There used to be two daily newspapers in Seattle. A liberal one, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, and a not quite as liberal one, the Seattle Times.
The P-I went under not too long ago and was sorely missed by the local leftists who honestly believe the Times to be a “Conservative” paper. On just about any day you can hit up the local leftosphere and find one of them bitching about how “right-wing” the paper is.
If there is a common denominator that links the shootings in Seattle, Lakewood and Eatonville, it is fools with firearms. The proximity of weapons to the angry, delusional and addled is astonishing.
Two of the shooters died in circumstances they brought on themselves, and another awaits a full, rigorous determination of legal accountability.
Application of the law, and all its protections and consequences, is separate and apart from assessing how the culture became awash in guns and embraced a mindless proclivity to use them.
A constitutional right to own a gun does not carry a subsequent right to put others at risk, or to amass a personal armory with a lethal capacity beyond some hypothetical need for household defense.
The shocking assault on law enforcement over the past eight weeks suggests uniform officers have become strange surrogates for all the simmering frustrations in the culture and economy. Bitter people armed to the teeth have taken a horrific toll.
As the facts have shown, Clemmons was on parole and had multiple felonies, and so was breaking existing laws. Also,the only reason Crable still had his guns was because the prosecutor and judge who worked his Domestic Violence case didn’t do their jobs. Lastly, no one knows what kind of weapons Monfort used or how he acquired them, because the Seattle Police Department refuses to divulge the information. Taking into account how anti-private ownership of firearms the SPD Administration is, their silence probably means he possessed stolen firearms of no propaganda value.
Yet, as any leftist in Seattle will tell you, the “conservative paper” says we need more gun control and that is proof that the NRA and their members are “extremists”.
If you want to see a sample of those leftists voices, click this link to read their screeds wishing death upon a hospitalized Rush Limbaugh. That “conservative paper” is allowing them to use their comment section to spew hatred that should be reserved for the likes of the murderer, Fidel Castro, and not for a talk show host. Sure, there are moderators, but they seem to be “off for the holiday”. I’m sure they’ll clean things up when they get back.
Let’s switch a few things around and see how they like it:
“A constitutional right to own a book does not carry a subsequent right to put others at risk, or to amass a personal library with an intellectual capacity beyond some hypothetical need for household education.”
Switch the focus from 2nd to 1st ammendment and their limiting constitutional right screed goes a full 180. Except for the intellectually dishonest, who follow the words of that great progressive, mentor to Che Guevera, Joseph Stalin: “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We don’t let our people have guns; why should we let them have ideas?” These are the folks who only want free speech for themselves, and not for you, only want freedom of the press for anyone divulging classified information to MSNBC, but none for FOX.
If “some hypothetical need for household defense” was the threshold for legal firearm ownership, which they seem to be granting as what they’d be willing to accept, it doesn’t matter. An angry felon with a 30-06 or shotgun could take out cops.
Of course, once they got their arbitrary threshold, they’d move the goal line anyway.
I don’t trust newspapers with their own patron Constitutional amendment, I certainly don’t trust them with mine.