Despite eight rampages that have claimed 57 lives since March 10, "it hasn't sparked any national goal to deal with this epidemic. In fact, it's going the other way," said Scott Vogel of the Freedom States Alliance, a gun control activist group.Gosh, you know if I thought that mass shootings were becoming more common in the Obama administration, I'd be interested in taking some kind of pro-active action, like getting a gun to defend myself with, or maybe even a carry permit. Apparently, I'm not the only one
H.T. Ride FastThe bias pops up in the first paragraph:
They had more in common than unleashing carnage — nearly every gunman in this monthlong series of mass killings was legally entitled to fire his weapons.Sorry, Charlie, but no way. While many of the gunmen may well have lived in states mandating a permit even to own a gun, none of them, in the context in which they used them, had a permit for such a discharge.
Maybe we could call this Obama Derangement Syndrome?
1 comment:
Billll, such an innocent little mistake in wording. Most of the recent shooters had a legal right to possess their guns - none had a legal right to fire at their victims, and not all were legal in possessing their guns at the scene.
Then there was the roadkill in Philadelphia that intentionally tried to commit "suicide by police". That one has been around a long time. Why can't we just get some of these disturbed type a job around farm machinery? That seems to work all too well.
Post a Comment