NY Times Editorial Board Bemoans The Typical Political Ritual After Shootings, Joins In

The NY Times Editorial Board, safely ensconced in their workplace with armed security, is Very Upset over the way people have engaged post-Oregon shooting (but not enough to actually offer condolences)

The Political Ritual After Mass Shootings

The Republican presidential candidates were quick to offer sympathy but little else to the nation, to the grieving families and to the terrified town where the latest in American gun carnage took 10 lives on Thursday at an Oregon community college.

The headline makes it seem as if there’s a problem with the typical politicization of the issue, and the Times joins in as they take shots at Trump and other Republicans, before getting to Obama

The contrast could not be greater between the bromide-driven slate of Republican candidates promising thoughts and prayers after “this senseless tragedy” and President Obama in his understandable fury and near despair over the political cowering to the gun industry and its lobbyists. Mass shootings have become an unsurprising part of American life, with lame public rituals in which politicians express grief and then retreat quickly into denial about this scourge.

One thing the NYTEB fails to do, much like Obama and the other Dems commenting, is offer any solutions

Modern high-powered weapons, adapted from war and unscrupulously marketed on the home front, have unfortunately provided the means for a shooter to act out his anger and despair in a matter of minutes. The state-sponsored citizens report on the gun massacre of 20 schoolchildren and six workers in Newtown, Conn., in 2012 concluded there is “no legitimate place in the civilian population” for fast-firing rifles and large-capacity magazines that were invented for the military but have flooded the American marketplace.

As I wrote in the comments at the Editorial,

So, what policies does the NY Times Editorial Board suggest?

“Fast firing rifles”? They really fire no faster than ones from WWI. One pull of the trigger, one shot. Automatic weapons are illegal.

“Large-capacity magazines”? If there’s no one to stop a shooter, it doesn’t matter if the mag is 7 or 15. It takes seconds to reload.

Easy access? The majority of weapons are purchased at a federally licensed firearms dealer.

Please, tell us what would stop any of these tragedies? Please tell us what will stop the constant shootings and murders in cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Camden, St. Louis, etc, which already have massive gun control laws.”

The first semi-automatic rifle was invented in 1885. The first semi-auto pistol in 1892. The vast majority of legal gun owners will never use any of their firearms for a crime. For all the thundering anger, what policies would stop these events? Murder and attempted murder are illegal. Yet, people still do it.

Other than repealing the 2nd Amendment and full confiscation, what policies can the anti-gunnites offer that would stop this from happening?

And why don’t they seem to care about all the Black on Black shootings/murders in liberal cities such as Chicago, Detroit, Camden, Baltimore, St. Louis, etc, which all have strict gun control policies?

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Leave a Comment

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend