I’ve noticed that. What does that mean to someone who doesn’t believe in coincidences? The quote is from a CNN anti-gun propaganda piece.
The headline: “Navy Yard shooting: AR-15, back in the news — briefly”. Yes, briefly, because they’ve found that one wasn’t actually used in the shooting.
From the article:
The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning’s shootings….
Regardless, the massacre pushed the AR-15 back into the gun-control debate. The weapon has been used in several other rampages that shocked the nation:
— Sandy Hook: Adam Lanza killed 26 people at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, with an AR-15 in December 2012.
— Aurora: Police say James Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58 using an AR-15 rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and at least one of two .40-caliber handguns police recovered at the scene.
— Portland: Jacob Tyler Roberts stole an AR-15 and killed two people in a mall food court in December 2012.
— Santa Monica: John Zawahri allegedly pieced together an AR-15-type gun and went on a rampage that started at his father’s home and ended at Santa Monica College in June. Five people were killed.
A questionable incident happened in my small city not long ago, a podunk place with a SWAT team, a county sheriff initially appointed by the governor, and a county sheriff’s department with a $91 million budget. The incident was a domestic disturbance call that required the SWAT team and the death of a man allegedly in possession of an AK-47. The incident somehow warranted the unexpected spectacle of a press conference, during which a testy reporter demanded to know the dangers associated with the deceased man’s weapons. The sheriff responded that weapons themselves aren’t dangerous, but dangerous in the hands of someone mentally unstable. That sounds a lot like the assertions being made by Fox News. Another coincidence?
Anyway, isn’t it funny how CNN had to run this article on the AR-15 even when the facts of the Navy Yard story didn’t justify its publication? What dolts.
The article continues:
“Almost every mass shooting involves an AR-15 assault rifle,” Staff Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford told CNN’s Piers Morgan Monday night.
“It’s the preferred mass shooter’s weapon of choice,” added Lunsford, who was wounded by Maj. Nidal Hasan during the Ft. Hood shooting in 2009.
“But I don’t see a logical reason why any civilian needs to have one of these killing machines.”
Perhaps to defend ourselves from crazed killers who have the weapons they don’t want us to have?
Making a point for “pro-gun activist” Ben Ferguson:
Had the contractor and civilians working in the Navy Yard been armed, they could have gunned down the gunman and stopped the shooting quickly.
From what I’ve heard, no personnel but law enforcement can carry guns in the Navy Yard. See what that creates? Those workers were sitting ducks, having to cower until someone authorized to carry a weapon came to rescue them. Gun-grabbers should be hanging their heads in shame for the tragedies they’ve caused.
Ferguson was being interviewed by Piers Morgan. Morgan’s inane response:
“I want the day to come where we don’t have to have this ridiculous debate time and again in America,” he said in frustration. “I just cannot have this debate anymore. It is ridiculous.”
I’d say the debate was stopped. Ferguson was right and Morgan’s just stupid. He’s on the wrong side of the issue and has no facts to back up his position. My advice for ending the ridiculous debate is to have all those who don’t have enough sense to understand that more guns means less crime, which has been proven again and again, to get off the air, shut up, and let people have their weapons, as our Constitution provides.
The article subsequently gives a history of the AR-15 and then a few obtuse quotes from gun-grabbing politicians. What a waste of space.
Nevertheless, the Navy Yard shooting was another opportunity for the gun-grabbers to point their fingers at assault weapons, even though none were used.