During the June 19 airing of ABC’s This Week, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) dodged questions regarding the impotency of his gun control proposal by suggesting it is not fair to judge gun control based on whether it works.
Democrats are notorious for “waving the bloody shirt” after an atrocity...as long as it wasn’t committed by members of one of their mascot groups, of course. Every shooting that makes national news brings the gun-controllers out of the baseboards with fresh proposals for limiting law-abiding Americans’ access to firearms. Whether it would have prevented the “triggering” atrocity, however, is of no interest to them:
So first of all, we can’t get into that trap. I disagree, I think if this proposal had been into effect it may have stopped the shooting. But we can’t get into the trap in which we are forced to defend our proposal simply because it didn’t stop the last tragedy.
That makes it legitimate to question the proposer’s actual motives...but how often do the major media bother to do so? When was the last time an interviewer for one of the major news channels responded to such as the above by inquiring, “Well, if it wouldn’t have stopped the last tragedy, why are you proposing it now? Aren’t you just using the bodies of the dead as a platform on which you can stand with your irrelevant anti-Second Amendment scheme?”
We in the pro-firearms-rights community would pay to see and hear that – and the reply to it.
2 comments:
Lets keep doing what doesn't work until it does. This mentality is rife in civilian 'leadership' in gov and the private sector. If one understands this a lot of apparently crazy actions begin to make sense.
I read something last week, regarding "their" proposals concerning firearms, likening it to taking cars away from sober drivers to prevent drunk driving deaths. Makes abundant sense to the ignorant and easily deceived. The rest of us, not so much. - Grandpa
Post a Comment