Newsflash! Oregon Shooter’s Dad is a Jackass!

After finding out that his abominable offspring, in whose life he apparently didn’t participate all that much, shot and killed a bunch of innocent people, Ian Mercer has decided that inanimate objects, i.e. guns, are to blame for the massacre.

Ian Mercer, during an interview outside his California home Saturday, told CNN that he didn’t know his son had a single gun, let alone 13. He asked, “How on earth could he compile 13 guns? How could that happen?”

Well, shitstick. Had you actually been in his life, instead of somewhere on the periphery, you would have known the answer to that question, but since cowards like him would never accept responsibility for the fuckups in their lives, blaming the gun not only allows them to shirk that responsibility yet again, but also promote their pusillanimous political philosophy.

Mercer said he has never held a gun. He doesn’t want to, he said. He laid out his personal philosophy on the issue: “I’m a great believer (in) you don’t buy guns, don’t buy guns, you don’t buy guns.”

I’m imagining this petty, testicle-deficient invertebrate running away from the responsibility of being a positive influence in his son’s life. I’m picturing him whimpering on his knees, begging for his pathetic life as an armed thug victimizes him and his family. Amoeba like him would never actually take a positive step to defend himself and his family. They consider it a lot more virtuous to beg and plead in front of monsters.

And then, as the interview wore on, he doubled and tripled up on the stupid.

“It has to change. How can it not? Even people that believe in the right to bear arms, what right do you have to take people’s lives? That’s what guns are, the killers. Simple as that. Simple as that. It’s black and white. What do you want a gun for?”

There’s so much fail in this incoherent rambling, I’m having trouble finding the right words to properly convey the level of stupid! He equates the right to own a tool with a nonexistent right to kill people, which no one claimed exists. He appoints himself the arbiter of other people’s wants and needs. He ascribes human qualities to guns.

It’s not difficult to picture someone this irrational spawning a psychotic murderer.

And then, there’s this asshole…

Yep, Uncle Fester is at it again, scrambling for relevance in a world that has long ago recognized his hypocrisy.


Kelly said lawmakers in Washington need “to close these loopholes that make it very easy for the mentally ill to get firearms.”

Interesting. Was the Oregon shooter in psychiatric care? Did he have mental issues? Was he seeing a mental health professional? Is Uncle Fester a mental health professional in his own right?

He noted that there are fewer deaths from gun violence in states that have strong laws restricting firearm sales and ownership.

“The idea is where there are more guns, people are less safe. If you have a gun in any kind of situation where things start to get heated, there’s a higher likelihood that somebody’s going to get shot,” he said.”

Of course, he missed the part where some of the most violent states writ large are ones with strong gun control laws, as if deaths by other means don’t matter. Obviously, they don’t matter in Uncle Fester’s world, because that little fact doesn’t support his political agenda.

Fact is there was nothing in the shooters background that suggested he should have been prohibited from buying a gun. He did not have a criminal record, and he and his mother purchased guns legally, as it is every American’s right to do. There is no law and no background check that would have prevented this.

But that won’t stop Uncle Fester from pontificating on gun control, using his injured wife as a poster girl for his twisted agenda, and cashing in on yet another tragedy.


11 responses

  1. Of course the father wants to blame anything but his parenting (or lack therof) and his son’s poor life choices. It’s just another way to say “it’s not my fault.”

    As for Mr. Kelley,

    The idea is where there are more guns, people are less safe. If you have a gun in any kind of situation where things start to get heated, there’s a higher likelihood that somebody’s going to get shot,” he said.

    This is just the latest iteration of the “blood will run in the streets!” argument that keeps getting made whenever the subject of people being allowed to carry comes up. It’s always a laundry list of horrible things that will happen: fender benders turning into shootouts. Bar brawls becoming gun fights. Etc. Etc. Etc.

    Only thing is, it never happens.
    All this was predicted back when Florida famously passed it’s shall issue permitting. Didn’t happen.
    When Indiana started allowing people to carry in state parks it was predicted that people would shoot each other on the trails. DIdn’t happen.
    It was predicted that unhappy employees would go out to their cars and grab guns for “workplace violence” (real workplace violence, not Obama’s euphemism for Islamic terrorism) when Indiana passed the “guns in locked cars” law. Didn’t happen.
    When Indiana passed true pre-emption and fobade municipalities from prohibiting firearms in parks and other municipal property, same prediction. Didn’t happen.
    When State after State when “Shall Issue” all this same stuff was predicted. Didn’t happen.

    Again and again and again they keep predicting these dire results and they keep not happening. At this point, only the most ignorant can claim that they don’t know this. And Mark Kelly is not one of them. No, he’s simply lying.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. “But that won’t stop Uncle Fester from pontificating on gun control, using his injured wife as a poster girl for his twisted agenda, and cashing in on yet another tragedy.”
    Right. Just like brain-injured Jim Brady was paraded out drooling in his wheelchair by Sarah et al. If someone who was actually involved in PRESERVING rights did something so woefully repugnant, they would be (rightfully) verbally assassinated by the self-righteous commie hoi polloi.

    Good heavens. Great catch Nicki – some of us have to rely on folks like you to read about and forward the shit you’ve managed to read and interpolate. Oh yeah, and, screw ALL these self righteous blood dancing assholes. Including Astro-nut douchenozzle Mark Kelly. (Good heavens. With logic like his, one wonders who the heck is in charge of letting Navy Officers like this fucktard fly in space vehicles as anything other than ballast.)

    Under his test, would his wife, who had a brain injury, be “permitted” access to a gun? These pathetic blood-dancing lemmings need to hit the Grand Canyon, form a line, and proceed to take a flying leap at fucking themselves to death before they hit bottom.

    We could take care of the remains with old Napalm canisters.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Oh – another thing: People like this : V

    The Prozis just hate when someone steps up to the plate to stop something like this – empty handed – because he followed the “no guns allowed rule…”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Where did the dead dirtbag get the money to purchase 13 guns?


    1. He did it over time. Probably had a job of some sort.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Let me start backwards here, with Mark Kelly.

    I tend to excuse people who are victims of these shooting incidents. Or in this case, the spouse of a shooting victim. Theirs is a very unique position to be in, and until any one of us is ever in that position, I cannot speak badly against them. It doesn’t mean that I have to agree with them, just that I am not going to denigrate them for their unique position.

    Now onto the festering pustule of a father…

    It is natural in these kinds of situations for a parent or spouse to automatically look for someone or something else to blame for their loved one’s actions. In this case it had to be the GUN that forced his precious child to go shoot up a college classroom.

    WE can see how ludicrous his statements are, but in his grief-stricken and shocked mind, his statements make perfect sense. He MIGHT snap out of it, or he might double-down and continue to blame the gun and not whatever it was bouncing around in his kid’s mind that morning.

    We, as a society, keep looking at the wrong problem. We see a gun. We see dead people. We jump to the conclusion that it was the GUN’S fault. “If only Billy hadn’t gotten his hands on that gun…we should make it HARDER for the future Billys to get their hands on guns…”


    The problem is clearly a BEHAVIORAL problem.

    Gun possession, and ownership is a RIGHT in the US. There is no getting around this fact, and unless we somehow managed to get a super-majority in both Houses of Congress, a president’s signature, and the super-majorities and governors signatures in thirty-seven states to change that Right, then that Right is going to be around for a very, VERY, long time.

    So BANNING guns is not an option. But doing something about BEHAVIOR is very much an option.

    With every Right, comes a RESPONSIBILITY. For every action, there is a CONSEQUENCE.

    If we have a problem with behavior, then we should DO something about THAT.

    Possession of a firearm is an AWESOME Right. But it does carry an equally awesome responsibility. If you mishandle that firearm and you’ve caused death, destruction, and / or injury then YOU, not the gun, are RESPONSIBLE.

    Let’s take that a step further. If you commit a crime using a firearm, then not only are you responsible, you are also subject to whatever CONSEQUENCES might come with committing a crime with a firearm.


    Over the past thirty years or so, we’ve been locking people up for thirty years for possessing a rock of crack cocaine. But we let armed robbers out of jail after serving only 42 months on an average. Something is wrong with that picture.

    If we are REALLY serious about cracking down on gun violence, we need to be going after the BEHAVIORS, not the guns themselves. If we change the criminal justice laws to make the commission of ANY crime while in possession of a firearm a mandatory life sentence, and make any crime with a firearm that results in injury or death to be a mandatory death penalty.

    Repeat violent crimes would be a thing of the past. It won’t stop mass shootings like what happened in Oregon, per se, but then, there is NOTHING we can do to prevent someone from snapping and doing something like this.


    1. Please cease and desist posting that nonsense about “locking people up for years for possession of a rock of crack cocaine.” It doesn’t happen. If someone is in prison for 30 years you can bet your kids’ inheritance that it’s for MUCH more than “possession of a rock of crack.” Likely, it’s because of possession while committing some other crime–such as armed robbery, rape or some other mayhem, or possession after being convicted for the 10th TIME.

      That said, you commit a crime with a weapon, you go directly to jail, do not pass “Go” and do not collect $200…period. If you want to stop gun crimes, you lock up people who USE a gun to commit a crime. Word eventually gets around.


  6. One’s first thought is to cut some slack to someone who has lost a child, no matter what the circumstances. But in this case, the immediate second thought is that Mercer was an ignorant jackwagon well before his son died.

    Uncle Fester (love that!): “The idea is where there are more guns, people are less safe.” Ergo, if there were no guns, people would be perfectly safe…wait, what?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. […] Newsflash! Oregon Shooter’s Dad is a Jackass! […]


  8. Oh please don’t insult Uncle Fester by using him in a comparison to that Kelly douchebag. Fester was a great guy who had an electric personality (proven by lighting up a 100 watter in his mouth) and was nice to the kids.

    Kelly on the other hand is an absolute piece of whaleshit.


    1. Well, yeah… but the physical resemblance is uncanny, ya gotta admit!


%d bloggers like this: