Now I'll be Famous
Well now it's happened. There's been another high profile shooter episode. I'm sure you've heard in the news about the former McDonald's clerk that went on a rampage in a Omaha Nebraska mall, leaving eight victims and himself dead. Be prepared for the hail of liberal calls for "common sense gun control". Because surely if this guy had been prevented from laying his hands on a gun he wouldn't have done this horrific thing.
I'm sorry but you are wrong.
The shooter in this case left a note. That note contains the very reason why eliminating guns would not stop such massacres. Robert Hawkins, the gunman said "Now I'll be famous". You see if he did not have a gun, he would have resorted to some other high profile means to kill a lot of people to attain his fame.
These events are not indictments of gun ownership as much as they are an indictment of the sensationalistic nature of today's news media. No one is saying that news of such events shouldn't be conveyed. The question is why does it need to be broadcast all around the world?. Why is it that these events need to occupy our television screens for hour after hour, day in and day out.
How many kids have tried to mimic the actions of Dillon Klebold because the news media granted him infamy? How many children have lost their lives because the "if it bleeds it leads" ghouls in the news media have granted someone unworthy of anything but contempt the haughty prize of fame and cult status?
It is not the tool; the gun in this case, that gives the shooter the idea. Guns don't convey ideas any more than hammers do. It is the droning newscaster, the images of blood stains and wailing kin. It is the nasal whine of the liberals bleating for the public to be further disarmed and helpless against animals such as these that inspire these people to action. In the shooter's eyes, their lives are minuscule and insignificant. They have sunk to a fetid, dank place where the moment of infamy is all that can be wrought from their miserable existence and that is what spurs them to act.
So take away their guns, but let the 24/7 coverage of the actions of such sick individuals remain and all you will be doing is forcing these desperate individuals to select a different tool. Instead of shooting sprees there'll be bombings, or chainsaw attacks or people will be mowed down with vehicles... all in a quest for that final affirming fame.
This is also an indictment of the liberal notion that everybody is "special". Every burned out youth is disillusioned that their comings and goings are not heralded with fanfares. This idea is squirted into their forming minds... Everyone is "special" and when "real life"™ sets in and the child finds they are nothing more than ordinary folks with ordinary problems they are ill-prepared to deal with it. So they strive for the only way they can find to be instantly "special"; they quest for that widely advertised infamy. They kill.
On the other hand, if one sane individual practicing concealed carry had been in that mall, perhaps they could have acted to end this savage's killing spree earlier. Perhaps a well placed slug to the braincase might have persuaded this nutjob stop his killing spree a few corpses earlier. Of course since the mall was a no carry zone, no one stopped this guy until he stopped himself.
Gun-free zones kill people.
You'll also notice that once again (just like the Va. Tech case and 99% of the rest of the cases) the police did not save a single person's life. The shooting spree ended when the shooter's wrath had run its course and he decided it was over.
I'm sorry but you are wrong.
The shooter in this case left a note. That note contains the very reason why eliminating guns would not stop such massacres. Robert Hawkins, the gunman said "Now I'll be famous". You see if he did not have a gun, he would have resorted to some other high profile means to kill a lot of people to attain his fame.
These events are not indictments of gun ownership as much as they are an indictment of the sensationalistic nature of today's news media. No one is saying that news of such events shouldn't be conveyed. The question is why does it need to be broadcast all around the world?. Why is it that these events need to occupy our television screens for hour after hour, day in and day out.
How many kids have tried to mimic the actions of Dillon Klebold because the news media granted him infamy? How many children have lost their lives because the "if it bleeds it leads" ghouls in the news media have granted someone unworthy of anything but contempt the haughty prize of fame and cult status?
It is not the tool; the gun in this case, that gives the shooter the idea. Guns don't convey ideas any more than hammers do. It is the droning newscaster, the images of blood stains and wailing kin. It is the nasal whine of the liberals bleating for the public to be further disarmed and helpless against animals such as these that inspire these people to action. In the shooter's eyes, their lives are minuscule and insignificant. They have sunk to a fetid, dank place where the moment of infamy is all that can be wrought from their miserable existence and that is what spurs them to act.
So take away their guns, but let the 24/7 coverage of the actions of such sick individuals remain and all you will be doing is forcing these desperate individuals to select a different tool. Instead of shooting sprees there'll be bombings, or chainsaw attacks or people will be mowed down with vehicles... all in a quest for that final affirming fame.
This is also an indictment of the liberal notion that everybody is "special". Every burned out youth is disillusioned that their comings and goings are not heralded with fanfares. This idea is squirted into their forming minds... Everyone is "special" and when "real life"™ sets in and the child finds they are nothing more than ordinary folks with ordinary problems they are ill-prepared to deal with it. So they strive for the only way they can find to be instantly "special"; they quest for that widely advertised infamy. They kill.
On the other hand, if one sane individual practicing concealed carry had been in that mall, perhaps they could have acted to end this savage's killing spree earlier. Perhaps a well placed slug to the braincase might have persuaded this nutjob stop his killing spree a few corpses earlier. Of course since the mall was a no carry zone, no one stopped this guy until he stopped himself.
Gun-free zones kill people.
You'll also notice that once again (just like the Va. Tech case and 99% of the rest of the cases) the police did not save a single person's life. The shooting spree ended when the shooter's wrath had run its course and he decided it was over.
Labels: Commentary, Current Events, RKBA
posted by G-Man at 10:07 AM
|
<< Home