Sunday, December 23, 2012


The only ones displaying a "willful ignorance" of the facts here is the New York Times. Civilians have stopped mass shootings. Some examples are Pearl, Mississippi in 1997, the shooting at Appalachian School of Law in 2002, and Santee in 2001. In these incidents the deaths were minimal because civilians stepped in and stopped the shooter. The Mother Jones study excludes these shootings by defining a mass shooting as one where four or more are killed. Convenient isn't it? What it is is an agenda driven denial of facts or "willful ignorance".
People like Mr. LaPierre want us to believe that civilians can be trained to use lethal force with cold precision in moments of fear and crisis. That requires a willful ignorance about the facts. Police officers know that firing a weapon is a huge risk; that’s why they avoid doing it.
What the New York Times and every other liberal proponents of gun control refuses to acknowledge is the "police" are "civilians" trained to use a firearm. There is nothing special about them and other "civilians" can be trained to use a firearm as well. I don't want to have police are armed guards in our schools. I do however see no reason that teachers and administrators who have volunteered to undergo training in how to use a firearm can't go armed in their schools.

H/T to Anne.


Wolfman said...

Who wants to bet they'll still beat the drum over Clackamas Town Square?

kahr40 said...

They can try but then they'll have to explain away the CCW holder who allegedly confronted the gunman before said gunman ate his gun.