Newtown Gun Rights Proponents Heckled at Hearing

Posted by on Jan 31, 2013 at 7:36 am

Actually we have no evidence these folks were heckled, but we’re simply applying the mainstream media standard of making things up. For a day we want to know how it feels to be an unconscionable MSNBC or BuzzFeed reporter.

It wasn’t until more than two hours into the hearing when a supporter of gun rights spoke up.

Mike Collins, an emergency medical technician, said law-abiding citizens shouldn’t pay the price for illegal activity.

“That’s what criminals do,” said Collins, noting that police have not yet reported how Nancy Lanza, Adam Lanza’s mother, stored the weapons that he stole after killing her.

“No gun pulls its own trigger,” said Richard Fenaroli, of Newtown. “We all have a responsibility for what was happening here,” he said, noting that Nancy Lanza must have been lacking something in her life to feel the need to acquire so many guns.

Jackie Villa, of Newtown, warned lawmakers that she shouldn’t lose her right to have guns because of Lanza.

“On behalf of millions of people and young mothers across the United States, please protect and preserve our Second Amendment rights to have the force necessary to protect those who are indefensible.”

Dr. William Begg, of Newtown, an emergency room physician who sobbed while recalling the two mortally wounded children who could not be saved at Danbury Hospital, said that in nations with tight gun control, mass murders rarely occur.

Meanwhile, in this country, gun owners are 25 times more likely to be shot with their own guns. “Please let us do some research that is real,” Begg said.

There’s no evidence to support that assertion about gun owners being 25 times more likely to be shot with their own weapons, and clearly the reporter is just making that up. Of course this is the same “reporter” who made up the bit about the father being heckled the other day.

5 Responses to “Newtown Gun Rights Proponents Heckled at Hearing”

  1. nickless on 31/31/13 at 9:21 am

    Undoubtedly they lump suicide in that figure to get it to where they want it. How likely is disarming a suicidal person going to prevent them killing themselves?

  2. Daybrother on 31/31/13 at 11:03 am

    “Dr. William Begg, of Newtown, an emergency room physician who sobbed while recalling the two mortally wounded children who could not be saved at Danbury Hospital, said that in nations with tight gun control, mass murders rarely occur.”

    Will he cry when his theater helps freedom die for 350 million?

  3. Bias on 31/31/13 at 11:25 am

    If the self inflicted wounds is such a problem we should give all criminals guns so they can accidentally shoot themselves.

  4. ertdfg on 31/31/13 at 12:10 pm

    “Meanwhile, in this country, gun owners are 25 times more likely to be shot with their own guns.”

    I love when they post arguments like these… because it makes the solution so clear. Guns are most dangerous to the owner, right?

    Step 1: Arm all violent criminals, so they have accidents. If you’re convicted of a violent crime, we force you to own and carry a gun at all times.

    Step 2: Disarm all police forces, so they don’t have accidents. We don’t want them getting killed, so they should never have guns.

    Conclusion: Safest society ever with reduced crime… from arming criminals while disarming police.

    Given the assumptions presented, that conclusion is clear isn’t it?

  5. MT Geoff on 31/31/13 at 12:28 pm

    Re #1: If a person is considering self harm in an impulsive situation, removing a gun removes a temptation and an easy way to act out. There are times to take weapons, especially firearms, from people known to be dangerous to themselves or others.
    Re #2: Mass murders by citizens are rare in nations with strict gun control, yes. Mass murders are by citizens are also rare in the US and in Israel, nations where gun ownership is common. It’s almost unknown in Switzerland, where guns are found in most homes. On the other hand, mass murders by governments are only too common in some tightly gun-controlled countries (see Syria).
    #3: The odds on a gun owner ever being shot are small — most people will go their entire lives without being shot. The odds on a gun owner using the gun to thwart an attack seem to be much higher than the odds on being shot with one’s own gun. But it may well be true that lawful gun owners are more likely to have an accident, choose suicide, or be the object of a family member homicide than to be shot by an intruder or to shoot an intruder.
    The reported numbers are all based on shaky research. I like John Lott’s research better but then he gets the answer I want, so it’s easy to like his research.