Jared Loughner’s Glock.

Via on Jan 11, 2011

What “sport” are glocks with extended cartridges best for?

A national moment of mourning becomes political theater: will we learn from this? All reports indicate “no” changes will be made to gun control/gun rights.

Jared Loughner’s gun, which cost only about $500, from a photo on his MySpace page:

From ABC:

Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, said the pistol’s price ranges from $400 to $500, not including bullets and magazines. Wal-Mart Inc. confirmed that Loughner tried to buy ammunition at one of its stores but was refused service due to “strange behavior,” according to the FBI. He was later able to get it at another Wal-Mart.

He bought the gun itself here, from Sportsman’s Warehouse. What “sport” are glocks with extended cartridges best for?

From a blog in defense of gun rights:

Inevitably, gun control advocates will ask why anyone needs a 30-round magazine. Why shouldn’t “high capacity magazines” be banned—as they are in CA and MA—by federal fiat? Because the same firepower that Loughner unleashed on innocent victims could save the life of an innocent person armed with a Glock 19 with a 30-round magazine when faced by an assailant or assailants. Sad, but true.

What sort of self-defense requires 31 shots?

Here’s what Mr. Loughner’s automatic-fire glock (with extended cartrage that allowed him to get off 31 shots) looks like, how it fires—30-plus shots in less than 15 seconds.

YouTube Preview Image

From Christian Science Monitor:

Why Jared Loughner was allowed to buy a gun

Despite evidence that Arizona shooting suspect Jared Loughner is mentally unstable, he was never declared mentally unfit by a court, so his name did not appear in the federal background-check database used by gun sellers.

…The federal Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits the possession of firearms by the mentally ill. So why was Mr. Loughner able to guy a gun?

The ability to own a firearm is a constitutionally protected right, and depriving someone of that right involves a legal process…

…The best-known evidence of Loughner’s mental issues comes from Pima Community College, where he was suspended last year apparently because of mental problems. The college informed him that he could return only if he obtained “a mental health clearance indicating that, in the opinion of a mental health professional, his presence at the college does not present a danger to himself or others.”…

Some states have been slow to report names that belong in the “do not sell” list, even after Congress passed a law in 2007 aimed at punishing states with inadequate compliance records and providing incentives to states with good reporting records.

The law passed after the Virginia Tech shooting that year, in which a mentally ill student killed 32 people. In 2005, a judge had declared the shooter, Seung Hui Cho, a danger to himself and ordered him into psychiatric care. But Mr. Cho was still able to purchase two semiautomatic handguns, because his name did not appear in the NICS database.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reported last Friday, the day before the Tucson shootings, that between Jan. 1, 2008, and Aug. 31, 2010, the number of disqualifying mental illness records submitted to NICS by states and territories had more than doubled – from 402,047 records to 929,254. Adding federal records brings the total to nearly 1.1 million.

But the Brady campaign argues that “millions of relevant records” are still missing from the system…for the rest, click here.

The sad thing is…unless we rise up in organized protest, unless our pundits and politicians grow a conscience and make beautiful noise…nothing much will change in terms of ready and affordable access to murder weapons. If we don’t learn from history, we’re doomed to repeat it. So next time this happens, and it will happen again, my raw, sad heart and your raw, sad heart will be calcified, cynical, we’ll say I told you so with dissatisfaction under our breath.

For our nation is a nation in love with guns.

About elephant journal

elephant journal is dedicated to "bringing together those working (and playing) to create enlightened society." We're about anything that helps us to live a good life that's also good for others, and our planet. >>> Founded as a print magazine in 2002, we went national in 2005 and then (because mainstream magazine distribution is wildly inefficient from an eco-responsible point of view) transitioned online in 2009. >>> elephant's been named to 30 top new media lists, and was voted #1 in the US on twitter's Shorty Awards for #green content...two years running. >>> Get involved: > Subscribe to our free Best of the Week e-newsletter. > Follow us on Twitter Fan us on Facebook. > Write: send article or query. > Advertise. > Pay for what you read, help indie journalism survive and thrive. Questions? info elephantjournal com

933 views

Appreciate this article? Support indie media!

(We use super-secure PayPal—but don't worry—you don't need an account with PayPal.)

Elephriends - Mindful Affiliates

9 Responses to “Jared Loughner’s Glock.”

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Waylon Lewis, Red Fox. Red Fox said: Jared Loughner’s Glock. http://bit.ly/gyccIV [...]

  2. BrotherRog says:

    Gun rights advocates are right to contend that, "only law abiding citizens should have weapons."

    Trouble is, all of us are law abiding citizens, until we aren't — until, when under the stress of an escalating family dispute, one of us remembers there's a gun upstairs and comes downstairs and uses it; until, when under the stress of an escalating road rage altercation, one of us remembers that there's a gun in the glove box, and uses it….

    And gun rights advocates rightfully assert that, "people with mental health conditions shouldn't have weapons."

    Trouble, most any of us can come down with a mental health condition at most anytime. 1 out of every 5 citizens will experience a mental illness at some point in their lives – with depression being the most common. Guns are statistically the most effective means of suicide. (see: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/18/health/

    It is clear that the status quo isn't working and that the system failed. Jared Loughner should not have been in the possession of a firearm.

    Part of why I choose not to own a gun is because of my awareness that, "who am I to think that I won't be the 1 out of every 5 people who will experience mental illness?" I'm also aware that gun owners, or someone in their family, are statistically more likely to be harmed by their weapon than they are ever to use it to protect themselves against a "bad guy."

    It's also clear to me that the most that I can say is that I am CURRENTLY a law abiding citizen and that I am not CURRENTLY experiencing a mental health condition. And that's the most you can say about yourself too.

    • tbs says:

      You are absolutely right. So, in that respect, you had better stop driving, get rid of all of the knives in your house, hammers, screw drivers, and of course plastic bags. Since you could become a danger at any time and just spontaneously become a murderer, it's best you commit yourself to a mental institution or even prison, for at any time you could commit a crime without warning.

      • Roger Wolsey says:

        there's a major difference between a gun which is explicitly designed for killing and doing so efficiently than those other items which aren't designed for that and which do so clumsily. that comparison is falicious and you know it.

  3. BrotherRog says:

    Tom, there is a major difference between a gun and a knife, club, or rock. Guns are far more effective killing devices and guns are involved in the majority of homicides.

  4. Jim Coleman says:

    How many of those gun fatalities also involve alchohol? Something else to ban.

  5. nanana says:

    Anyone can own a knife, it can be concealed easily, purchased anywhere, and it can be used without making a sound. Guns are already illegal to be used in a crime, and in fact murder is already illegal, so making guns "more" illegal obviously isn't the answer. There is nothing "more illegal" than murder and the law doesn't seem to stop that.

    If your family were tied up and bleeding to death, and 9yr old daughter were being raped, I am betting that you would not hesitate to grab any available weapon to make it stop. I am even betting you'd reach for the gun first.

    • Roger Wolsey says:

      nanana, since i don't have a daughter and since i don't have a gun, your "bet" doesn't apply. that said, I would certainly do what I can to stop a loved one from being harmed. with my own bare hands. I do have a baseball bat in the closet and could consider using it, but i doubt if i'd need to resort to it.

Leave a Reply