Hear David Boze every weekday at 6am on 770 KTTH
 David Boze
Get David's Books
The Little Red Book of Obamunism: Quotations from The One
It's the must-have election resource of 2012! It's a pocket-sized collection that reveals not just what the president says, but what he means!
Buy it now on Amazon.com
Look inside: Read a sample

Kumar Joe, The Singing Crow
Kumar Joe, the Singing Crow is the tale of a little crow who was born with a heart for music, but not a voice for it.
Buy it now on Amazon.com
Look inside: Read a sample



Most popular
Help us build a Fisher House
Bonneville Seattle is raising funds for the construction of a second Fisher House at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma and we need your help.

Soledad and Lott

December 19, 2012 @ 8:13 am (Updated: 1:51 pm - 12/19/12 )

I find this video fascinating. Soledad is repulsed by the conclusions Lott's research has led him to, to the point where it appears it's almost impossible for her to actually comprehend what he is saying. Especially telling is when she challenges Lott to "prove" that the fact that the killer at the Aurora theater ignored the theater closest to his home and the biggest theater closest to his home and instead chose to attack the theater with the posted "gun free zone" signs. Lott essentially grants that his choice of 1 of 7 theaters COULD be a coincidence but points out this coincidence happens regularly with mass killers. CNN wouldn't apply that level of proof to the rest of its coverage (including their constant reporting that the Newtown killer was autistic--why do they keep reporting that if they have no established link?).

 

This video is also fascinating, but a little older. Again, Lott is rarely allowed to finish a point or provide the context his adversaries are supposedly seeking. Often, they decide to put words in his mouth so that they can more easily knock down the straw man they have set up.

More David Boze

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (56)


  • Add A Comment

  • Drool wrote...
    Lott's other Assertion
    December 19, 2012 9:35 am
    That all but one of these crimes since 1950 happened in a "gun free zone". You can go directly to the web and find out it's false by searching.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Did Lott Check....
    December 19, 2012 9:36 am
    .....how many theaters were screening Batman that night? I bet not. The shooter was apparently mimicking a character (Joker) from a Batman movie with his dyed hair. That would indicate to me that the movie had more to do with the theater of choice than any gun free zone.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    DROOL
    December 19, 2012 10:28 am
    Good job.He refused to look at the obvious another example of how the Rightys twist the FACTs.I would like to see the media find out who signs these so called experts paycheck and run that info on the screen while the interview takes place and that goes for the so called lefty experts also.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • saylean wrote...
    Evil prefers unarmed victims
    December 19, 2012 3:35 pm
    Dictators prefer unarmed civilians.... Criminals prefer unarmed victims.... Just put yourself in a criminals mind..you have two choices, victim A who you know is unarmed....or victim B who you know is armed (or might be)...why would you not eliminate the risk and go with the unarmed? I guess if criminals dont prefer unarmed victims, armored car drives should disarm too.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    saylean
    December 20, 2012 10:04 am
    Sorry but after watching cop shows TV it seems that the criminal element is made up off the idiot segment of our population. They kill,rob and assault without much in the way of planning or giving a thought to what will happen to them if they are caught.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • saylean wrote...
    @messiah101
    December 20, 2012 10:45 am
    You're right! All the more reason to BE armed, as they are half the time, not even rational.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    Bear in mind...
    December 19, 2012 4:58 pm
    The same government that wants to disarm you, purchased over a billion rounds of hollow point ammo themselves this year.

    There is no legitimate war time use for hollow points. It's against the rules.

    Fortunately, this type of ammo is typically used in low capacity magazines. So, depending on their accuracy, they will have to change clips after shooting every five or ten civilians. That should keep the death toll lower.

    Remember to keep your hands where they can see them when you pass the TSA checkpoint booths. Please have your papers and your groin ready for inspection. Soledad and Piers will outline the proper procedure for you in an upcoming broadcast. Stay tuned...

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Roomtemp, Bear in Mind....
    December 19, 2012 5:45 pm
    The reason the government buys so much of this ammo is proper practices dictate training with the ammo one uses in service....that means the JHP service rounds.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    This shows the POWER of the Gun Lobby
    December 19, 2012 7:40 pm
    Some ammo manufacturers are getting rich filling these contracts.Funny I googled "government buys billion rounds of ammo" And every link had a different amount of ammo bought
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    " Fortunately, this type of ammo is typically used in low capacity magazines."
    December 21, 2012 5:19 pm
    Nope. It goes in high capacity mags too.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hayduke wrote...
    roomtemp: "There is no legitimate war time use for hollow points."
    December 19, 2012 7:37 pm
    Well then I guess you'd have no problem BANNING hollow points, would you. Unless you like using them for, ahem, deer hunting.

    Look, I grew up around guns, and I believe in the right to own guns as much as any of you RWNJ's here. But can we not find some common ground, for Chrissakes, and take a few rational measures to at least reduce the frequency and severity of these shootings? And no, sorry. But arming teachers is absolutely idiotic.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Hayduke
    December 19, 2012 7:52 pm
    But can we not find some common ground, for Chrissakes, and take a few rational measures to at least reduce the frequency and severity of these shootings?

    I have yet to see a recommendation that would have kept weapons out of the hands of the mother. You have to disarm women to achieve your goal. You willing to disarm single/divorced women because someone might steal their weapons?

    Now I agree, knowing that her son was disturbed, she should have locked them away...can't legistate intelligence or people facing reality. When a parent is in denial you can't make a law to force them to wake up.

    If, as you say, have been around firearms then you know that he could have done exactly the same amount of killing with just pistols...a ban on rifles, or just rifles that look a certain way, isn't going to stop shootings.

    It may come as a surprise, but conservatives are heartbroken at the senseless deaths of these children as well...knee-jerk reactions won't bring them back, and won't really save many if any down the road. And the cost is to give away yet more of our rights...and the federal government does not have the authority to take our rights away...at least in the manner that is being tried. You want to change a constitutional right? Change the constitution. There is a process for it...yes, it's hard, and intentionally so.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Hayduke
    December 20, 2012 6:17 am
    Holowpoints ARE used for hunting as or the more commonly used soft point ammunition. Just because the military do not use it (per Geneva conventions) does not mean it has no legitimate use. In fact hollowpoint ammunition when used in a tactical situation lessens the likelihood of over-penetration and a round hitting more than one person. In hunting and a tactical situation you also want a lot of kinetic energy transferred in a short amount of time. Expanding ammunition provides this.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hayduke wrote...
    rational:
    December 19, 2012 8:19 pm
    "I have yet to see a recommendation that would have kept weapons out of the hands of the mother."

    If what I've read is correct, the mother had SIX weapons. Tell me why a woman, or for that matter, an able bodied man, needs SIX friggin guns for defense? On the other hand, massacre shooters, like the one at the Portland mall, typically like to carry several weapons. Yeah, so I recommend a limit of say, 2 or 3 guns, for starters. Sorry all you collectors out there, but learn to "live" with a few less. I'm sure you'll still be able enjoy your hobby.

    "Now I agree, knowing that her son was disturbed, she should have locked them away...can't legislate intelligence or people facing reality"

    You're damm right we can. If we make people like this mom criminally and civilly liable for unlocked guns being stolen from their homes, you can bet people will be more careful with them. This is negligence. We penalize people for other negligent actions, for example, driving a car recklessly. Why should gun owners get a free pass? Oh, and for that matter you have to pass a TEST to own a car. Just like you do in the military before they let you carry a weapon. Why should the average idiot civilian gun owner be given special rights? And how many times do we hear stories about cops and gun safety advocates accidentally shooting themselves or loved ones?

    Requiring background checks at gun shows is another option. Also, requiring a waiting period before buying a gun. You know, like conservatives like to impose on rape victims before they can abort the progeny of their attacker.

    "If, as you say, have been around firearms then you know that he could have done exactly the same amount of killing with just pistols." This is the same nonsense your side says about knives. really? Let's say you and I are engaged in a gun battle. You have a choice of a pistol, or an AR-15. Which would you prefer? Yeah, I thought so.

    "You want to change a constitutional right?"

    No more than conservatives do. Conservatives are always putting forth constitutional amendments,for example, on flag-burning. And when the founder wrote the Constitution, all they knew were muzzle loaders. Do you think if they were around to witness sandy Hook, they'd still feel the same?

    And i seem to remember a few choice words in the 2nd Amendment. Something about a "WELL-REGULATED MILITIA. I know you right wingers like to think your the only ones with any authority on or appreciation for the constitution, so could you please explain what the founders really meant by those three words?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Honus wrote...
    What the Founders meant is childishly easy to ascertain.
    December 19, 2012 10:17 pm
    Hopefully the formatting comes out okay with these cut and pasted quotes. "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788 "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People." — Tench Coxe, 1788. How many quotes do you need, by the way? There are plenty more.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Frogsplash wrote...
    Honus
    December 20, 2012 10:31 am
    Based on the times, it sure was easy to ascertain.Just as it was the 1st amendment. Times and technology have changed. Interpretations based on today's technology are required. Does the 2nd apply to RPG's? Use your own quote "Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People" Based on this, you or I should be able to have nukes, tanks, chemical weapons, whatever we so desire that the military possesses. I'd like my own fully armed and capable F16 please, because Tench Coxe in 1788 said it was my birthright, and shouldn't be in the hands of the Federal Government, but in mine. Yes, the right to bear arms is our right, but, there DOES have to be limits set. You have to examine the 2nd and interpret it based on todays technology.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    @peeps...
    December 19, 2012 10:24 pm
    @drool... From what I've read, target rounds like wad cutters are typically used for training because they're much cheaper. We used about 5-6 million rounds a year of various caliber in Iraq during a war. They must need a LOT of practice eh? When you consider that many large purchases were made under different agencies like social security, noaa, fish and game, etc. It looks more than a little suspicious.

    @messiah101... You probably read many different numbers because it wasn't all made in one order. That won't be an issue anymore because they decided to keep that information from the public now. Part of the famed Obama admin transparency no doubt. Are you tacitly admitting that your oh-so-transparent presidential choice and dem controlled senate is in the pocket of the gun lobby too? Glad you're finally waking up, lol. He's also in the pocket of bankers and the military industrial complex. But who's counting. Have you been having fun watching MSNBC beating the war drum on Syria? I guess you lefties must need a little more convincing, I haven't heard nearly as much on Fox. Stay tuned for the next undeclared Obama war. I told you this months ago by the way.

    @Hayduke... I don't remember calling for bans on anything (with the possible exception of excessive government spending). I think you'll find that I'm about as anti-ban and pro-freedom as you can get. (Is an anti-ban the opposite of a Taliban? ;-) Just wondering.) Yes, there is a use for hollow points, maximum damage with minimum ammo use. They just aren't considered appropriate for war time use. It's also considered bad strategy as it ties up more enemy manpower to get a wounded combatant off the field. But that's beside the point. The point was that it was a LOT of ammo purchased that was obviously intended for use on civilians. I also don't recall ever suggesting that teachers should be armed. They are there to teach, not protect. If we need to hire someone else to protect, like a school security guard or off duty cop who is armed, I'd be OK with that.

    "You have a choice of a pistol, or an AR-15. Which would you prefer?" ... Where are we (hypothetically!) gun fighting? If it's inside the same room or in tight quarters, I'll take the pistol. If it's across a field or at some range, I'll take the rifle. In the context of this latest incident, arguing that an 'assault rifle' makes any difference is just dumb. It doesn't. Any semi auto could have done the same thing.

    The 2nd amendment serves 3 basic purposes. The right to defend yourself against hostile individuals. The right to defend yourself and your area against hostile foreign powers. And as a check and balance against a tyrannical domestic government. The reference to 'well regulated militia' serves the the last two points. It's there because the founders never envisioned us having a huge standing federal army. In fact, they spoke against it. The power, even the military power, was intended to remain with the individual and the people in a 'free state', not the federal government. (We're not supposed to be running around playing world police either.)

    And as long as we're quoting, let's not forget the part that says... 'shall not be infringed'.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Roomtemp
    December 20, 2012 6:21 am
    Target rounds like wadcutters are used for just that.....target shooting.

    When training with a service weapon one should use the high power service ammunition so you have the same recoil, same ballistics, and same mechanical interaction in the weapon. No point in finding out your weapon won't feed the service ammunition when you need it because you have have been practicing with cheap ball ammunition that fed just fine.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    @Drool...
    December 21, 2012 12:43 am
    Fair point on using the same ammo for practice. I'll concede it. But a billion rounds? All for federal use? (Local police forces buy their own.) And for agencies like the social security administration?

    It still sounds really fishy to me.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    A Billon Rounds (or whatever the real number may be)
    December 21, 2012 7:46 am
    Who says they take delivery all at once? Just becuse they sign a contract for XXX rounds of ammunition doesn't mean they get it all at once. It could very easily be a multi year contract.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Roomtemp
    December 20, 2012 9:50 am
    Yes the Dems are in the NRA pockets also BOTH parties have been owned by the NRA for many years.Yes the media is beating the war drum my belief is that AIPAC is involved as they provide the DRUMS.Israel wants to give a picture that Iran is somehow involved.AIPAC is more powerful then the NRA .Yes ALL POTUS are in the pockets of the military complex as well as Wall Street,The power of $$$ TRUMPS political power,the politicans dance to the tune of the person with the $$$$
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    @messiah101...
    December 21, 2012 12:55 am
    Are we really in agreement on something that actually matters?

    You're freakin' me out a little there fella. We better start arguing about something pointless and irrelevant or I'm gonna need a drink. :-D

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    odd
    December 20, 2012 6:33 am
    I made 2 posts on this thread last night and both of them are gone now. Not a very stable board, and really should have a spell checker.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    We could stop making guns today and ban all guns tomorrow
    December 20, 2012 8:26 am
    and the problem still would not be solved until we start treating the mentally ill and institutionalize the mentally ill who can't function in society. Mass killings are and always will be the work of mentally deranged people. Yes it will cost extra tax dollars but what are the lives of our children worth?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Forrest
    December 20, 2012 9:43 pm
    I completely agree Forrest. Guns aren't the problem...people to use them to kill large numbers of people are the problem. One of the largest mass murders in recent US history (9/11 aside) was about 120 in an arson in a dance club...going to outlaw gas and matches? We need to deal with the disturbed people.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }