Author: wizardpc

Commenter “Brad” over at Bob Owens’ place gives an absolutely beautiful response to those people who think that the ill-conceived federal assault weapons ban would have done anything to stop what happened in Aurora:

Let it also be said that even if the killer had used a weapon which complied with the Feinstein AW ban, the outcome would not have changed. The proof of this is the 1999 Columbine massacre, where the primary murder weapon was a Hi-Point 9mm carbine using a supply of loaded 10 round magazines.

http://acolumbinesite.com/weapon.html

Armed people vs unarmed people are what enables massacres. Not flash-suppressors or 20-round magazines. The Hi-Point 9mm carbine was designed to comply with the Federal AW ban. I don’t think a magazine greater than 10 rounds capacity even exists for the weapon. Yet it is perfectly suitable for slaughtering unarmed victims.

That had never occurred to me.

Because you never know when some jackass wants to go on a shooting rampage in hopes that police will kill him.

Note, however, that he didn’t actually wait around for the cops to show up and kill him. Nor did he try to go out in a blaze of glory when the police finally caught up with him came to pick him up after he confessed to a FedEx worker

Also, this wasn’t what I’d call a “thug bar” where you’d expect drug-related violence to break out. We see that all the time. This was a sports bar filled with college kids. That kinda kills the “just don’t go to those kind of bars” argument that our opponents kept trotting out.

No good info on what kind of weapon the shooter used. The press is reporting it was an “assault rifle” but I’d also seen reports that paramedics claimed it had created small-caliber wounds. My guess is a Ruger 10/22 with a 30rd mag. That would explain the high number hits, but zero fatalities.

He also shot someone about an hour before this, and set two fires at his former place of employment.

Oh, and just in case it comes up? He was a prohibited person. Shocking, I know.