I.D. Bill) in place that nobody cared much about when it passed in 2005 which will be coming down hard on everybody if Hillary gets in. So they’ll not only know all your so called deadly weapons you purchased, they’ll know exactly where you live and keep your ‘deadly weapons’!

    Then they’ll use their newly granted total universal spying powers within the budget bill (slipped in with this latest trillion dollar budget that passed quickly with the help of all the republican traitors just so the potus wouldn’t veto it before everybody went on holiday break)…
    …which was a deal making corporate social media among others complicit in the universal all encompassing spying that will emerge full force next summer. Cruz gave a inadvertent slip on this at the last debate when he said under the old Patriot Act we were garnishing maybe 25 percent spying on everybody, now it will be 100%).

    Of course this egregious illegal anti-4th/A spying against private citizens is justified by simply lying to the sheeple that it protects them against domestic terrorism.

    The entire system must be changed. I really hope we can do it sooner, rather than later.

    I have a flashback nightmare to a few years ago when someone invited me down to their so called ‘paradise’ bug out location in Guatamala. to see what the good life was like. When he said , but um uh, ahem,…don’t carry or take anything with you in your luggage, you might, um…be slowed down (detainted) at the airport/customs. I said i have ‘credentials’.. He said yeah, but sometimes they’ll get funny about it. I found out that not only are you limited to what firearms you may own in counties like Belize and Guatamala, but they have a very neat totalitarian vetting process for expats and permanent residents.

    You must submit to a comprehensive ‘psychological exam process’ to see if you are ‘fit’ to have a gun! Yup, Paradise, alright.
    Needless to say, I declined the offer.

  • Mahatma Muhjesbude December 26, 2015, 1:26 pm

    Interestingly, when the spox for the governor’s office announced the charges against this woman on TV, the phrase was “…murder with a deadly weapon.”

    So they now classify cars as ‘weapons’ with deadly potential. Instead of what they used to call it…’vehicular homicide’. then sub categorized as manslaughter or intentional murder, or accidental.

    Yup, I would not be surprised if they include universal background checks in future drivers license renewals. And of course charge the licensee/applicant a ‘service fee’ for the process for a little double banger on the tax payers. Vehicles are already universally ‘registered’ and licensed, unfortunately, but we don’t need ‘permission’ to own them?

    But they get away with this because of One humongous difference. The 2nd/A does not speak about your type of transportation vehicle. What kind of horse or buggy you traveled around in wasn’t subject back then to the government scam of license or users fees and taxation. Your horse was like your clothes. A piece of your personal private life and not something for the government or anyone else to be actively concerned with. This was a later result of the avaricious societal disease of political employees using their power corruptly enrich themselves. But now they gained a bonus as having universally licensed registered cards gives them another tangent into your privacy and an additional opportunity to track and keep tabs on you. (Search license plate scanners on public vehicles).

    The Second/A does, however, GUARANTEE PROTECTION
    I smell their scheme like a bad whif of dog shit in a dark alley. After universal background checks on car ownership, they’ll use this to further justify the universal background (aka universal registration) checks on all firearms)

    Since they already have a National I.D. card Law (‘Real I.D. Bill) in place that nobody cared much about when it passed in 2005 which will be coming down hard on everybody if Hillary gets in. So they’ll not only know all your so called deadly weapons you purchased, they’ll know exactly where you live and keep your ‘deadly weapons’!

    Then they’ll use their newly granted total universal spying powers within the budget bill (slipped in with this latest trillion dollar budget that passed quickly with the help of all the republican traitors just so the potus wouldn’t veto it before everybody went on holiday break)…
    …which was a deal making corporate social media among others complicit in the universal all encompassing spying that will emerge full force next summer. Cruz gave a inadvertent slip on this at the last debate when he said under the old Patriot Act we were garnishing maybe 25 percent spying on everybody, now it will be 100%).

    Of course this egregious illegal anti-4th/A spying against private citizens is justified by simply lying to the sheeple that it protects them against domestic terrorism.

    The entire system must be changed. I really hope we can do it sooner, rather than later.

    I have a flashback nightmare to a few years ago when someone invited me down to their so called ‘paradise’ bug out location in Guatamala. to see what the good life was like. When he said , but um uh, ahem,…don’t carry or take anything with you in your luggage, you might, um…be slowed down (detainted) at the airport/customs. I said i have ‘credentials’.. He said yeah, but sometimes they’ll get funny about it. I found out that not only are you limited to what firearms you may own in counties like Belize and Guatamala, but they have a very neat totalitarian trick vetting process for expatriots and permanent resitdents.

    You must submit to a comprehensive ‘psychological exam process’ to see if you are ‘fit’ to have a gun! Yup, Paradise, alright.
    Needless to say, I declined the offer.

  • Bob December 26, 2015, 1:07 am

    The Happy Land fire was an arson fire that killed 87 people trapped in an unlicensed social club named “Happy Land”, at 1959 Southern Boulevard in the West Farms section of the Bronx in New York City on March 25, 1990. Most of the victims were young Hondurans celebrating Carnival,[1] largely drawn from members of the local Garifuna American community.[2][3] Unemployed Cuban refugee Julio González, whose former girlfriend was employed at the club, was arrested soon afterward and ultimately convicted of arson and murder. The weapon used was 1 gallon of gas. This mass murder has a death toll higher than Aurora, Sandy Hook and San Bernardino combined. Gas in 1990 was less than $1.50 a gallon. America has a short memory. Guns are not the problem.

  • Athanasius December 26, 2015, 1:05 am

    This isn’t a comparison we want to make. The libs, who want to control every aspect of our lives, absolutely want to make driving car illegal. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/17/musk-someday-driving-a-car-will-be-illegal.html

    We will have less independence than medieval serfs once they get their way.

  • Phantom December 25, 2015, 11:17 pm

    Great article and many good comments. I would like to toss this in for your consideration. First, I heard Donald Trump say a month or so ago, “there is something about Obummer that we don’t know”(I’ve been saying this for years, but that later). I recently attended a class to re-acquire my class A license and the class was full with just under thirty people attending. Four were white, maybe six or seven were black, the other more than half of the class either ‘were or had’ muslim names. My point that slapped me like a sack of bricks, “there were individuals that wanted to learn to fly, not take off or land mind you, just fly large jet liners in the year before 911 happened”. Some people questioned this but no one really paid attention to the ones raising the questions. Two planes took out the twin tower, one damaged the Pentagon, and a forth was downed by brave passengers headed to what many believe was the White House. One straight truck loaded with explosives took out a government building many years ago, an act of domestic terrorism. Now, imagine a planned attack of 20, 100, 1000, ????? semi trucks all across the country(and by planned I mean loaded with explosives to cause maximum damage) to disrupt communities and law enforcement sending the country into chaos. I don’t believe this country will be attacked by armies invading from the air or sea, the enemy is within, already here, either sneaking across the borders or have acquired legal documents such as marriage visas and just blending in. And at this time with racial tensions abounding, no one wants to profile or say “hey somethings not right here”. Just made me uneasy, over half the class of thirty?
    Again, for your consideration.

  • Larry December 25, 2015, 10:43 pm

    100% Pro gun, and 2nd Amendment here ….but….unsubscribing to this joke of a newsletter. So fucking ridiculous, it’s not even worth explaining why. Later.

  • PAUL ANDERSON December 25, 2015, 7:55 pm

    If terrorist’s want to create Chaos, they don’t need a gun. As currently proven, the Government cannot stop terrorists. What the Government does need, is the help from We The People. And this is not going to happen by trying to dis-arm the people & by removing Rights. It’s done by asking for the peoples help, & creating a trust. Until the Government admits it needs the help of an armed people, it’s only going to get worse. Where were the armed handgunners when you need them???

  • Monica December 25, 2015, 7:42 pm

    Lakeisha has dead eyes, like a shark.

  • ed sikes December 25, 2015, 3:51 pm

    Wow!…That was gripping, them were some hard facts. I haven’t heard them facts 100 times over (sarcasm). NOW GET OUT THERE TILL YOUR BLUE IN THE FACE AND CONVINCE THEM ANTI-GUN NUTS TO BELIEVE IT (more sarcasm).

    • Jack L. December 25, 2015, 6:17 pm

      Wonder will Hillary and company ban all cars and make the manufacturers responsible for their use, make walking a felony impose criminal background checks before breathing?

  • Duane Bessette December 25, 2015, 3:32 pm

    Comparing a motor vehicle to a weapon like a modern firearm will only make pro second amendment folks appear disingenuous. It’s an argument we can not win in the court of public opinion. Quoting numbers will do no good either. Fear and emotion drive both gun sales and calls for greater gun control. This article is a waste of time and regurgitates an old, worn argument.

  • martin December 25, 2015, 1:40 pm

    the author declares a fact well worth remembering: “… the great flaw within the anti-gun doctrine… doesn’t address the fundamental cause of violence: *the will to kill.” All proponents of gun rights would do well to re-call this *fundamental fact* when faced with activities that “(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.” Patriot Act of 2001

    • John A Freeman December 25, 2015, 6:57 pm

      To end the threat to the Second Amendment; “Congress finds the following: (1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.”
      Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, 2005

  • Cobraman December 25, 2015, 1:17 pm

    Well Pete; How do you know that the wrong way driver on the interstate who kills 5 plus himself in a head-on crash was not a suicide/murder?
    Why are you only concerned with people murdered with guns? (Gun Violence). That’s very cold-hearted and mean-spirited. Why would a death by gunshot have more value to you than a death by a hammer?
    According to the FBI, in 2011, an average of 32.5 people per 100,000 were killed with any kind of firearm and 496 people were killed with hammers and other blunt force implements. I don’t see you calling for a ban on hammers and where are the lawsuits against True-Temper and Stanley? hmmmm?
    Obama loves to hold up Australia as a shining example. “Look at Australia” he says.
    OK let’s. In 96 Australia had a terrible massacre and banned guns. Result: murders went up. Go to the statistics dept. of the Australian Federal Gov’t website http://www.aic.gov.au and you will find that while firearm murders went down, murders did not. The thing is, unlike a car, hammer or knife, the best defensive weapon is a firearm. Keep drinking the kool-aid.
    P.S. a Harvard study of 2007 and this year’s study by the CDC both conclude that where there are more (legal) weapons in the hands of citizens, there is less violent crime of all types. Funny, Obama ordered the CDC study, but never quotes from it. I wonder why.

  • dan December 25, 2015, 12:27 pm

    wonder why the media never reported what a witness said about this event.According to the witness this woman was screaming Allah Akbhur while she mowed down the victims.More liberal protection from the progressive media

  • Dave December 25, 2015, 11:40 am

    Just in case you don’t know this, as a motor vehicle dealer the federal government requires us to check every person we sell a car to with the national terrist watch list ! If we get a RED FLAG we are to call the FBI and stall the person, hasn’t happened yet ! Maybe they know something we don’t ( although I dought it )

  • Capn Stefano December 25, 2015, 10:57 am

    This is why I pack an EAA Witness Elite 10MM (15 shots) and every 3rd round is a LeHigh 115 grain penetrator load @ 1700 FPS. No hesitation to open up if I had the drop on this savage.. and of course this was terrorism, and a “hate crime” as well. Can’t have any of the cattle out here waking up to the outrageous black on white crime statistics.. so the “to protect and serve” (insert smirk) folks give this monster a pass

    • Oaf December 25, 2015, 2:09 pm

      Good luck in court if, heaven forbid, you ever need to use that mixed bag mag load in a situation where you kill or wound someone. An overzealous prosecutor in a criminal trial will have a much easier time convincing a jury that you’re some kind of Rambo vigilante punisher type that was out looking for someone to shoot with his “extra powerful” death gun that has bullets capable of penetrating every wall in a home along with its occupants. Even easier to convict in the following civil trial where the burden of proof is much less. Pick one of the new, hot “defense” loads (note how even the ammo is described as a defensive load) and stick with that.

      • Capn Stefano December 25, 2015, 4:44 pm

        Dunno where you live but where I live that’s not going to happen. Now anyone can sue anyone in civil court but I’ve planned for that as well. Even if all that (again, in my locale) paranoia you posted were true, it wouldn’t change a thing for me, as surviving attack is more important to me..

  • Capn Stefano December 25, 2015, 10:56 am

    This is why I pack an EAA Witness Elite 10MM (15 shots) and every 3rd round is a LeHigh 115 grain penetrator load @ 1700 FPS. No hesitation to open up if I had the drop on this savage.. and of course this was terrorism, and a “hate crime” as well. Can’t have any of the cattle out here waking up to the outrageous black on white crime statistics.. so the “to protect and serve” (insert smirk) folks give this monster a pass

  • pete December 25, 2015, 10:37 am

    Typical small ‘logic’. Cars are not used for homicide and suicide nearly as much as guns are. And if we licensed guns the way we do cars / drivers there would be a lot less gun deaths too. This sort of intellectual dishonesty is one reason we gun nuts are not taken seriously by the rest of the nation and the most of the world.

    • davud December 25, 2015, 9:42 pm

      we already do license guns much as we license cars. no license is needed for operation of either on private property. if you want to operate in public, though, in most states the gun carrier needs a license – secured by undergoing training, passing a test and showing a certain degree of law abiding history – same as a driver.

      *** Cars are not used for homicide and suicide nearly as much as guns are. ***

      and yet they kill three times as many people. we as a society tolerate this bloody toll because of their usefulness. the intellectually dishonest contention common to anti-gun rhetoric is that guns have no usefulness, when actually their use in self-defense is common. in the six figures annually in the u.s.

  • James Wegman December 25, 2015, 10:20 am

    If she had used a gun, thats all we would have heard about! Not the fact that she was crazy, but that she used a gun! Since she used an Oldsmobile all we will hear is that she was crazy. The people that are injured or dead are just as injured or dead no matter what she used. Evil acts are committed by evil PEOPLE, thats the problem that the libs refuse to see! The tool they use to do their damage is not the problem. Evil has always be in the world since Cain “clocked” Able, and always will be. Disarming law abiding people will only make it worse!

    • WeThePeople December 25, 2015, 1:25 pm

      The American people will NEVER be disarmed.The Pres and all his minions(Capitol,Senate,and all the alphabet soup agencies)are like a sand pebble on the beach.They mean nothing and do nothing until the last minute.The PEOPLE must protect themselves as they have always done in the past.Police arrive at the scene in 23minutes.A gun can be fired in 1 second.You can pull a trigger or dial 911.I prefer the trigger.

    • Concerned December 25, 2015, 9:48 pm

      Both England and Australia saw a huge increase of firearm crime after they made it against the law for the general public to have them. The same would be true here in the US if the same path is taken. As the number of guns in the US have increased over the past few years the gun crime rate has decreased in general. It is also well known that the places with the most strict gun laws have the highest gun crime rates in the US. In the countries where the general public were no longer allowed to have protection it was not long before the greatest enemy in those countries turned out to the the Government and it appears to very clear that the present administration is not able to completely control the citizens as long as they have their own protection, the solution, take them away then only the government and the criminals will be armed.

  • Rob December 25, 2015, 10:09 am

    In the United States, the odds of being killed by conventional medicine are almost 20 times (2,000%) greater than being killed in an automobile accident (23) and almost 30 times (3,000%) greater than being killed by a gun.(24) The conclusion is that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States.(25) So you have an almost 30 times higher chance of being killed by your doctor or by legal (approved by our government…) prescription drugs from big pharma than you have by being killed by a mass shooter or even by any gun at all. Do your own research and you will find out that this is true. Why don’t these self serving clowns do anything about THAT!? It is because they are taking bribes from big pharma…

  • Larry December 25, 2015, 9:55 am

    The answer to the question is, because if we did, the Dems & other assorted nut jobs would want to ban all vehicles!

    Merry Christmas to all & may God bless you.

  • Tt December 25, 2015, 9:44 am

    1 million annual violent interracial crimes and 90% are black On White. This is but just another

  • Voice of reason December 25, 2015, 9:30 am

    “The takeaway? Both objects are deadly. The question, however, is why we are so concerned with the former when the latter presents an equal, if not greater, threat (at least from a physics standpoint)?”
    Fact:Banning one is politically expedient
    Fact:Banning the other is political suicide

  • Jaknel December 25, 2015, 8:46 am

    I’ve said for years arm the people

    • Concerned December 25, 2015, 9:53 pm

      From the history of the United States we find that the reason that the Founding Fathers put the 2nd amendment in place was to protect the people from a our own government and the present administration sort of proves the point. Rights given by the constitution are being taken away right and left.

  • Methane251 December 25, 2015, 8:34 am

    I wonder if the FBI will get involved in this investigation. I would like to know why “Lakeisha” was distraught. All we have so far is what her defense attorney is saying.

  • Pat Bryan December 25, 2015, 8:33 am

    No, not a wakeup call. It is just the maunderings of another schizophrenic. It is also just another way to spread fear among the populace, as is this essay.
    Terrorists want to spread fear and terror. What better way to spread fear than to propagandize about more crap we should be scared of. How better to steal food from the poor, steal money from education when you convince us that the money has to go to weapons makers so every local police department can have tanks and mortars.
    The terrorists are the politicians preaching fear and hatred.

    • Rob December 25, 2015, 10:17 am

      Well said. The terrorists are our politicians and they no longer deserve our vote. Let our answer be to fear nothing and to hate no one.
      Merry Christmas!

  • Gunflint December 25, 2015, 7:35 am

    Drunk drivers, texting drivers, now terrorists, proves cars are deadlier than guns.. Liberals should band all cars, especially if their black ! Yep this is sarcasm

  • Justin Case December 25, 2015, 6:27 am

    Time to ban cars from sidewalks. Oh…wait…they already are.

    • Larry December 25, 2015, 9:58 am

      Just like “gun free” zones, sidewalks are supposed to be “car free” zones. The latter has proven to work out much better than the former.
      Merry Christmas, Justin.

    • Rob December 25, 2015, 11:45 am

      No wait, let’s ban sidewalks so cars can not drive on them.

  • garhunt05 December 25, 2015, 5:47 am

    well this is a waste imo. Cars can be deadly but because of that we put tons of safety features in them. We have processes for operating and they are required to be registered and insured. if you applied this to guns many on this site would go crazy.
    this article is right about the will to harm but does it make sense make it easy to get the tools to cause harm. also what would you do to reduce the will to harm? other than moar guns

    • RetNavet December 25, 2015, 6:35 am

      Answer: Less libtards like you and Lakeisha, who incidentally has been the recipient of numerous libtard social programs

    • Dr Motown December 25, 2015, 7:24 am

      The “safety features” of cars primarily protect the occupants from unexpected events coming at them (like hitting a patch of ‘black ice’), but still can’t stop said occupants from doing bad things to others intentionally or by disabling the “safety features.” The point is that NO LAW can “reduce the will to harm.” If laws could stop people from doing bad things, why do bad things still happen? Why do we need police, courts, and prisons to clean up the mess if “the law” itself could “reduce the will to harm?” The only people who follow laws are the law-abiding citizens who were unlikely to do anything bad to begin with!

    • DNS December 25, 2015, 7:49 am

      I can go buy a 1960 pickup truck today that has minimum safety features. I don’t need to register it, insure it, or pass a background check. I could take said truck to any gun free crowded place and kill as many people as I wanted to without anyone stopping me.
      Licence, insurance, etc? Only if I planned on driving it legally on the highway and none of it is required to take possession and use said truck to kill.
      Since I have no constitutional right to buy, own, drive, any vehicle they can be banned. My guns? Nope.

      • Guntoter December 25, 2015, 9:24 pm

        Excellent reply DNS, Sadly , the fact is that it requires a degree of thoughtful intelligence to assess the data and come to a reasonable conclusion, based on fact. Liberal democrats have long demonstrated that they are incapable of achieving that level of cognitive thinking.

        • Guntoter December 25, 2015, 9:43 pm

          After offering a reasonable , analytical reply regarding the paranoia, unreasonable fear of an inanimate object,such as a firearm, and waiting 15 minutes for consideration to allow posting, I have made THE DECISION. I will NOT return to this site. There are many other venues which seem to welcome a dialog between responsible conversing parties.

    • RetNavet December 25, 2015, 8:38 am

      Incarcerate and/or deport all libtards like you and Lakeisha, who incidentally has been the recipient of numerous libtard social welfare programs

    • BillMiller December 25, 2015, 10:56 am

      Thanks to the “car show loophole” (something that I just made up), anyone can buy a car at a car show without having to go through a background check. String of DWIs and vehicular homicide convictions in your past? No problem!

      We need some commonsense car-safety legislation so that this kind of thing won’t happen again.

    • loupgarous December 25, 2015, 7:48 pm

      Neither you nor your idol Barack Obama addressed the obvious take-away from this incident: All of Barack Obama’s “common sense” laws which are rarely enforced against habitual criminals (look at the actual record of Federal charges brought against felons and other forbidden persons possessing or attempting to purchase firearms – just one of many “common sense” gun laws which isn’t enforced very often against the recidivist felons who misuse guns most often) are FUTILE against someone who wants to kill a lot of people badly enough. The Obama Administration merely wants more laws which it can enforce selectively, not ways to protect the American people. Actual terrorists aren’t even called “terrorists” in many instances when the attacker or attackers look like the current President, or worship Islam. The only real way to describe this behavior on the President’s part is “racism” and “sectarianism.”

    • Huapakechi December 25, 2015, 11:09 pm

      “A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”
      – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

  • Gunflint December 25, 2015, 5:05 am

    If terrorist’s wants to create Chaos, they don’t need a gun. As currently proven, the Government cannot stop terrorists. What the Government does need, is the help from We The People. And this is not going to happen by trying to dis-arm the people, & removing Rights. It’s done by asking for the peoples help, & creating a trust. Until the Government admits it needs the help of an armed people, it’s only going to get worse.

    • Eric N December 25, 2015, 12:13 pm

      You said it. If just one competent person was armed and ready for an attack, even If it is just one person per block, the chances for others to live grows exponentially.

  • homer hardy December 25, 2015, 4:53 am

    dont forget about OSU’s home comming incident, were another psychotic woman used her car as a weapon.

  • Larry DeMaio December 25, 2015, 3:25 am

    Nearly 40,000 people were killed on our nations highways each year. Yet we still license people to drive. And I can’t have a pistol permit??? Go figure

    • Delain Carroll December 26, 2015, 11:52 am

      Delain, I don’t if we the people and our Nation is being threated my fanatic terrorist you would think arming the public would be a win win for all of us! We have a lot of Vet that know the rules of deadly force! To deny anyone that has a clean record + that served in our armed forces is just wrong any way you may look at it!!!

  • Joe December 25, 2015, 3:22 am

    Are you running for President ?… We could get some manufacturers to back you and you’d have my vote

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend