Atlanta spa shootings spark new push for gun controls
Prominent gun control groups angered by the ease with which the alleged Atlanta spa shooter was able to acquire his weapon are calling on politicians to convert their outrage at the massacre into a renewed push for legislative reforms.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Giffords Law Center, the advocacy group named for the former congresswoman and gun violence survivor Gabrielle Giffords, say the deaths of eight people, including six Asian American women, merely hastens the need for action in Washington DC and at state level.
The alleged murderer, Robert Aaron Long, purchased a 9mm handgun on Tuesday morning, just hours before Tuesday’s deadly rampage through three Atlanta area spas. According to law enforcement sources, and the gun shop owner, the transaction breached no federal gun laws or procedures.
“Hate exists everywhere in the world and America’s unfettered access to weapons makes that hate lethal. It is tragic that it took the highly public murder of eight people to prompt that conversation, again,” Brady’s president, Kris Brown, told the Guardian.
“The attack in Atlanta is a horrifying display of how racism, misogyny and white supremacy, when combined with firearms, are lethal. Whether it’s waiting periods for firearms purchases, expanded and strengthened background checks, or resources for mental health and community violence intervention, it is clear that this attack has catalyzed the discussion around what measures we need to take to stop gun violence.”
The news from the police is that this was not a racially motivated hate crim but the shooter was a sex addict that shot women at “full service” massage parlors to end the temptation. Yes, horrible and sick, but not a racist hate crime.
Numerous politicians at national and state level condemned the shooting, with several expressing concern that Long, 21, was able to walk into Big Woods Goods gun shop and range in Canton on the day of his killing spree, pass a rudimentary background check, and walk straight out with the weapon in his pocket.
He passed a 4473 NICS check.
He had previously spent six months at a rehabilitation facility in Roswell, Georgia, beginning in 2019, seeking treatment for sex addiction, according to a roommate at the Maxwell Recovery Center, and attended weekly therapy sessions thereafter.
This only matters if he was adjudicated mentally ill. If he volunteered for rehab and therapy than it’s not illegal for him to buy a gun nor would that show up on a background check.
Moreover it shouldn’t. Most addicts are not violent and we don’t want people who are facing addiction or other issues to worry that seeking help with lose them their gun rights. We want to encourage people who need help to get it, and that means when people seek help they shouldn’t be punished for it.
Igor Volsky, executive director of the advocacy group Guns Down America, pointed to the state’s no-wait law as a significant factor in the shootings. “I would really encourage Georgia and other states to look at what happened here and think about what they could do in order to reduce or prevent such incidents from happening again,” he told Newsweek.
Mike Wilensky, an attorney and Democratic party representative in Georgia’s state house, concurred.
“Waiting periods create an important ‘cooling off’ period that can help prevent impulsive acts of gun violence, including gun homicides and suicides,” he said in one of a series of tweets calling for new restrictions.
Is there any evidence that cooling off periods work or this person would have not shot eight people if he has been forced to wait 72 hours for his gun?
“We need to have a law in Georgia that after you apply for a gun there is a waiting period. I have never heard of someone in a rush to get a gun for a safe, good reason.”
That’s bullshit. There are many more legitimate reasons to need a gun now than not need a gun now. Ask anyone who has been threatened.
This is pure blood dancing.
How many recovering alcoholics shoot bartenders to avoid the temptation of drinking? This seems extremely rare.
I not sure what else within reason could have stopped this?
The guy had no real red flags that I’ve seen reported on that he was a potential mass murderer.
But that doesn’t matter, the point is to eliminate your rights.
Every drop of blood that falls is one for them to splash around in and they are doing that with alacrity.
“… we don’t want people who are facing addiction or other issues to worry that seeking help with lose them their gun rights.”
Just so. See also PTSD, and the persistent push to make a diagnosis thereof disqualifying.
A lot of the women these “gun control groups” purport to “protect” have died at the hand of abusive exes, boyfriends, husbands or stalkers while waiting for approval to obtain a firearm in state with “cooling off periods.”
“Victim disarmament types are sick, sick people, who’d rather see a woman raped in an alley and strangled with her own pantyhose than see her with a gun in her hand.” — T. D. Melrose, quoted by Neil Smith
Gaslighting again. Abusers want their victims solely dependent on them for ‘protection’. In the political realm, they want to make things more dangerous, so that the people will give up more liberty in exchange for that protection.
With that in mind, the more bad things that happen, the better.
Prepare for a slew of “gun control” proposals that have jack-all to do with the shootings. “Assault weapon” bans, standard-capacity magazine bans, Universal Background Checks, waiting/cooling-off periods, “safe storage” mandates, one-gun-per-month limits, registration and licensing of guns and gun owners, limits on the applicability of concealed weapon licenses … the works.
Even though the facts show not a single one of those would have prevented or stopped him (going in same order as above):
– Used a handgun, so no AWB would apply.
– Visited three locations, with plenty of opportunity to reload 10-round mags in between.
– Passed a federal/NICS background check.
– If not the same day, would have gone in three days … or five, or seven, or ten, or whatever.
– Didn’t store the gun at home, and even if he did would have had it available.
– Only bought one gun.
– Would have still had a gun with registration and licensing (see previous line about passing the background check).
– Didn’t apply for or receive a CWL.
And the real elephant in the room: He was a man on a mission — to remove sexual temptation from his community — and without a gun would very likely have used a different weapon. Because that’s what men with personal missions do.
When a man is intent on violence, he WILL commit violence, even more so when he wholeheartedly believes the violence is sanctioned by God and/or the greater good. No law is going to prevent it.
Yeah. He could have used any weapon from a kitchen knife to a baseball bat.
…sigh, this is only the millionth time sumdude asshole kills people and it’s the weapon’s fault.