Because, y’know, splitting hairs about killing children is what the “gun advocates” are all about. Pick on the little details when you are, essentially, defending the right to mow down kids.
First reports were that it was 4 handguns. Then it was a shotgun, then the story became a “semiautomatic assault weapon” and now it is a full automatic weapon.
This isn’t about splitting hairs, this is about the press and the politicians spinning the narrative so they can push a gun control agenda by dancing in the blood of dead children.
Although handguns claim more than 20,000 lives a year, the issue of handgun restriction consistently remains a non-issue with the vast majority of legislators, the press, and public. The reasons for this vary: the power of the gun lobby; the tendency of both sides of the issue to resort to sloganeering and pre-packaged arguments when discussing the issue; the fact that until an individual is affected by handgun violence he or she is unlikely to work for handgun restrictions; the view that handgun violence is an “unsolvable” problem; the inability of the handgun restriction movement to organize itself into an effective electoral threat; and the fact that until someone famous is shot, or something truly horrible happens, handgun restriction is simply not viewed as a priority. Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms – are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.
Face it, had Newtown been perpetrated with a Remington 870 shotgun, would the outcry have been the same?
No. Your argument is abhorrent and you’re an idiot not worthy of addressing. Everyone else was just trying to treat you like you were reasonable. I will not.
April 9th, 2013 at 12:20 am
Because, y’know, splitting hairs about killing children is what the “gun advocates” are all about. Pick on the little details when you are, essentially, defending the right to mow down kids.
April 9th, 2013 at 12:58 am
First reports were that it was 4 handguns. Then it was a shotgun, then the story became a “semiautomatic assault weapon” and now it is a full automatic weapon.
This isn’t about splitting hairs, this is about the press and the politicians spinning the narrative so they can push a gun control agenda by dancing in the blood of dead children.
April 9th, 2013 at 9:39 am
@NoneSuch: Well, the (Gun) Violence Policy Center back in 1988 was all in favor of confusing the public:
Face it, had Newtown been perpetrated with a Remington 870 shotgun, would the outcry have been the same?
April 9th, 2013 at 2:45 pm
This is a surprise? The only time that retard aint lying is when he aint talking.
April 9th, 2013 at 7:15 pm
Kids are just little details. OK. Got it.
April 9th, 2013 at 7:22 pm
No. Your argument is abhorrent and you’re an idiot not worthy of addressing. Everyone else was just trying to treat you like you were reasonable. I will not.