Saturday, January 15, 2011
One of the guys who tackled the shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, being interviewed by Ed Schultz:
Food for thought: If the government failed with alcohol prohibition and it's currently failing with drug prohibition, what does this mean to those who want to impose varying degrees of gun prohibition?
It's not too difficult to buy pot, ecstasy, heroin, or any other drug if you know the right people. Criminals sell these things and they profit tremendously. Prohibiting or further restricting access to guns will move the market for firearms further underground. It will expand the black market for firearms. It will provide profit to criminals, gangs, and mafias, and deprive free individuals from their right to self defense. It will leave firearms in the hands of criminals and leave the rest of helpless and defenseless. Is this what we really want?
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Of course, no self-proclaimed "liberal" (I'm still puzzled about what's actually liberal about the modern American "liberal" movement, but that's a whole different topic) is bitching and moaning about left-wing terrorists, such as the Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front... But you obviously can't expect these so-called "journalists" to be objective.
The New York Rag has gone so far as to call for the "quieting [of] the voices of intolerance." What's that supposed to mean? Should we just white out that pesky First Amendment and install some wise overlords at a federal agency who will tell us what to say, what to write, and what to think? Thought control...
And, of course, there is a problem with the official left-tard version of events. The killer was actually a registered Democrat whose favorite books included Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto, both two great pieces of left-wing literature.
The Southern Avenger, as usual, does a great job destroying the lies propagated by the left-wing media:
Of course, the entire point isn't to bitch about what some nut's political beliefs were. Obviously, this guy was crazy. As someone pointed out:
Isn't it sad that some guy on the internet has a better view of the news than our entire alarmist news media combined? I think so.
For crying out loud, do we know anything about why this guy did it? Is there any indication this was politically motivated, other than the fact that he shot up a political event? Maybe he hated Giffords for some personal reason. Maybe he hates the federal government and wanted to kill his local representative, regardless of the representative's affiliation. Maybe he's just a mentally disturbed man who wanted to kill a bunch of people and figured a political event is a good place to do it. Maybe he's another John Hinckley, Jr., trying to get the attention of Kristen Stewart or something.
It is an incredible accusation to say Palin or others are tangentially responsible when you have zero information as to why the kid did it. Sure, it fits the story of a right extremist provoked by political rhetoric into 'doing something,' but we still have no idea if that's the case. I know I'm expecting too much of a person like Olbermann, but damn, show a little patience and restraint.
Here's ReasonTV with a little, ummm, reason on this tragedy: