Oh come on, not again.
This story is looking for a guilty party but acknowledges that without video, the initial investigators couldn't determine one.
To me though, it sure reads like it's the homeowner. Something is off about a guy who spots a car that turns into his driveway and for some weird reason, immediately insists that it "leave".
Why? People turn into driveways all the time by accident and while one certainly doesn't want anyone "camping out" after, it's a bit strange to be so concerned that you have to send out your kid to "tell them to leave". I mean, wait a few minutes right?
Something up with that guy.
But, okay, the actual story -- the reason it's circulating -- is because apparently the entire thing was never given to the DA to determine what might happen next. The report was scribbled down and then the local department just shrugged on.
Strange all the way around.
By Dave for Personal Blog.
Comments (0) | Promote (0) | PermShare | Focuses (145)
Look, it's not interesting that someone shot a would-be mass shooter. Many, maybe even most, mass shooters get shot. They are either shot by police, though, a fair number also wind up actually shooting themselves. Mass shooters get shot, and they die -- it doesn't matter who shot them.
Because of this, examples of good Samaritans like Elisjsha Dicken taking out a mass shooter before he can inflict more carnage do not strengthen the gun advocate's argument.
Innocent people still died and that number of similarly innocent people adds up when multiplied over all the cases of people dying before mass or piecemeal shooters are shot themselves. Those who advocate for the elimination of gun rights to reduce the circulation of firearms, to reduce shootings, have a better case out of this incident than gun right advocates do in trying to make theirs. So any narrative to the contrary is pretty ironic.
The reasons are pretty simple: Mass shooters typically get the drop on everyone with respect to their intent, and some such as the Buffalo Tops shooter, even wear body armor. A good man with a gun doesn't resolve things like that. In the Tops shooting a "good man with a gun" was annihilated in seconds thanks to the latter circumstance. He died shooting and said shooting made no difference.
Note I am not taking up sides here, I tend to favor handgun ownership these days, in fact. But that doesn't mean that I am not bothered by people sipping up instances of drama stupidly making arguments for their cause. The best and only good argument gun right advocates have is that it appears to be a Constitutional right, so if we care about that, we have to adjust as a society. People who advocate against the elimination of guns (of which I have no example to provide since just about everyone who argues against guns is really arguing for sensible gun control -- gun 'nutters just "hear" something else in their delusional foaming) would be logically correct that eliminating all guns would obviously frustrate their circulation, and gun deaths and mass shootings would eventually fall to near nil. A moot point considering that, again, Americans have this right to bear arms.
By Dave for Personal Blog.
Comments (0) | Promote (0) | PermShare | Focuses (885)