Tweet
Follow @ra7s
Those looking to blame someone should start with the killer, and leave the rest of us alone

Blaming NRA over killings shows no amount of laws enough for anti-gunners

Those looking to blame someone should start with the killer, and leave the rest of us alone.
Elliot Rodger/Facebook Those looking to blame someone should start with the killer, and leave the rest of us alone.

David Codrea
Gun Rights Examiner

May 25, 2014

Misplacing blame for the killing of his son in the Isla Vista murders, the father of one of the victims issued a grief-stricken attack on the National Rifle Association Saturday, The Los Angeles Times reported.

"Why did Chris die? Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA," Richard Martinez told assembled reporters. "They talk about gun rights. What about Chris' right to live? When will this insanity stop?"

The sentiments have been echoed by raving gun-grabbers on Twitter, where the tone is uglier. What's emerging is something psychiatrist Sarah Thompson described as "Raging against Self-Defense," that is, indignant slurs by people who bring neither facts nor logic nor anything but ignorance and hostility to the discussion. That said, those individuals have done gun owners an unintended service, because they clearly offer proof that no amount of "gun control," for which California has been hailed as a leader by citizen disarmament groups, will ever be enough for them.

That everything currently being pushed on the national level as "common sense" and "reasonable" is already in place in California, that it proved wholly inadequate at stopping a determined, mad killer, and that this does not enter into what passes for their thought processes, shows they will not be satisfied until all guns are banned from private ownership. There can be no other conclusion.

It also shows they have no intention of actually engaging in that "national conversation on guns" the anti-gunners have fraudulently called for, when time after time they have demonstrated what they're really interested in doing is dictating the terms of our surrender. That and being insulting.

So they've actually done us two services. They've not only shown us their end goals, and what a ridiculous lie every one of them who parrots the ubiquitous "No one wants to take your guns" talking point is telling, but they've also relieved us of any obligation to respond to them except in kind. Since it will do no good to point out all the existing checks and balances that were either ignored or proved useless, there's really nothing left to say to those blaming this obscenity on gun owners.

Well, I can think of one thing, but I can't post it here.