Obama: ‘Be Tough on Terrorism’ With Gun Control
14th June 2016
“Enough talking about being tough on terrorism; actually be tough on terrorism. Stop making it as easy as possible for terrorists to buy assault weapons,” Obama said.
Obviously, Obama has never tried to buy an ‘assault weapon’. (Not that anybody would sell him one.) Besides, he wouldn’t pass the background check.
None of his proposals would make it more difficult for terrorists to get (not buy) ‘assault weapons’; they would just make it more difficult for normal Americans to buy such weapons to defend themselves.
‘Actually be tough on terrorism’ means getting rid of potential terrorists, who overwhelmingly happen to be (wait for it) Muslims.
(Student loonies who shoot up schools and movie theaters aren’t ‘terrorists’ — they have no political agenda, and aren’t trying to terrorize people — they’re just loonies.)
June 15th, 2016 at 09:47
There were over 300 people in that club. They did not shoot the bad guy and stop his killing spree BECAUSE THEY WERE OBEYING THE EXISTING ANTI-GUN LAWS.
That’s right, when it comes to preventing a crime, laws only apply to law-abiding citizens. Criminals, by definition, don’t pay attention to laws.
Once you imprison a criminal, then you can apply the law to the criminal (essentially by force). If criminals obeyed the law voluntarily, they wouldn’t be criminals.
But the law says you can’t have a firearm – even with a permit – in a club that makes most of it’s profits from alcohol. So 300+ people, by law, assumed the status of “potential victim”.
Now, with that in mind, what new anti-gun legislation can be put into place that would make things better? (Cue the Jeopardy Theme while we wait.)
If you want to have real change, you have to focus on the criminal, not the tool he uses. Because bad guys will simply CHANGE TOOLS!
Golden Example: This event was NOT the worse mass murder at a night club. The worst (in the USA) occurred in the 1990’s in Bronx NY. A jealous boyfriend got even with his girlfriend by torching a club called Happy Land. Killed around 90 people with a can of gasoline. Would restrictive laws on gasoline have prevented that? C’mon, even a liberal could figure that out!
But, hey, liberals hate facts and love feelings. A mass murder evokes lots of feelings, so why not capitalize on it and make more people miserable. They have a small playbook and they keep running the same plays over and over – as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning.
June 17th, 2016 at 14:41
There was a call to Rush Limbaugh’s show today who said that about 10% of Florida’s population have weapon carry permits, which suggests that an estimated 30 people in that crowd would have been carrying had it not been against the law — and, if so, I doubt that they’d be mourning so many dead people today.