A curious quandry for controller banners after the Navy Yard shootings...

[Eleanors38]

There are many reasons why the Navy Yard shootings did not resonate with the public as the Sandy Hook tragedy did; I have speculated & posted on this previously. But another possible reason came into focus during discussions: Any call for bans was throttled because the banner belief system ran head-long into gun-owner "buying" activism.

Specifically, if controller/banners truly believe that "more guns = more crime," and any calls by elites in office and in MSM for gun bans & restrictions spur more gun/ammo purchasing (as happened after Sandy Hook), then the constructive thing to do is to zip it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were no wrap-around-the-block lines at gun shows, no runs on ammunition, after the Navy Yard killings. And there were no calls for banning anything, either.

This could be a curious but fundamental turn in the "gun debate" where one side has to mute its most impassioned calls for bans lest they start "putting out the fire with gasoline." (Apologies to David Bowie)

[Jenoch]

1. I believe you are overthinking the situation.

I believe there are two reasons there were not as many negative reactions towards guns and gun owners, and the NRA, after the Navy Yard murders when compared to the Sandy Hook murders. The first reason is the victims, the secod reason is the gun that was used to initiate the Navy Yard shootings.

[Eleanors38]

5. Quite agree.

[rrneck]

2. There are other contibuting factors to a roll off in gun purchases.

A more important one might be market saturation.

In terms of the symbolic importance of guns, the features of guns that make them dangerous for innocents makes them equalizers for innocents in the event of an assault. That merry go round of potentialities underlies the entire debate. So whenever there is a mass shooting, calls for the elimination of guns are matched with the desire to acquire them for defense.

The Navy Yard shooting and Sandy Hook, while both mass shootings, involved a different set of victims and their role in our culture. Sandy Hook involved children while the Navy Yard shooting involved the military. Never mind that guns are not commonly carried on military bases and certainly not in office buildings, any organization with the word "navy" in it calls to mind rough and ready soldiers kicking ass and taking names at the drop of a hat. The murder of defenseless children in what should be in a place as safe as their homes personalizes the experience for the public in a way that the killing of people associated with the military would not.

I expect a bunch of factors combine to make the Navy Yard shooting a less viable product for lobbyist group and firearm manufacturer profit. He used the wrong gun for the wrong reasons on the wrong people too soon after the last mass shooting and too late after landmark legislation had run its course. The result was outrage fatigue, legislation fatigue, stereotype confusion, and an event that does not fit the ideologically based business model of the outrage manufacturers and fearmongers that feed off of both sides of the issue.

[krispos42]

3. Good post

The result was outrage fatigue, legislation fatigue, stereotype confusion, and an event that does not fit the ideologically based business model of the outrage manufacturers and fearmongers that feed both sides of the issue.

I like the last line especially. The gun-control side was forced to look foolish when the weapon used was a pump-action shotgun and not an "assault weapon", as initially reported, but said that they should still be banned anyway.

[NYC_SKP]

4. +1 (nt)

[DonP]

7. Not to mention a few folks here on DU ...

"The gun-control side was forced to look foolish ... "

We had more than a few folks here insisting that AR's be banned immediately.

Most refused to recant, even after the facts came out and one kept insisting that; "He could have had an AR of he wanted one, there was no law to stop him." Except that there was, but far be it for mere facts to get in the way.

I doubt that even this embarrassment will make them temper their rants if another shooting occurs and the dutiful media minions start wailing about ARs again.

I've learned with events like the Navy Yard to wait at least 36 hours to find out what really happened. The media are in such a hurry to be the first with the news they often create the story they think it should be, rather than reporting what actually happened.

[Eleanors38]

6. When I posted on the diff between Sandy Hook and the Yard a couple weeks ago...

the notion of belief vs. language (of prohibition) and demonstrable consequences for using that language came up. I have to wonder if this has crossed the minds of elite prohibitionists as it did some posters on DU.

I recall responding to one of my morr virulent critics earlier this year that as mass-shootings take on the trappings of news cycle entertainment as well as tragedy, that each successive outrage would become less and less evocative to the public, and opportunities to act constructively would suffer. I'm beginning to think "outrage" is a poor instigator for Any kind of constructive act, given the fundamental conservatism (when it comes to new ideas) of controller/banners.

[rrneck]

8. I think outrage is a great tool to focus public opinion.

But given the nature of guns the outrage is difficult to focus and then harness to constructive change. Half the "outraged" want to ban guns and the other half wants to buy more. The result is a cultural zero sum but huge profitability for the culture war machine.

[Jenoch]

10. That bill is about shield laws that go beyong the 1st Amendment.

The bill would give reporters more rights to protect their sources, it's not about limiting rights.

[sdrake]

11. while i hate finstein i was

stupid and drunk, looking for any reason to hate finstein.

was completely in the wrong.

[oneshooter]

12. There were several members od DU that called for the

pump shotgun to be added to the list of banned longarms. They were laughed silent.

[DonP]

13. Ah, in the mystical world of ...

... Bansalot they speak a strange language with many contradictory phrases.

Knowing the current laws, what a NICS check is or a 4473, has nothing to do with activism apparently. In fact it qualfies you to be a host yonder.

I enjoyed that thread and it was hard not to write a sarcastic response. But eventually their own rulers cast him/her aside.

"Why not ban pump shotguns?" indeed, and probably never win another election in our lifetime.

[oneshooter]

14. I believe that I was #10 to be shown the door. n/t