Seriously, how can the same people who claim movie violence and video games have no influence on violent behavior suggest that a shooting in a place where all guns are banned would have been prevented by more laws and tighter gun control?
The solution is always to emasculate society--not to raise feminist ire here. It is an expression that means to render powerless. Until recently we saw power in terms of masculine virility and such. Not my idea. Just the messenger.
Anyway, by the present logic they will eventually find it best to cut off our arms and legs except for those who get permission from on high to possess these deadly limbs.
The trend for way too long has been to look at every insane act or even just accidents as something that justifies reducing people to begging victims, hoping the big grand power of government will save them from the imminent rape, murder, beating, etc. To "take the law into their own hands" would just be wrong. Leave it to the professionals; the ones who can legally carry a gun and legally shoot you for almost any reason.
Well, that last is a stretch, but not much of one in reality. I just don't want to fuel the new victim twist of thought which has thugs and other idiots deciding that it is OK to shoot police because Al Eric, and Barack have more or less claimed you are justified. Even though "hands up, don't shoot" never ever even almost happened. Total fiction. Just how it is.
So, they play up the mass murders in a way that attracts people to do it. And they, of course, deny any influence. But that is clearly wrong. How do you think drugs spread so quickly? News and schools hammered us about it when very few kids even knew what pot or any of that was. The cops who came to talk, and the administrators and teachers involved were already so highly annoying to many people that their credibility was nil.
If they said it was so bad, and we hadn't seriously considered it up until then, maybe it was worth trying. Those people were dedicated statists who were full of lies and were highly unjust. So they sold a lot of people on the efficacy of drugs and alcohol.
Had there been less sensationalism and less hysterical legal reaction, I doubt things would have gone as they have. The first I heard of crack cocaine was in a news article which described how to make it. Brilliant. It was a guy who did and sold coke who showed me the article. Up until then, he didn't know how it was made or much anything about it.
So first they promote by guaranteeing murderers that they will be famous and that millions will be frightened or otherwise affected by them. Then they create the image of the dark mind, the loner persona, a disturbed person whose past can "give us insight into the killer's mind".
Who doesn't want to be so important that who shows are devoted to your inner mind and what makes you tick.? Annoying cliche--"what makes him tick?'. Ask clock boy--another bandwagon bunch of garbage that Obama embraced much too quickly. Did he inspect the hoax clock to know it wasn't purposely designed to cause panic? Like all sensational stories and cases in distant cities, he knee jerked his way into taking a side without knowing anything accept it served to help him manipulate opinion.
What a jerk. Really. And now to make it like the only people who care about murder are those who seek "common sense gun control", which is absolutely meaningless. Remove guns from all government people based on my view of their suitability to possess a firearm. I trust my judgement more than theirs. I absolutely do not trust their motives whereas I do my own. And that is why I oppose the idea that more laws will save the day.
We disarm our own military on military bases. I'm sorry. WTF? How does that make sense? We don't disarm the body guards of the monied elite or of government officials. But the rest of us can only hope that attention seeking lunatics will follow the law. Really.
I have rarely seen a president disgust me more in reacting to an act of terrorism and sadistic cowardice.