The Formal Rules of Gun Safety: WHY an armed audiece should NOT have fired at James Holmes

The premise that more armed people would have prevented or shortened the mass shooting in Colorado has received a lot of support on the right among the gun-lover crowd.  It is a stupid premise, and it only serves to underline that their gun attitudes are founded on an emotional hero fantasy, rather than an objective attitude about guns.
There is no way that either armed civilians or armed law enforcement could have safely taken out the shooter in Aurora, Colorado.  To have attempted to do so would violated the rules of gun safety; those rules apply MORE not less in a situation like the mass shooting in a movie theater in order to reduce casualties.  There is nothing about that situation that would make setting aside those rules a desirable or intelligent exception.

I'm going to use the wikipedia entry here.
The scenario in Aurora Colorado - a dark theater, loud sound from the movie, a person wearing all matte black coming in from an outside door, not apparently back lit by direct outside lighting, throws canisters of a substance that acts as tear gas or pepper spray.
You have a lot of people moving around.  You have an inability to breathe easily, choking, eyes are watering, lights are flickering in mostly darkness from the movie.  There is tremendous confusion and movement, both the crowd and the shooter.  The seating makes movement difficult. 

Here is the gun safety rule that apply to responding in that situation, an excerpt from Wikipedia's Gun Safety entry ( added emphasis is mine - DG).
Gun Safety Rules
Be sure of your target and of what is beyond it
This rule is intended to eliminate or minimize damage to non-targets when a firearm is intentionally discharged. Unintended damage may occur if a non-target is misidentified as a target, if the target is missed, or if the bullet hits something or someone other than the intended target.
Handlers are taught that they must positively identify and verify their target. Additionally, they learn that even when firing at a valid target, unintended targets may still be hit, for three reasons:

• The bullet may miss the intended target and hit a non-target around or beyond the target.
• A non-target may pass in front of the target and be hit with a bullet aimed at the target.
• The bullet may pass through the intended target and hit a non-target beyond it, so called "overpenetration".

Therefore, this rule requires a handler to "always be sure of your target; not just the target itself, but above, below, to the left, to the right, in front of, and behind the target".
This may create situations that present dilemmas for a handler. Such situations are for instance a police officer in a riot, a civilian facing a possible intruder at night, or a soldier in a situation where civilians are near the enemy. Indecision or misjudgment of the handler's abilities in such a situation may cause undesired outcomes, such as injury to the handler due to hesitation, or the handler violating rules of engagement and causing unintended damage.
Training is used to minimize the risk of such outcomes. Target practice increases the precision with which the handler can discharge the firearm and thus increase the chances that the intended target is hit. Education about terminal ballistics gives the handler knowledge about the characteristics of a bullet after a target is hit. This knowledge coupled with insight into the handler's own capabilities makes it easier for the handler to make appropriate decisions about whether to discharge or not, even if given little time and/or put under severe stress.

Ammunition can be chosen to reduce the risk of overpenetration; see Terminal ballistics, Stopping power, and Hollow point bullet.

In the real world scenario, not the "I would be the hero" fantasy of the gun nuts and 2nd Amendment fanatics, you could not possibly safely shoot in the situation in Aurora, Colorado. No civilian or law enforcement office could know who was around and behind the shooter, or even have a clear view of the shooter, much less know if the shooter was alone or acting with others. 

This was a situation where people could not breathe, and where their eyes were watering from near the shooter across most of the theater, and the gas created a visual barrier; the problems of being able to see the shooter clearly are compounded the further from the shooter a person was located.  ADD to that situation that someone would or could be shooting at the person returning fire which inexperienced people tend to disregard or downplay, and you do not have a good return-fire situation, even for a swat team or a highly trained and talented sniper.
Now add to this that there is NO WAY WHATSOEVER for an armed movie patron to know if there is one bad guy attacking or multiple people involved.  Whoever takes a shot at the shooter, rightly or wrongly in terms of safety, now becomes to other armed movie patrons a potential second attacker, or third or tenth bad guy. 
There are documented cases of off duty law enforcement, in situations without these impediments of gas and darkness and crowds of people and noise, shooting each other because of this kind of difficulty in identifying who is a good shooter and who is the bad shooter(s).
A case in point where friendly fire has been just as deadly as unfriendly fire, and where the people involved had far more training and experience than an ordinary gun-carrying civilian:
How a Retired Officer, Trying to Stop a Robber, Shot an Agent Doing the Same
or the case of Omar Edwards, also in New York.

More people shooting at James Holmes in Aurora, Colorado not only would have caused MORE death and injury, they would have badly confused the situation for law enforcement to be able to correctly identify the attacker.  Further complicating a correct identification of the attacker in that mass shooting was that the way he was dressed would have made law enforcement MORE likely to believe he might be one of them, and then shoot instead at an armed civilian trying to help by mistake.

The risk would be that the heroic person trying to take out the attacker would in turn be shot - shot by law enforcement, shot by another armed citizen or multiple armed citizens.........and the greater the number of rounds fired, the exponential increase that those rounds will hit someone else who is an innocent bystander in that theater OR IN THE NEXT THEATER.
I would point out here that some of the Aurora Colorado victims WERE in the adjoining theater; those rounds hit them AFTER going through the theater walls.  Adding to the number of rounds fired would also have endangered THOSE PEOPLE in addition to the danger from the attacker.
The painful reality is that there was unlikely to be a good, safe, LEGITIMATE opportunity to shoot the shooter at any point in his attack, until he had voluntarily broken off firing and left the building, where he appears to have dropped his weapons, or placed them in his vehicle, and WAITED for police to arrest him without resistance.

Add to this scenario the facts that these carry crazy gun advocates won't mention.  The reality is that even the most well-trained law enforcement officers who engage in shootings often have many if not most of their shots miss their targets.  It is very different to be taking your time, in optimum lighting in a target shooting situation from the shooting in a real conflict.  One of the most significant items of information that was included in my own firearm training were how often even at relatively close range law enforcement and civlians alike fired a lot of rounds at a threatening individual, at criminals, and had most of the rounds fired MISS their target.

This is an excerpt from an excellent op ed piece from a retired Chicago cop about his 30 years on the streets that describes exactly that experience of most shots missing their target in a real shooting situation: (my emphasis added in bold-DG)

When I reached one man, running in the darkness between two houses, he had already been shot by another officer. When the officer had ordered the man to stop and identify himself, the man had pointed a pistol at him. The officer ducked behind his car door and fired half the bullets in his Glock 21 before finally hitting the offender once in the left buttock. We eventually found the shooter’s silver semiautomatic deep in a snowdrift.  

The suddenness and confusion of that moment points out the folly of the politician’s belief that an armed civilian could have easily taken out James Holmes. Imagine the scene: speakers blasting, larger-than-life heroes and villains on the screen, and suddenly real gunshots, a man in a gas mask firing one of three weapons — a shotgun, handgun and rifle, with extended magazines for extra ammo capacity — into the panicking crowd. Even a highly trained, armed police officer would have been caught off guard. Try adding a bunch of untrained, armed civilians into the mix — this type of intervention could have made things much worse.

A Glock 21 has a 13 round capacity magazine, which is larger than most standard handguns. 

That those who advocate for open or concealed carry think this would have been a good instance for intervention only highlights how UNSAFE these people are among us.  It is an understandable impulse, to want to stop someone doing something so horrible as this mass shooting, or any other crime.  But the solution to these situations is NOT more guns, no matter how appealing the fantasy of being a hero is, or the fantasy that gun carriers have that they will shoot the bad guy -- and ONLY the bad guy; odds are they will miss, but the odds are all too good they would hit something or someone else.
The ONLY real solution is to stop guns and explosives getting into the hands of people like James Holmes, or Jared Loughner, or the hands of the many other people who commit crimes of gun violence every day in this country with smaller victim totals resulting.  Those peole are just as dead, just as injured as anyone in the Aurora, Colorado shooting.
More guns are not the solution; they are part of the problem.  Our gun culture is predicated on fantasies that can only result in more deaths and injuries and threats; our gun culture is a failure.  Gun restrictive societies and cultures have been far more successful at reducing deaths, injuries, and incidents of intimidation or threats from firearms than our own gun culture has been.  The clearly effective solution is not more guns, but fewer guns in the hands of fewer people who are more carefully selected and regulated (both the guns and the people who have them).
The time has come to choose, gun reality or gun fantasy.  But that doesn't make for exciting movies or games; reality is less sexy than fantasy, so we probably won't succeed at making the right choice.

The School for Scandal, 2012 style?

It should be interesting to see who blinks first, Brodkorb or the GOP leadership. 

I don't see how Brodkorb can have much of a case; there are no similar positions of power to the one he held, so comparisons to women staffers seems a stretch.   The amount of power and authority he held would seem to be a valid issue for such comparisons, and whether or not the relationship was one involving direct reporting would be as well.

Winning or losing seems secondary to pure revenge for Brodkorb.  Apparently he has no shame, but that should come as no surprise; he also doesn't seem to have much going for him in terms of personal ethics or integrity either, just sleaze.  That Brodkorb is a thoroughly unsympathetic figure, and to a degree from the way she has responded to being caught, Amy Koch as well, for their refusal genuinely to take responsibility for DOING SOMETHING WRONG seems key to appreciating the flaws in this
litigation.

If the MN GOP majority settles.....it would seem pretty clear they have skeletons in their closet they are trying to cover up, which will come out anyway.  If the MN GOP settles, it will show them to be without the moral courage to oppose this shakedown of taxpayer money as well.  The actions of two of their key leadership has alread called into question the moral values to which they give loud lip service.  Failure on the part of the rest of the party, especially the leadership, to stand up to this suit would only compound that moral failure, especially when it involves accusations of other people sleeping around like sluts.  No one hates sex, or feigns hatred of sex as sin unless they are the ones doing it,  like the righties.

 No one in their right mind should expect Brodkorb to go away quietly with a payoff; he wants to do damage.  If the GOP engages in a legal battle, they will face criticism for the expense, as well as the very public focus on their 'values' and 'good governance' failures.  Speculation about other scandals being covered up could be worse than the scandals themselves, in eroding confidence and support, even from the most blind party faithful.  Brodkorb wants to hurt a lot of people on the right for DARING to hold him accountable for having an affair ....and apparently for being a less than pleasant and cooperative staff member, a claim which this suit only seems to make more credible.

This is a no win for the MN GOP; and apparently Koch doesn't have the political sense to at least pretend to be ashamed of having engaged in adultery, even if she is quitting politics....or is she?  But there is no real win possible for Brodkorb in this either; even an unlikely legal award of damages would probably be eaten up by his lawyer's fees.  It seems a stupid act of revenge with no real up side for anyone, a classic lose/lose situation.  I don't see any way for Brodkorb to get back in the power, if not the good graces of the GOP this way; if he had quietly gone away for a time, he might have made a below the radar return later.  But this? Who in their right mind would want to give him a second chance after this? Who would foolishly trust Brodkorb in politics ever again?

Between this scandal and the failure of transparency by the MN GOP not performing an audit to straighten out their financial disaster under Tony Sutton....the fiscal failure of responsibility........and their debt? Who will hear anything the right has to say in the next four months, or care?  The family values party has shot itself in the foot with their own hypocrisy; the fiscal responsibility party has shown itself massively irresponsible; and jobs, jobs, jobs, 'its the economy stupid' was a bait and switch for government shut down and endless culture wars and special interest legislation.

Could there be a greater overreach by the MN GOP?  It beggars the imagination to see how.

Pop the popcorn; put your feet up, the sex and politics soap opera is on.  I'm waiting for the twisty sub plot where the MN GOP try to devise a way to blame this on the Democrats....

I think I've seen this along the Interstate... maybe more than once

If you averaged out incidents, they would be more frequent.... she needs to go away.

Dear Gun Carriers (Open and Concealed): Here is Why We Do NOT Believe You When You Insist You Are Safe It is because you aren't.

Yosemite Sam walks into the Wal Mart Men's Room....or at least, something very like the gun carriers doing so....

Not too long ago I wrote about the correlation between a state being red and the number of Wal Marts it had, along with the pattern of people having far lower levels of education, and being obese. In short, it tracks perfectly with the NRA tendency for their gun nuts to be old, white, flabby and crabby, conservative and not well educated.
And along with their obsessions with carrying guns at Wal Marts is the reported incidences of stupid accidents -- like guys shooting toilets out from under their own asses in men's rooms because their gun fell out while they were relieving themselves, and discharged.  The gun carriers span the spectrum from open carry to legal concealed carry to illegal carry, and a wider variety of demographics than the NRA members -- and they are all dangerous, they all put others at risk without a legitimate reason to carry.
There was another shooting at a Wal Mart this week in Dallas, there was one last month in Elizabeth, North Carolina. :

George Reichle  was seated in the men’s room stall next to Felty June 29 when to the surprise of them both, Felty’s .38-caliber pistol discharged a single round through the stall door and into the bathroom ceiling. Reichle wasn’t hurt, but the near-miss has angered him enough to publicly criticize Walmart for its reckless policy of allowing Felty and other customers to bring concealed weapons into the store.

Of course, changing the policy won’t be easy. Commonsense almost always loses out when it’s up against the often insane way gun rights are worshipped in this country. Simply suggesting that someone leave a dangerous weapon at home or in their car before entering a crowded store is considered by Second Amendment zealots to be tantamount to government storm troopers breaking into your house and confiscating your guns.

Sadly, many concealed weapon permit holders apparently are not above seeing the occasional customer shot to death if it means protecting their right to walk Walmart’s aisles with their handguns hidden at the ready. There are in fact dozens of websites where gun owners are constantly on the look out for any breach of their right to bear arms in Walmart stores, and there’s even one site that asked members how many of them performed their first “concealed carry walk” at Walmart. According to the poll, 18 of 43 respondents said they “proudly” did.

If you do a google search of gun discharges, Wal Mart, there is a shocking number. Here's another one, the most recent -- but then the week isn't over yet. There's time for another one any minute, given WallyWorld's are open 24 hours, and welcome people carrying guns.  And it is not like WalMart is the only place that gun guys put people in danger.
Next time a gun nut wonders why we don't believe they are safe, this is why - this and all the other incidents like it; this and all the other incidents where someone gets shot, intentionally or accidentally.

From CBS Dallas;

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) - A woman and two young children were wounded on Monday night after a gun accidentally discharged inside of a Walmart store in northeast Dallas. The incident happened at about 9:20 p.m. in the 9300 block of Forest Lane.

According to police, a man identified as 23-year-old Todd Canady — who does have a concealed handgun license — went into the Walmart store to purchase groceries. But he had trouble pulling out his wallet at the check-out line. He accidentally dropped and fired his pistol instead. The bullet first grazed Canady in the back of his leg before ricocheting off of the ground.

Debris struck two children and a woman’s ankle as they were standing in line. They were not seriously hurt.

Todd Canady (credit: Dallas County Sheriff’s Department)

Canady left the store and then fled when police tried to question him about the incident. He was later arrested and will face a felony charge of injury to a child, as well as misdemeanor charges of assault and evading arrest. The pistol has been taken in as evidence as an investigation continues.

The Inequality for Sally Ride and Her Partner

Romney and Palin are hypocrites for in one breath praising Sally Ride, and in the next, vilifying and denying her and her partner equal rights. They have not done so by name, but the have done so by their statements about same sex couples.
 Shame on the righties, although to be fair, they probably had no idea that she was a lesbian. If they did know they might have been less complimentary of her. The right are consistently, chronically, regularly hypocrites who harm other people with their narrow minded bigotry.
Same sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples to marry the person they love, the person with whom they live, raise children in many cases, own homes and make love.
The Golden rule which occurs with minor variations in all of the major world religions says do onto others as you would have them do unto you. If you would deny someone their sexual orientation, if you would not wish to have the circumstances reversed so that you could ONLY marry someone of the same sex, but not the man or woman you actually loved and with whom you had a committed relationship, then you should not impose that kind of limitation onto others, denying them happiness and fulfillment.

When people live in a monogamous relationship which is in every way similar to heterosexual marriage, except for the gender or sexual orientation of the participants, it is and should be recognized as a marriage.
When you deny people that right, when you deny people that freedom, when you deny people the benefits that occur in heterosexual marriage, you insult them, you harm them, you discriminate against them with a bias that is ignorant and bigoted.
Both Romney and Palin support,condone, endorse and encourage exactly that kind of discrimination, exactly that status of second class / inferior citizenship for the late Sally Ride and her long-term partner.
They cannot fairly and honestly applaud her, and deny her equal humanity including her sexuality. If you respect the courage and intelligence of Sally Ride, if you admire her as a person, respect ALL of the facets of who she is -- she richly deserves it, and so does her de facto spouse, who should be receiving full federal benefits after 27 years together.
It is time to repeal DOMA, it is time for a federal law respecting same sex marriage. It is time to speak out against discrimination and gender and sexuality inequality. NOW is the time, not later. For once, the conservatives should abandon being on the wrong side of history.
Allow people to be equal; support marriage equality NOW.

The bigotry, discrimination, hostility and intolerance shown to same sex people, the very views expressed by Palin and Romney and the people who they support, and who supports them, result in tragic and violent crimes like these instead of equality:

Expert: People Could Use Obama’s Stance As ‘Justification’ For Anti-Gay Violence

In Churches Across The Country, Far-Right Pastors Preach Anti-Gay Hate And Violence

Settlement for University of Wisconsin student who suffered antigay attack

Nebraska Woman Has Anti-Gay Slurs Carved Into Her Skin In Alleged Hate Crime

Highest Number Of Anti-Gay Murders Ever Reported In 2011: The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs


GOP challenges military march in gay parade  (Our armed forces have a lot to make up to our gay armed service personnel for the shabby, ugly, and unfair way the have been treated.  THIS from the right does not respect the service to her country of Sally Ride, or of the many brave and honorable members of our armed force.)

Boy Scouts Pledge to Keep Antigay Ban (no surprise there, the Mormons are a major funder of the Boy Scouts, so the call the policy shots; Romney is a former Boy Scouts of America board member)

Mike Huckabee: Keeping Gays Out Of Boy Scouts Will Protect Boys From Abuse (it is utterly false that homosexuals are pedophiles; overwhelmingly, the majority of pedophiles are heterosexually oriented)

FRC Strategy Memo: ‘We Must Go On Offense,’ Target Secular Research And Young People (the plan to lie, deliberately, about sexual orientation)

The Price of Bullying: About $35,000

3 hospitalized after spate of anti-LGBT violence

Zachery Gray, Florida Teen, Suffers Brain Damage After Suicide Attempt Allegedly Due To Anti-Gay Bullying

When we stop having headlines like these, when we stop having the right argue in support of conservative teens being able to bully other students for their sexual orientation, when we no longer have people being treated as second class citizens for who and how they were born, only then will praise from Romney or Palin not ring false, and not be offensive hypocrisy. 

The above were a casual selection; there were so very many more horrible headlines that underline how badly the right treats gays, the violence, the hatred, the prejudice and the disrespect.  Shame on conservatives for being bigots, for their intolerance, and for their hypocrisy.  Once again, the more extreme right, which is most of them now, are on the wrong side of history.  It is a conservative pattern, to be on the wrong side of issues historically; so why don't they learn? Or can't they change?

Sincerely honor Sally Ride; treat her with respect as a full and equal person, including treating her partner as a spouse.

Even the Muslim Brotherhood Debunks - and Mocks - Bachmann

Bachmann is an idiot - a very malicious and evil self-promoting bigot; the people who form her base, who give her the benefit of the doubt or who think the woman is intelligent are fools of the variety who believe bat shit crazy conspiracy theories.  These are the people who have politics that are fact-free; the idea of fact checking anything, or of being skeptical about anything they are told that generates hate and suspicion is completely foreign to them. 

They believe, consistently, stupid, improbable things, all too eagerly.  You have to ask the question, what is wrong with the pro-Bachmann people?  What is wrong with them is that they have the disease that goes hand in hand with being an extremist right winger -- willful ignorance.

From care2makeadifference:

Muslim Brotherhood Mocks Bachmann Claims

• by Jeff Fecke
• July 24, 2012
• 1:00 pm

 

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., has claimed that members of the Muslim Brotherhood are infiltrating the US government. From Huma Abedin in the state department to Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., Bachmann has not been afraid to name the people she thinks are secretly working with the multinational Islamic party.
Bachmann’s claims have drawn brickbats from Democrats and Republicans alike. And now they’re drawing attacks from another party — the Muslim Brotherhood itself.
“I haven’t heard these rumors, but they strike me as ridiculous,” said Ahmed Al Nahhas, a Muslim Brotherhood leader in Alexandria, Egypt. In an interview with GlobalPost, Al Nahhas said it was foolish to think Abedin was secretly working for Muslim Brotherhood. “Surely the United States government selects its employees very carefully,” he said.
Another Muslim Brotherhood leader, Ibrahim Ali Iraqi, found the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood was penetrating the U.S. government laughable.
“The Muslim Brotherhood can’t even penetrate the Egyptian government,” said Iraqi, referring to the ongoing standoff between the popularly-elected, Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt, and the Egyptian military’s transitional government.
Iraqi added that at the moment, the Muslim Brotherhood is more focused on domestic issues than any attempt to infiltrate anyone.
“We are in a period of darkness because the country is still governed by the Supreme Council of Armed Forces — and they have a long history of support from the United States,” Iraqi said. “So it is ridiculous that these accusations are leveled at us.”
That’s not to say that nobody in Egypt is listening to Michele Bachmann. Some opponents of the Muslim Brotherhood have used Bachmann’s assertions to claim that the U.S. is actually behind the Muslim Brotherhood’s electoral victory.
Nevertheless, Bachmann continues to occupy lonely territory. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., blasted Bachmann on Sunday, saying, “Religion is a personal issue to every one of the people who lives in the United States, whether you practice a faith, how you practice a faith, whether you don’t practice a faith, whether you say you’re a member of a faith but don’t practice it, it’s none of the government’s business.”
Bachmann also was rebuked — albeit mildly — from a fellow Minnesota Republican. In an interview with Minnesota Public Radio, Rep. Erik Paulsen, R-Minn., said, “Well, I’ll just say I don’t agree with her comments, and I don’t think they were right to go after an administration official without any background that would prove otherwise.”

 

What Voter Fraud? Where? Oh, yeah OK GOP ADMITS THERE ISN'T ANY

Republican claims of voter fraud are a hoax, a fraud, a fake, a deception; it is nothing but manipulative, propaganda that only the gullible and low information conspiracy-theory fools believe.  No one who honestly looks at the information could believe it occurs.
Only people who deeply disrespect the core principles of the founding fathers in creating our Constitution would assault so very dishonestly the premise of one person / one vote.  Only Un-American greedy bastards trying to gain power for themselves at any cost would deny legal voters the right to vote, on such a massive scale.
They should be ashamed, but they lack sufficient conscience to manage shame.  They're too busy taking corporate money, too interested in being the step-n-fetchits for the rich.  The right has sold their integrity, and the big money got a bargain, because they sold it so cheaply.
From TPM:  Ahead Of Voter ID Trial, Pennsylvania Admits There’s No In-Person Voter Fraud

Ryan J. ReillyJuly 24, 2012, 6:25 AM23366As the Justice Department investigates Pennsylvania’s voter ID law on the federal level, a coalition of civil rights groups is gearing up for a state trial starting Wednesday examining whether the law is allowable under Pennsylvania’s constitution.
In that case, Pennsylvania might have handed those groups and their clients (including 93-year-old Viviette Applewhite) a bit of an advantage: They’ve formally acknowledged that there’s been no reported in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania and there isn’t likely to be in November.
The state signed a stipulation agreement with lawyers for the plaintiffs which acknowledges there “have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states.”
Additionally, the agreement states Pennsylvania “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere” or even argue “that in person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.”
Pennsylvania has said that over 750,000 registered voters do not have ID from the Transportation Department, a problem more concentrated in urban centers like Philadelphia. One top state Republican has claimed the voter ID law would help Mitt Romney win the Keystone state and Democrats have already altered their campaign plans should the law survives legal challenges.
Judge Robert Simpson will hear the case, Applewhite et al. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al., in Harrisburg starting on Wednesday. The ACLU expects the trial to last five to seven days.

The Role of Extremst Rhetoric on the Actions of the Mentally Ill Is a Legitimate Concern for Public Discourse and Media Reporting: Right Wing Hypocrisy and Double Standards

What this post is about: The role of extremist rhetoric influencing less than mentally sound people to act violently is a legitimate concern for both news coverage and public discourse.  But how we engage in that as a finding of fact, and as a subject for discourse varies tremendously; there is a good way, and a bad way.  

The Colorado Mass Shooting has provided sharp examples of what is a good way and what is a bad way, and how that tracks with political extremes.

While researching a story idea, I came across an entity called the Poynter Institute.  Who they are impressed me, their purpose and mission statement struck me because of how well it was applicable to the post:

Poynter is a school that exists to ensure that our communities have access to excellent journalism—the kind of journalism that enables us to participate fully and effectively in our democracy.

What we do

To that end, we teach those who manage, edit, produce, program, report, write, blog, photograph and design, whether they belong to news organizations or work as independent entrepreneurs. We teach those who teach, as well as students in middle school, high school and college—the journalists of tomorrow. And we teach members of the public, helping them better understand how journalism is produced and how to tell for themselves whether it’s credible.
We teach management, ethical decision-making and the power of diversity; we teach editing, writing, reporting and new media skills; we teach those in broadcast, print and the Web; we teach those trying to remake their organizations and those trying to remake their journalistic skills set.

This interested me not only because of the context this provides to the post I was writing, but because it explains WHY the commentary from the Poynter school was significant to it.  I want to continue to grow this blog, to improve my own writing and to continue to strive for a factually accurate and well-reasoned blog.

I recently dropped by an old friend who has been writing what seems to me to be increasingly propaganda pieces on a blog that presumably gets more traffic than we do.  Rarely do I see one of the regulars question anything, least of all the factual accuracy of the propaganda premise.  But consistently I see a ginning up of false premises used to create greater polarization and extremism, appeals to emotions not information... in fact, active misinformation and dysinformation, appealing to emotions not intellect.

Here is the Craig Silverman Poynter piece on the recent mistakes by mainstream ABC news (which the far right calls liberal, but where I think a good argument could be made for moderate conservative in bent), and by the Breitbart right wing extremist blog enterprise.

Please, DO follow the link to see the whole piece at Poynter.  But the essence was that both entities made mistakes in reporting -- ABC noted that a person with the same or similar name to the Aurora Colorado (alleged) mass murderer belonged to the Tea Party and had posted on a Tea Party site, and Breitbar claiming without any apparent substance that the shooter was a registered Democratic voter.
The ABC reporter made it clear in the context of the same or similar name, AT THE TIME, that this might not be the same person and that the name of the presumed shooter was a common one.  Not noted, but what can be assumed in the larger context is that we were coming up in the next two days on the one year anniversary of the far right wing massacre in Norway, where Anders Breivik held many positions that are expressed by the right, including the urging of violence expressed by many figures in the Tea Party. 

Given that shooting in Norway on the premise of a political motivation, the issue of a possible political basis for the Aurora, Colorado shooting having a political motivation was a distinct possibility.

In my opinion, the ABC news guy should not have made any comment until he had verified if this was the same individual, because of unfairly drawing speculation to a private rather than public figure.  In the internet / social media age, we see mistakes happening all the time, where someone is identified as another very public person, with their home address and their other private contact informtion being posted or tweeted.  This happened very conspicuously in the Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman controversy recently.  Private individuals should not be put through the resulting harassment that results from this.

But there is a fair point to distinguishing between established fact, and the ongoing investigative process as well, which ABC did do.  In that regard, I think they could have indicated they were looking at online postings of someone with a similar name to a tea party site, without being more specific in a way that singled out the individual who was the wrong person.  They could have done that by indicating why this was pertinent, providing a context of some of the more violent aspects of political extremes, including the Breivik shooting. 

That is a valid concern; we still do not know if there was any political component to the motivation of the Aurora, Colorado shooter - right, left, or so far out there it doesn't connect to any part of the spectrum.  Although schizophrenic, the shooter of Gabrielle Giffords had ranged from being liberal to being more and more extreme far right as his mental illness appears to have progressed, and there were specific references to his far right extremism in letters he had written to Ms. Giffords and in content found in his home. 

So while it seems clear that Jarred Loughner's actions were determined in part by his mental illness, there was also a political component to the targetting of Ms. Giffords, which is legitimate news content to understanding that violent mass shooting.  The role of extremist rhetoric influencing less than mentally sound people to act violently is a legitimate concern for both news coverage and public discourse.  There is nothing about that which should be off-limits, so long as it is done accurately and responsibly.

As the Poynter piece notes, ABC corrected their information (I happened to be watching it live, so I made a note about it at the time).  They made their corrections both in the original program where they overreached with the information, and subsequently; it was not a one-off that could be easily missed.  They also issued an apology, which I'm quoting from the Poynter piece:

An earlier  ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. Several other local residents with similar names were also contacted via social media by members of the public who mistook them for the suspect.

The Poynter critique faults ABC for essentially claiming - look, we're not the only ones.  I don't think that is quite correct, although it is a fair speculation on their motives.  That social media here as well as in other controversies been significant in causing individuals to be harassed IS legitimate, and it explains in part what is wrong with getting information wrong.  They are taking clear responsibility for their error and correcting it.
But ABC does more - they issue a subsequent apology; yes, that apoloty would be better if it were part of their correction, but they DO issue an apology in a timely fashion.  Here is that apology as quoted by the Poynter commentary author, award winning journalist Craig Silverman:

An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.

How did the Breitbart blog deal with THEIR error?  That was covered by the Poynter critique as well - basically they did nothing substantive or corrective:

Over at Breitbart, there are only “updates,” no corrections. Here’s the current headline on the post:

EXCLUSIVE: CONTRA ABC NEWS, DARK KNIGHT AURORA, CO SHOOTING SUSPECT JAMES HOLMES COULD BE REGISTERED DEMOCRAT – UPDATE: NOT REGISTERED?

The post itself  maintains the original lead, which suggests that ABC News’ Ross was wrong and the shooter could be a registered Democrat. You have to scroll all the way to the bottom, to the final update posted two hours after the post first went up, to learn none of it is true.

Even then the website doesn’t admit error.

And as another Poynter Institute critique pointed out, it wasn't only Breitbart making the mistake; other right wing sites falsely linked the Aurora shooter to the Occupy movement, as noted here:

Is James E. Holmes A Occupy Black Bloc Member, James E. Holmes Shoots Up Aurora Co Movie Theater Killing 12 And Wounding 59 As Batman Movie Slams OWS.

... It’s impossible not to feel Nolan’s disgust at Occupy Wall Street a movement the film paints as both incoherent and violent courtesy of a class warfare villain armed with nuclear weaponry. “The Dark Knight Rises” never mentions the 99 percent or other overt Occupy Wall Street slogans. But Nolan clearly summons the spirit of the ragtag movement with a propensity for violence. Bane’s henchmen literally attack Wall Street, savagely beat the rich and promise the good people of Gotham that “tomorrow, you claim what is rightfully yours.”

In this comparison betwen a responsible main stream media source, and the extreme right wing blogosphere, I don't see any justification for the level of umbrage, much less a legitimate basis for their propaganda on the right (but then that is part of what separates propaganda from opinion - lack of fact combined with emotional appeals).  The right, more so the further to the right, the more extreme they get DOES engage in violent rhetoric.  It has on at least two very public mass shootings, been a factor in the actions of a person who has a diagnosed mental illness  - the Gabby Giffords mass shooting, and in the actions of Anders Breivik in Norway, who has received two conflicting diagnoses, but who is clearly by any standards not a well-adjusted individual.

I don't think the Tea Party has as much basis to complain about the conduct of ABC as they have tried to assert.  That it is a hypocritical position is clear when they do not criticize worse conduct by the Breitbart blog or other right wing sources.  Breitbart and Fox News consistently demonstrate a lack of professional standards and a failure to adequately correct their many errors - often they make no corrections whatsoever, and no apology, or at best a non-apology apology.

Another Crazed Gunman on a College Campus

Just think how many lives we would save, how many lives would not be put at risk, how much safer we would be, and of course, last and least, how much money we would save if far fewer people owned firearms. These events are dangerous, they are costly (in every way) and they are unnecessary. It is stupid to have so many guns in our society; they are not useful in any constructive way to reduce crime or increase protection when weighed against all of the shootings - an estimated 1,000 a day, with 30,000 of them every year killing people. This was never the intent of the founding fathers, and if it had been, continuing this level of guns per capita is still stupid. The founding fathers were fallible; they made mistakes, notably slavery and not providing women the vote originally.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

By NBC News staff and wire reports

A standoff with an armed man at the University of Connecticut in Groton that forced the evacuation of the campus is over after the man committed suicide, according to local reports.
Police had been negotiating for hours with the man, who had crawled beneath a dock on the premises.
“As the subject was pointing the weapon towards himself and towards others,” Connecticut Police Lt. Paul Vance said, “troopers deployed less-than-lethal equipment in an effort, again, to disarm the subject. Again, it was not successful.”
They attempted to stop the gunman by talking to him on his cell phone and tried to distract him by using bean bags, flash grenades and a tactical vehicle, NBCConnecticut.com reported.
The man’s family had called Groton, Conn., police around 5 p.m. Monday, saying he was despondent and armed, police said. A few hours later, he drove his Jeep onto the university campus.
Police spotted the gunman just after 10 p.m. ET Monday, threatening to hurt himself.
At around 2:15 a.m. ET, police said they had set up a perimeter around him.
Police ordered an emergency evacuation of the entire campus, and a brief emergency alert was sent out and posted to the university’s website.
“He doesn’t appear to be a threat to others, but we want to secure his safety,” University of Connecticut spokeswoman Stephanie Reitz said during the standoff.
Police said the man was 30 years old, and they won’t release his name until the family is notified.
A group of high school students was on the campus for a summer program, but the students remained in another building on the opposite side of campus during the standoff. Reitz said very few people were believed to be on campus because of summer vacation.
The school reopened at 8 a.m. ET Tuesday, but the investigation continues.
NBC Connecticut and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

It's an auction for the wealthy, not an election for and by the people

If there were ever proof needed that our elections have become our political auctions, here's some compelling evidence for the argument.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

RIP Inspiration to women everywhere, Sally Ride

We take it more for granted than we used to do that women could do whatever they wanted; there was a time when there were very few women in the sciences. We take it as a given that women can successfully do dangerous, adventurous things now more so than we used to do.  There was a time when women were considered the weaker sex, less competent and capable than men.

The progress of feminism is that women can now come closer to fulfilling their potential than they could previously.  I am old enough to remember being told that there were things that girls couldn't do just because they were female.  I used to hate that; very few things could make me as angry when I was growing up as that assumption about potential and ability.

I remember being told by a very traditional mother that I had to hide being smart because males did not like competition from women.  My response was that I wasn't interested in the approval of someone less intelligent than I was - male or female, and that I didn't care if smart men liked or disliked competition from women either, but that I thought they would prefer smart women to stupid women, all other things being equal.  I obstinately refused to play dumb as I had been directed.

I remember a series of risk taking activities I engaged in growing up that concluded successfully; and repeating ad infinitum to my parents and other adults that I was brave, not stupid, meaning I was quite capable of assessing risk, and did so before acting.  I was fortunate to grow up with the influence of an adult mentor who enjoyed my mind, who spoke with me as an equal, and who took the time to discuss risk taking and assessment during my childhood.

So for a variety of reasons I rejoiced at the career of Sally Ride as the first woman to venture into space.  She was a woman of science, but also a woman of action.  She personified in her own personal pursuit of her career what women could do in a world that regressively tried to restrict women.  She did so while demonstrating not only intelligence and courage, but grace and humor; she proved that women could be adventurous without being less feminine, that we didn't have to become masculine or imitative of men or male caricatures, to succeed.

It is a tragic loss to all of us, but especially to the women of the world that she has died so young.  We still have so many obstacles to overcome; women make less than men, and certain opportunities although we have made improvements as a gender are still closed to us instead of being determined by merit and ability.  We still live in a world where conservative men have speculated on whether or not menstruation might make a woman unsuitable to serve on the Supreme Court, as when G. Gordon Liddy used the argument to attack Sonia Sotomayor's appointment in 2009.  We still live in a world where a coservative Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia doesn't believe the U.S. Constitution prohibits discrimination against women.  And we still have the obscenity rantings of conservative Rush Limbaugh and failed candidate Rick Santorum that equates women controlling their reproductive lives and sexuality with being sluts.  And last but not least we have the idiot right winger from Wisconsin who believes that women don't care about money, so therefore it should be legal not to give equal pay for equal work.

The greatest tribute to the accomplishments of Sally Ride is to oppose the conservative war on women.

We live in a post-Sally Ride as astronaut world where a leading New Zealand Neuroscientist, James Flynn, in the area of Intelligence and IQ testing has found that women in the developed world have not only made tremendous strides, we have done so at a rate that surpasses men, as an indication of nurture showing a pronounced influence on the natural raw intelligence potential we inherit.

She has died too soon; her inspiration to all of us, but especially her influence on girls growing up now in a world changed by Sally Ride will continue after her.  She has left us a tremendous legacy, which the videos below document.  Thank you, Sally Ride; Rest in Peace.

We have a duty to your accomplishments to continue to fight any effort to

Now, not later, not never

The gun lobby for the gun manufacturers, aka the NRA, don't want any changes that would cut into their gun sales and blood money.  The politicians they have bought don't either.  They are hoping that when it is a less fresh tragedy, we will have fogotten, that the edge will be off of the discussion, that it will quietly go away while the American public focuses on the next new shiny distraction.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Colorado Killer Copycats Begin - with a machine gun instead of bombs

I thought the machine gun ownership was fascinating. More crazy gun guys demonstrating the gun culture failure.

From MSNBC.com:      

Police: Man was driving 112 mph on Maine Turnpike with AK-47, 4 handguns, boxes of ammo

Police: Man was driving 112 mph on Maine Turnpike with AK-47, 4 handguns, boxes of ammo

updated 2 hours 59 minutes ago

Maine police arrested a heavily armed man driving on the state turnpike who carried clippings about the cinema massacre in Colorado and claimed he attended the new "Batman" film with a loaded gun, authorities said on Monday.

Timothy Courtois, 49, was driving 112 mph on the Maine Turnpike with an AK-47 assault weapon, four handguns and several boxes of ammunition in his car when state police pulled him over about 10 a.m. on Sunday, said Maine Department of Public Safety spokesman Steve McCausland.
He told police that he was headed to Derry, N.H., to shoot a former employer, McCausland said in a statement.
Courtois told police he had attended the new Batman movie, "The Dark Knight," at a theater in Saco, Maine, on Saturday night with a loaded gun in his backpack, he said.
Police found clippings in his car about the mass shooting in Aurora, Colo., where 12 people were killed and 58 wounded by a gunman at a Friday showing of "The Dark Knight," he said.
At Courtois' home in Biddeford, Maine, police found several additional guns, including a machine gun, and thousands of rounds of ammunition, he said.
Courtois was slated to appear in court on Monday in Springvale District Court on initial charges of speeding and carrying a concealed weapon, McCausland said.

How Easy? Too Easy

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

MN GOP Hubris: Don't Audit, and Whatever You DO - Don't Blame Tony Sutton?????

Strib writer Repya gets it right about the righties; they have to know enough from their sort of selective review of finances that there are almost certainly more scandals and mismanagement lurking in their books.

If there were not other significant problems, they would be more transparent and a heckuva lot more responsible, particularly to their donors.
Not having a full, professional audit is the actions of that has something to hide and is actively trying to suppress that embarrassing information from reaching the public. 
Except that those things come out; they ALWAYS come out.  And MNGOP is only demonstrating that they are still secretive, still covering up, still not open and above board - and still not fully addressing their problems.

 It is reminiscent of the line from the Romney campaign, "That's all you need to know about our taxes / finances".

NO. IT ISN'T ALL WE NEED TO KNOW.  It especially isn't all the people on the right in Minnesota need to know.
Come clean, MN GOP; get an audit, and be public about the results, no matter what they are.

ONLY THEN CAN ANYONE MOVE ON AFTER YOUR MASSIVE UNPRECEDENTED SCREW UPS.

Last week I received a tweet that appears to have gone far further, in demonstrating the MN GOP total lack of perspective, context, and willingness to take responsibility. 

Can you IMAGINE the criticism, storm and contempt that would be coming from the right if the DFL had made the massive, colossal, mega-fuck ups that Sutton made, running the MN GOP?

It is extraordinary folly to compare Sutton to MN Sec State Ritchie, carefully and conscientiously following the spirit and the letter of the law in making sure that Minnesota Voters have a clear and representational wording available to them so as not to mislead or deceive them in their decision.

It is as opposite as possible not to be forthcoming to all state citizens about the secretively horrific financial mismanagement where a party is millions in debt, and a matter of hours away from eviction from their headquarters, and facing law suits and possible criminal charges for campaign activities.

Why should we believe the MN GOP when they tell us everything is fine? It wasn't when they told us that line of crap before.

So, you can see why the following is so tragically flawed, so opposite from any form of responsible accountability that it is really just downright funny -- in a bad way funny, not in a good way.

No party conservative or liberal can claim fiscal responsibility, but not do an audit after the problems they have had.

Tony Sutton @agsutton 09 Jul Mark Ritchie is more of a partisan hack than I was . . . shame on the state's top election official. #stribpol #morelawsuitscoming

In the context of that tweet, this Repya piece is even more compelling:

Let's audit those state GOP finances

• Article by: JOE REPYA
• Updated: July 22, 2012 - 8:11 PM

The party says it can't afford to come clean. OK, then. We'll pick up the tab.

The Republican Party of Minnesota seems to have adopted its own policy of "don't ask, don't tell" when it comes to investigating its multimillion-dollar financial mismanagement scandal.

A number of weeks ago, the party's finance chairman, Bill Guidera, challenged me, stating: "If you want a forensic audit of the RPM financial books, why don't you pay for it?"

Minnesota voters would agree that we need a two-party system to maintain the checks and balances necessary for good governance. When one political party dominates state politics, it often spells economic turmoil.

What's perplexing is the lack of interest at the state party offices in conducting a forensic audit. You would think that members of the party would be demanding accountability from those who held fiduciary responsibility over their finances. The party is reported to have amassed a debt of more than $2.3 million.
Party leaders said they investigated the problems and, on May 7, issued a report saying they could find no illegality. The 20-page report from the party's Budget, Financial Controls and Oversight Committee went to great lengths to point out that although calls were made for a forensic audit, no audit of any kind was completed. Rather, there was a review of 11 specific party transactions.

However, on July 13, the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board leveled fines exceeding $33,000 and acknowledged a possible criminal violation. Even the most partisan Republican should find this troubling and demand a forensic audit.

The Republican Party of Minnesota must prove to the state's voters that it is not engaged in a cover-up. Remember, it's not the act of wrongdoing but the cover-up that always brings you down. The party's executive board has instead taken the "don't ask, don't tell" position, insisting the party is broke and can't afford a forensic audit.

The Campaign Finance Board ruling raises troubling questions: Why is the party really refusing to conduct an audit? Will an audit uncover more alleged civil or criminal wrongdoing? Will it implicate more GOP leaders, including officeholders past and present? Would it expose additional Federal Election Commission violations? Will it expose graft, political payoffs or outright corruption? Will more GOP lobbyists or major donors be implicated?

People who have nothing to hide do not object to a thorough investigation.

Mr. Guidera, it is time we clean and sanitize our GOP house and drain the swamp. So I take up your challenge.
A group of concerned Republicans will personally raise the money necessary to conduct a thorough and transparent forensic audit of the Republican Party of Minnesota financial books dating back to 2007.

We have established Minnesota Republicans for Financial Accountability and Justice LLC to solicit funds for that purpose. Anyone is welcome to donate, be they Republicans, Democrats or independents. You can donate either via P.O. Box 22306, Eagan, MN 55122-0306, or on our website, www.mnrepublicans forfinancialjustice.com, using PayPal.

Our objective is simple: to restore fiscal honesty and transparency to the Republican Party of Minnesota, and to hold those who had fiduciary responsibility for party finances accountable.

We will choose the firm to conduct the audit and produce a transparent finding to the party. The LLC will cover all the audit expenses. We will also allow the current party treasurer to observe the forensic audit process.

There is, however, a time limit on our offer. The party must accept our terms and turn over the books no later than Aug. 15 to allow adequate time for the forensic audit to be conducted prior to this fall's election. If the party does not comply, we withdraw our offer and will return the money donated.

Common sense says this is an offer that can't be turned down by anyone who has nothing to hide. Will the party accept, or will it risk more negative publicity and a major voter backlash in November? The court of public opinion is watching.
----------------
Joe Repya is a retired U.S. Army officer, Republican activist and former candidate for party chair.

Afraid of the truth, for a change,
instead of fear of gays, Muslims
 Immigrants and voters?

Corrupt PARTISAN BLINDNESS
and HYPOCRISY MUCH?

and now....NO AUDITS?

Where things could go, and
maybe should go, without
the MN GOP coming clean;
TAKE THE AUDIT OFFER!!!!

Failed Gun Culture, Failed Argument

The reality is, guns DO kill people.  It is a specious argument to say guns don't kill people, people kill people.

People USING GUNS kill people. 

They kill people more effectively than other means of violence, including as a means for people acting impulsively to kill themselves. 

We have a lot of mass shootings in this country, compared to other countries where they have more reasonable, more restrictive gun regulation.  Clearly, these mass shootings are significantly avoidable, if not entirely avoidable.  Nations like Australia and the U.K. or Norway rarely have a problem with mass shootings once every 10 to 15 ears or more.  Canada has had a couple, very recently; they blame guns coming over the border from the U.S., falling into the wrong hands, circumventing their gun laws.  It happens in Mexico as well; we are a bad neighboring country with which to share a border in that regard.

We are not more free because of gun ownership. We are not more safe because of more firearms either.  Ballots, not bullets make us free.  People being people, not corporations being people make us free.  The right is wronging this country, and demonstrating failed reason as the so often do, in not limiting easy firearms  to both legal and illegal possessers, but instead trying to prevent legal voters from having easy access to the ballot box, on the pretext of non-existent voter fraud.

It might be different - MIGHT be a different story, IF there were actual significant voter fraud; there isn't.  Speculating there might be, if someone cannot prove it to exist -- and if voter fraud DID exist sufficient to alter election outcomes, more instances would be provable (if not all) than show up now.

Here are a couple of editorial cartoons that highlight important issues:

Taste Has Never Been Madonna's Strong Suit

It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if the police in the UK gave Madonna a free jail cell sleepover for ignoring their requests regarding guns, real or replica, unless she has permits for them.

I guess when you're on the slippery slope of becoming irrelevant, you have to try to be more sensational and less substantive; (it certainly would explain Bachmann, Coulter, and the other right wing media whores and horrors).

From MSN.

© AP/ Madonna

Madonna defies police, takes guns onstage during Scotland show

July 22, 2012, 6:09 PM EST

WENN
Madonna ignored pleas to tone down her MDNA show at a concert in Scotland on Saturday and brandished a machine gun and pistol onstage.
Police officials advised the pop superstar not to include images of firearms and weapons themselves during the Murrayfield Stadium gig in Edinburgh in the wake of the Colorado cinema massacre on Friday.
But she defied the local authorities and hit the stage with pistols and an AK47 assault rifle -- as she has at all the shows on her MDNA tour.

A spokeswoman for the Mothers Against Guns organization tells local newspaper the Daily Record, "Madonna and her dancers using replica guns was always in bad taste but given what happened in Colorado it is even worse. She should know better."

Meanwhile, fans arriving early at the stadium caught the Material Girl and her band completing rehearsals onstage.

The pop star told the surprised concertgoers, "I'm just running through some songs early."