2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,367
- 52,615
- 2,290
Good article that demonstrates…again…that guns do not cause gum crime or gun murder…….the time when the U.S. government flooded the country with inexpensive military rifles…….and nothing bad happened……..
Possibly you’re old enough to remember the great massacre spree of 1964? Classrooms shot up, strip malls decimated, scout troops blown away, fast food restaurants turned into mortuaries.
And all because, in its infinite stupidity, the U.S. government dumped 240,000 high-capacity .30 caliber assault rifles into an otherwise innocent America.
The weapons clearly had a demon-spirit to them. Compared to anything else in the market, they had that murder-most-easy look. One glance at the sinister gleam of the walnut stock which caressed the military-gray receiver and barrel of the weapon, its magazine wickedly boasting of many cartridges ready and waiting, its photo- and Hollywood associations with war, and some went screwball. They had the overwhelming desire to use it as it was meant to be used. It was not powerful enough for deer and not accurate enough for vermin. It existed only to kill human beings.
Except there was no massacre spree of 1964, despite the fact that in 1963 the United States Army surplussed 240,000 M1 carbines via the NRA. They were available through the mail at $20. Not an NRA member? Eighty bucks, then, from any sporting goods store. Denver’s Dave Cook’s–“Guns Galore at Prices to Score”– had them by mail order, magazine and sling included, postage, $1.25.
What did happen next was remarkable. It was also simple: nothing. Firearms deaths in 1964 rose modestly, in accord with statistical norms. No spurt of slaughter can be documented, much less attributed, to the sudden presence of all these weapons of war.
Some experts might argue that the carbine, an auxiliary rifle adopted by the army — six million were manufactured — for truck drivers and clerks, but preferred by many combat GI’s, was not a true “assault rifle.” It fired a cartridge far less powerful than the army’s majestic Garand rifle, a true battle weapon.
Liberals will add that it’s not scary, by which they mean it doesn’t scare them. It doesn’t have the pistol grip or the ventilated cooling sleeve encasing the barrel that so enflames the liberal imagination. That’s because it expresses the design tropes of the ’40s, not the ’50’s. However, for more expert commentary on this issue, we could ask the dead — they knew it well.
—————
So in 1964, the guns were there — lots of them, everywhere, dirt cheap. But Gendron and Ramos were not. We must look elsewhere for the reason why.
www.powerlineblog.com
Possibly you’re old enough to remember the great massacre spree of 1964? Classrooms shot up, strip malls decimated, scout troops blown away, fast food restaurants turned into mortuaries.
And all because, in its infinite stupidity, the U.S. government dumped 240,000 high-capacity .30 caliber assault rifles into an otherwise innocent America.
The weapons clearly had a demon-spirit to them. Compared to anything else in the market, they had that murder-most-easy look. One glance at the sinister gleam of the walnut stock which caressed the military-gray receiver and barrel of the weapon, its magazine wickedly boasting of many cartridges ready and waiting, its photo- and Hollywood associations with war, and some went screwball. They had the overwhelming desire to use it as it was meant to be used. It was not powerful enough for deer and not accurate enough for vermin. It existed only to kill human beings.
Except there was no massacre spree of 1964, despite the fact that in 1963 the United States Army surplussed 240,000 M1 carbines via the NRA. They were available through the mail at $20. Not an NRA member? Eighty bucks, then, from any sporting goods store. Denver’s Dave Cook’s–“Guns Galore at Prices to Score”– had them by mail order, magazine and sling included, postage, $1.25.
What did happen next was remarkable. It was also simple: nothing. Firearms deaths in 1964 rose modestly, in accord with statistical norms. No spurt of slaughter can be documented, much less attributed, to the sudden presence of all these weapons of war.
Some experts might argue that the carbine, an auxiliary rifle adopted by the army — six million were manufactured — for truck drivers and clerks, but preferred by many combat GI’s, was not a true “assault rifle.” It fired a cartridge far less powerful than the army’s majestic Garand rifle, a true battle weapon.
Liberals will add that it’s not scary, by which they mean it doesn’t scare them. It doesn’t have the pistol grip or the ventilated cooling sleeve encasing the barrel that so enflames the liberal imagination. That’s because it expresses the design tropes of the ’40s, not the ’50’s. However, for more expert commentary on this issue, we could ask the dead — they knew it well.
—————
So in 1964, the guns were there — lots of them, everywhere, dirt cheap. But Gendron and Ramos were not. We must look elsewhere for the reason why.
Stephen Hunter: The massacre spree that never was
Stephen Hunter retired as the Pulitzer Prize-winning chief film critic of The Washington Post in 2008 and is the author of the Bob Lee Swagger novels. His most recent is Targeted, published earlier this year. Inspired by recent events, he sent us this column. * * * * * Possibly you're old enough...
www.powerlineblog.com
