Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Lot of sense in the article. But it misses the point that Spence brought up that the real goal wasn't to curb mass shootings, but the real goal is to accomplish what they can accomplish.
|
You're not suggesting that this was a plan waiting for the right disaster, are you?
There is also a interesting opinion piece by David Mamet in Newsweek, of course he is now a brain dead conservative rather than a brain dead liberal.
A paragraph that I love from that:
The Left loves a phantom statistic that a firearm in the hands of a citizen is X times more likely to cause accidental damage than to be used in the prevention of crime, but what is there about criminals that ensures that their gun use is accident-free? If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.