But in a few short years, she went on, the family's harmony dissolved into mistrust and recriminations, her parents separated, and Mary Koontz went to live in Florida. A year ago, after being gone for 19 months, she returned with a silver revolver and sneaked into her former home in Glen Arm while her estranged husband and daughter slept, prosecutors say. Once inside, they say, she shot her husband four times as he lay in bed and then went into Kelsey's room and fired at the girl. The bullet missed its mark.
Did you notice she used a gun? I suppose she could have used any number of tools, but she used the preferred killing instrument.
Where do you think it came from? Probably even a middle-aged mentally unstable woman could pick one up in gun-friendly Florida, don't you think?
So, in a reverse twist on the old theme, guns are still bad news for women.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
I see those great gun control laws in Baltimore worked yet again.
ReplyDeleteMikeB: “I suppose she could have used any number of tools, but she used the preferred killing instrument.”
ReplyDeleteAlso the preferred instrument when the window breaks in the middle of the night.
MikeB: “So, in a reverse twist on the old theme, guns are still bad news for women.”
Why not just say they are bad news for everybody?
Wow, what an objective piece of journalism.
ReplyDeleteNow that we are through with the sarcasm, please tell me what is wrong with current laws regarding firearms?
Should the masses be punished because the few circumvent or outright ignore the law?
Should all men be chemically castrated because a few choose to rape and molest? Or all women not be allowed to handle any household chemicals because a majority of the prolific female murderers use poison?
Give me a break, however I don't expect you to seriously reply to this. I rather expect you to dismiss it and continue on with your disinformation and partisan-ism.
Anonymous, You said you were through with the sarcasm with that remark about my "objective journalism." But then you went on to make the "chemical castration" comparison.
ReplyDeleteIf I knew who you were, I might confer upon you the title I've given Joe Huffman, The King of Comparisons.
First of all, I'm not a journalist and I happen to be extremely objective.
I'll answer this:
"Should the masses be punished because the few circumvent or outright ignore the law?"
Yes, absolutely, if by "punished" you mean what I call "inconvenienced." And besides, it's a bit more than a "few" who circumvent or outright ignore the law"