Posted on 12/26/2012 6:38:21 AM PST by marktwain
The following editorial appeared in the San Jose (Calif.) Mercury News on Sunday.
The ideas spouted by National Rifle Association chief Wayne LaPierre in his disturbing statement Friday morning were so bizarre, so unhinged from reality, that the organization’s leadership cannot be considered serious participants in the national discussion over gun rights.
An armed guard, possibly a volunteer, in every school? Where do we even begin?
This idea is an insult to Americans hoping the NRA would keep its promise to offer a “meaningful” contribution to the conversation in the wake of the slaughter of 27 people in Newtown.
“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre said.
We have 300 million guns in this country. If what LaPierre said were true, and more guns equaled less danger, there would be no gun violence in this country. Nancy Lanza was armed to the teeth, and her own weapons were used to murder her.
(Excerpt) Read more at centredaily.com ...
” bizarre, so unhinged from reality, “
Bizarre was the LaPierre media talking points word last week. Dems have decided add “unhinged from reality”.
lol! That is true.
This is just the start of a possible series of actions that the San Jose Mercury News ought to demand, if they really believed the "suck and fail" they spew.
Bottom line, SJMN, you first. Disarm yourselves first. Let's us know how that goes.
Any you're a disgrace for a newspaper coming out to suppress the speech of others. Obviously, you're losing the argument or you'd want the NRA to shout their nonsense from the rooftops.
“The ideas spouted by National Rifle Association chief Wayne LaPierre in his disturbing statement Friday morning were so bizarre, so unhinged from reality, that the organization’s leadership cannot be considered serious participants in the national discussion over gun rights.”
Did you run this editorial when President Bill Clinton proposed the same idea? No ? Then STFU because it is YOU that does belong at the debate.
They be self appointed.
If no one needs armed security, I suggest firing the entire secret service detachments guarding 0 bummer, Sasquatch and their offspring.
The more I watch (with sheer, giggly delight) the reaction to LOHUD.com’s posting of gun owners in the NY area, and the subsequent posting of the LOHUD staff’s personal information, I think this should be the reaction to every publication, public figure, politician, etc. that advocates for gun control and against common sense.
In other words, from now on, we LOHUD the bastards. No big deal, right? The police will protect them, should there be any problems.
Here’s a good starting point: SJMN’s staff info on Linked In:
http://www.linkedin.com/title/staff-writer/at-san-jose-mercury-news
Wayne is so right that it hurts! He told the truth and nothing but the truth. Damn all gun grabbing dims to hell.
LLS
and this should be the response:
We find it important enough to use armed guards to protect our money at banks, our politicians in D.C. and our celebritards in Hollyweird.....
But they find it inconceivable that we use armed guards to protect our children at schools.
How ignorant are these people?
RLTW
With marxists, the first amendment is not welcome. Neither is the second amendment. Neither is the constitution’s divison of power.
Treasonous jerks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.