Link
It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.
The "editorial board" can lament till the cows come home, but fortunately each member has one vote, just as I do. They got so worked up about their rant that they didn't seem to notice that they even failed to stick with their specific targeting of "assault weapons" by mentioning Virginia. I'm presuming they're referring to Virginia Tech, a place where assault weapons weren't used.
ReplyDeleteThough it's more likely that they noticed, and simply don't care. I'm waiting to see how a certain DFL candidate tries to back off of her pre-primary comments of supporting an Australian gun confiscation plan, which this article also advocates for.
Let's keep in mind that one of the goals of an insurgency is to get the government to overreact in ways to represent the citizens. This is right out of the counterinsurgency manual.
The best way to respond was well demonstrated in Garland Texas.
Lets not forget how many of these attacks DID use assault weapons, like San Bernadino.
DeleteI wonder how many tens of thousands of guns (mostly so-cslled "assaultvweapons") the NYT sold with that little whine-fest.
ReplyDeleteThe gun industry should send the editorial board a big ol' gift basket.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if a once prestigious newspaper actually did its duty and provided the actual news, not government press releases. And to editorialize using trite and worn out platitudes is embarrassing to any intelligent reader.They use the terms 'moral outrage' and 'national disgrace', yet don't include themselves in those terms, which is really what that paper has become. Oh, besides useless.
ReplyDeleteSince they are concerned about marketing of products, they might want to worry about their own slumping standing. I also suggest that the editorial board get a firm grip on themselves. But, as usual, they create and invent the usual hobgoblins and boogeyman by their perpetual lies. In their polluted eyes and minds a product marketed as a defensive tool becomes an object used vigilantism and insurrection. How imaginative of them and their warped minds. Ignorance is bliss, especially in the case of this editorial board that is too stupid to blush at their own ignorant editorial.
orlin sellers
I thought you guys would like that.
ReplyDeleteWe're just wondering if this means you'll finally stop with the old cannard about how "Nobody wants to take your guns away."
DeleteMike doesn't say that. He qualifies it by saying "we don't want to take away all the guns from everybody". Instead he wants to take away all the guns from half the people, and then half the guns from those who were allowed to keep something... and we're supposed to go along with that willingly.
DeleteThank's TS. I was just about to answer Mycroft with a sigh of fatigue. You guys never tire of misusing the concepts of ban and "take away." It's a real drag.
DeleteDefine misuse Mike. After all, it hasn't been too terribly long ago, that we heard the front runner for the Democratic candidate for President speaking glowingly of Austrailia's firearms ban and confiscation law.
DeleteMikeB: "You guys never tire of misusing the concepts of ban and "take away." It's a real drag."
DeleteMisusing? You just thanked me for accurately summing up you position which has literally hundreds of millions of the "taking away" of guns going on. That's a whole lotta taking away, Mike.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gun-stocks-rally-after-obamas-prime-time-address-on-terrorism-2015-12-07
ReplyDeleteThanks Obama, my retirement fund needed a boost!!!!