# The AR-15 and the Navy Yard shooting **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2013, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443 "2013-09-22T14:03:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/241 "2013-09-30T03:56:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > …So, yes, “maybe” and “who knows,” works just fine…until you get to that inconvenient fact. Well, did you know? When you first read that he was refused in Virginia, were you outraged at the lie? I’m sure I read at least a couple stories on the subject, but I don’t remember if I read that part or not, because…I don’t fucking care. Now, I’ve been called many things, but “normal” isn’t one of them, so I can only guess how a normal person would respond. But I tend to think most people wouldn’t care either,or even notice. But you’re normal, right? How did you react? There’s gotta be a couple more people on the boards who are normal, how did they respond? (We should ask\*\* Spavined Gelding\*\*, he’s from Iowa, the very heart of normal…) ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/242 "2013-09-30T09:37:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But I do know that no Virginia law prevented the sale of an AR-15. That’s the beauty of this particular falsehood: there’s no hiding behind the shield you just used. Sure, the other stuff might all have completely innocent explanations. But no explanation can trump the actual lack of any Virginia law that says what the story claimed. > > So, yes, “maybe” and “who knows,” works just fine…until you get to that inconvenient fact. So who told the original “falsehood”? That word implies intentional mendacity, when it is equally possible they were simply misinformed. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/243 "2013-09-30T12:44:57Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So who told the original “falsehood”? That word implies intentional mendacity, when it is equally possible they were simply misinformed. The problem with THAT attempt to save them is the evidence that when they were informed of their error, they failed to correct it. We might, as you hope, in an excess of credulity or charity say that they simply quickly reported a fact they were told, with no time to check it, and thus it’s not their fault when it turns out to be false. (Although how long does it take to look up a simple fact about Virginia law…) But when they’re given the exact information, and refuse to correct the error, that defense vanishes. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/244 "2013-09-30T13:19:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The problem with THAT attempt to save them is the evidence that when they were informed of their error, they failed to correct it. Or correct it quick enough for your satisfaction. So we are back to your contention that they lied, except they didn’t, they were misinformed. Then they didn’t make a correction, but they did, just not fast enough for you. Weak tea. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/245 "2013-09-30T13:22:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The problem with THAT attempt to save them is the evidence that when they were informed of their error, they failed to correct it. First, you’ve cut off the end of that sentence which is “…fast enough for Bricker’s satisfaction, but faster than some outlets and slower than others, which I think is evidence of their liberal plot.” And second, you actually have no idea what they were told. Nor do you know how they responded to whatever they might have been told. What you know is that Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s outfit claims to have told them something. You’re resting your immense confidence on the fact that a quick investigation into Virginia law would have revealed the error, assuming that information was indeed passed to them, that there was someone on staff available to to do that legal research immediately, and assuming–most importantly of all–that they had no interest in finding out the actual facts of what happened before making a correction (i.e., determining whether the store mistakenly denied him a gun as would be consistent with their sourcing, or it never happened at all, or any number of scenarios that could be true regardless of what Virginia law says). ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/246 "2013-09-30T13:55:28Z")
Also: What you believe to be true, I take it from your citation of the Washington Post article as flawless, is that Alexis rented an AR-15, and upon being told about the various legal requirements for purchasing different guns in Virginia, opted to purchase the Remington shotgun. Do we know whether he had on him the necessary forms of ID to purchase the AR-15? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/247 "2013-09-30T14:11:48Z")
Perhaps a minor point, or perhaps I simply missed it, but would he have gotten the AR-15 immediately? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/248 "2013-09-30T15:19:07Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Also: > > What you believe to be true, I take it from your citation of the Washington Post article as flawless, is that Alexis rented an AR-15, and upon being told about the various legal requirements for purchasing different guns in Virginia, opted to purchase the Remington shotgun. > > Do we know whether he had on him the necessary forms of ID to purchase the AR-15? Yes. Because Virginia law treats shotguns and rifles identically. If he had the necessary ID to purchase the shotgun, he could also have legally purchased the AR-15. It was his inquiry about the purchase of a handgun that was fruitless. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/249 "2013-09-30T15:20:55Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Perhaps a minor point, or perhaps I simply missed it, but would he have gotten the AR-15 immediately? Yes. But think hard; I’m sure another idea will come to you – anything to avoid acknowledging the Times continues to err. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/250 "2013-09-30T15:22:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes. > > Because Virginia law treats shotguns and rifles identically. If he had the necessary ID to purchase the shotgun, he could also have legally purchased the AR-15. It was his inquiry about the purchase of a handgun that was fruitless. I see. If that’s true, then I agree that even the corrected version of the NYTimes article is misleading as to VA law. And I’d go further and say the correction also betrays the correction-writers bias. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/251 "2013-09-30T15:29:55Z")
But is it true? the NRA seems to think VA treats them differently from shotguns. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/252 "2013-09-30T15:31:37Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > First, you’ve cut off the end of that sentence which is “…fast enough for Bricker’s satisfaction, but faster than some outlets and slower than others, which I think is evidence of their liberal plot.” > > And second, you actually have no idea what they were told. Nor do you know how they responded to whatever they might have been told. What you know is that Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s outfit claims to have told them something. Seriously? You, and anyone else, can see what the Washington Times told the New York Times by _reading their published words._ Unless you suspect that the Washington Times has figured out a way to publish information visible to all persons except those employed by the New York Times. > [@](#): > > You’re resting your immense confidence on the fact that a quick investigation into Virginia law would have revealed the error, assuming that information was indeed passed to them, that there was someone on staff available to to do that legal research immediately, and assuming–most importantly of all–that they had no interest in finding out the actual facts of what happened before making a correction (i.e., determining whether the store mistakenly denied him a gun as would be consistent with their sourcing, or it never happened at all, or any number of scenarios that could be true regardless of what Virginia law says). They amended their story based on the correction provided, so clearly they allocated at least some time to determining their error about Virginia law was in fact an error. But their correction still leaves the impression that some aspect of the law prevented the AR-15 sale. That’s deliberate. And the contortionist twists you’re coming up with in an effort to cast the NYT in an innocent light are extraordinary. This is why the vast majority of liberal media bias will never be accepted. If a case like this, which remains a straightforwardly blatant and uncorrected error on an issue that is factual and relatively easily proved, can still garner such contortions to prove that the liberal media representative acted innocently, it’s difficult to imagine what evidence would possibly convince. I suppose Sulzberger could author a book in which he lays out precisely how he saw bias deliberately inserted into the news, and you’d just handwave it away. After all, that’s what Bernie Goldberg did, and that’s how you reacted. Seriously – step back and second and look at how many zebras you’re asking the reader to believe in for each set of hoofprints they see. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/253 "2013-09-30T15:33:37Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > But is it true? the NRA seems to think VA treats them differently from shotguns. They do? [Here is the NRA’s summary page for Virginia state law.](http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/virginia.aspx) What resource are you reading? ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/254 "2013-09-30T15:38:37Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Bricker View Post > Yes. > > Because Virginia law treats shotguns and rifles identically. If he had the necessary ID to purchase the shotgun, he could also have legally purchased the AR-15. It was his inquiry about the purchase of a handgun that was fruitless. So, you’re saying we need to pass stronger laws to prevent this? I must say, you’re commitment to the idea that we shouldn’t do anything to prevent future mass killings is verging on obsession. As is your absolute conviction that the NYT is mistaken, and mistaken on purpose to further its sinister goal of saving innocent lives. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/255 "2013-09-30T15:48:06Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > So, you’re saying we need to pass stronger laws to prevent this? > > I must say, you’re commitment to the idea that we shouldn’t do anything to prevent future mass killings is verging on obsession. As is your absolute conviction that the NYT is mistaken, and mistaken on purpose to further its sinister goal of saving innocent lives. First, because the following _is_ an actual obsession: your commitment, please, as opposed to you’re commitment. More substantively: I am absolutely in favor of doing things to prevent future mass killings. But I am also in favor of preventing future deaths caused by automobiles. Yet I do not favor banning cars, or even restricting highway driving to one trip per month. I wouldn’t mind seeing mental patients assessed carefully before being given drivers’ licenses. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/256 "2013-09-30T15:51:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Seriously? > > You, and anyone else, can see what the Washington Times told the New York Times by _reading their published words._ Which employee of the NYTimes do you think is tasked with reading every right-wing newspaper in the country every day? I had thought your claim was that a Senior Editor called someone at the Times. Your claim is actually just that they should have been aware of every publication in the country? > [@Bricker](#): > > They amended their story based on the correction provided, so clearly they allocated at least some time to determining their error about Virginia law was in fact an error. But their correction still leaves the impression that some aspect of the law prevented the AR-15 sale. That’s deliberate. I agree, subject to the correctness of your representation of VA law, which I’m less confident of having read the NRA page. > [@Bricker](#): > > And the contortionist twists you’re coming up with in an effort to cast the NYT in an innocent light are extraordinary. Meh. You characterize it as chasing Zebras. I think you’re biased. These are obvious questions and assumptions that most people wouldn’t take on faith like you are. > [@Bricker](#): > > They do? > > [Here is the NRA’s summary page for Virginia state law.](http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/virginia.aspx) > > What resource are you reading? That resource, actually. Did you read it? Note the “READ ALL” and “HIDE” tabs, as well as footnote 1. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/257 "2013-09-30T15:55:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > First, because the following _is_ an actual obsession: your commitment, please, as opposed to you’re commitment. Damn. You’re right. I need to slow down, drink more coffee, and proof read. I apologize. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/258 "2013-09-30T16:00:23Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Which employee of the NYTimes do you think is tasked with reading every right-wing newspaper in the country every day? I had thought your claim was that a Senior Editor called someone at the Times. Your claim is actually just that they should have been aware of every publication in the country? That was, and is, my claim. I thought you were saying that the editor, Miller, lied about it. I was pointing out what a rapaciously stupid lie that would be, since it was published. It would have been a devastating blow for the NYT to respond that the claimed conversation didn’t happen. And of course, they haven’t done so; moreover, in apparent response to the call, they did issue a correction, albeit one that retains a basic error. So your speculation about the WT editor lying is absolutely without foundation. > [@](#): > > I agree, subject to the correctness of your representation of VA law, which I’m less confident of having read the NRA page. > . > . > . > That resource, actually. Did you read it? Note the “READ ALL” and “HIDE” tabs, as well as footnote 1. Yes, of course I read it. Footnote one is referenced by the “no one under 18” provision, which is not applicable to the shooter under discussion. So why don’t you quote the specific provision or provisions on that page that you contend are relevant to making anything the NYT said more accurate? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/259 "2013-09-30T16:01:25Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Damn. You’re right. I need to slow down, drink more coffee, and proof read. I apologize. As I said, not a substantive error, but one I’m anal-retentive about correcting. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443/260 "2013-09-30T16:06:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > As I said, not a substantive error, but one I’m anal-retentive about correcting. Anal retentive isn’t supposed to be hyphenated. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ar-15-and-the-navy-yard-shooting/669443.md?page=14)