This is what the NY Times editorial board runs with the day after Thanksgiving, cause its a super duper most important issue, unlike America being broke, facing the fiscal cliff, a stagnant economy, Iran, post-Sandy cleanup, housing still in the dumps, etc
President Obama’s fleeting mention of the need for stronger gun controls at a presidential debate last month was hardly the kind of forceful political statement needed to address the scourge of gun violence in this country. Even his tepid remark was considered by the nation’s gun owners as a threat to take away their firearms. In what amounts to a buyers’ panic, they are again ramping up gun and ammunition sales as they did four years ago, convinced that Mr. Obama intends a gun-control crackdown.
Mr. Obama talked about starting “a broader conversation” about reducing gun violence. The best place to start is in Congress, which has been grossly negligent toward constituent safety for the past 20 years as it bows to the demands of the gun lobby.
Yeah, because violating that pesky Bill Of Rights is no big deal in NY Times World. And its rather strange that the majority of gun violence tends to occur in Democrat held areas, eh?
Mr. Obama is free of the pressures of campaigning — and free to lead the nation toward sensible laws that can help reduce the flood of guns and related homicides.
Funny stuff, they actually linked Obama to leading. That would be a first.
The need for strong leadership on this issue is growing as statehouse politicians cave to ever more lethal demands from the gun lobby. State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people “stand your ground” in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably.
In Times World, citizens should not be free to shield themselves from criminals who carry guns obtained illegally. All of those measures mentioned allow law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families from people who would do them harm. I wonder if the NY Times editorial board would be willing to give up the armed guards in the lobby at the NY Times building.
The Times worries about the 30,000 lives lost to gun violence every year. What they dont tell you is that around half of those are suicides. Of the remaining, in 2010 (the latest year for data), 8775 were from crime, the rest accidental. Thats with over 270 million privately owned guns. I wonder how many crimes were prevented because someone owns a gun? Hmm, an estimated 2.5 million? And women are the most likely to be saved by owning a gun? And most shootings involved criminals killing other criminals? Oh, and women are the biggest recipients of being able to show a gun to someone who is looking to harm them?
Perhaps the Times should be concerned with the 1 million plus abortions this year.