Here he goes:
President Barack Obama assured the grieving, shell-shocked Newtown community on Sunday that “you are not alone” and vowed sternly to wield “whatever power this office holds” in a quest to prevent future mass shootings.
“We can’t tolerate this anymore,” Obama said from behind a podium on the stage of a Newton High School auditorium, as adults wept, or hugged, or sat quietly, many hugging small children. “These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change.”
“In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens — from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents, and educators — in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have?”he said.
The speech, broadcast nationwide, offered the bold suggestion that Obama might engage lawmakers on the subject of gun control — a topic that has not been among his top priorities during his presidency.
“We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage?” Obama said. That the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year, after year, after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”
I’m wondering where the FBI was in all this? In a few hours the media had the story of a troubled kid in a troubled home with a troubled mom “all the warning signs” yet the information gathering state failed to put the pieces together. Meanwhile they push kids who don’t know better into committing “terrorist acts” and trumpeting how wonderful they are at preventing catastrophe.
It is truly a shame that people still think the FBI should be held up as experts (see “The FBI” staring Efrem Zimbalist Jr) when almost all this stuff is premeditated and almost always telegraphed, these days on social media (backed up for your convenience by the NSA). Instead they continue to capture information about everyone that will eventually be used against us.
Good old Clover Alfred E Neuman Obama. And the argument from tyranny. Bowler In Chief of a “30” on the campaign trail. Pompous Pencil Neck Poohbah of the free world.
America wants and needs “Mad Men” not “Mad Magazine Men.” TPTB will of course continue to give us the exact opposite of what we want and need. And give it us “good and hard” besides.
It’s gonna be tough teleprompting our way out of this pickle, President Alfred E Newman Declares. But “What Me Worry.” Operation Charge of the Erkel Brigade is in full force, there is nothing to fear.
You see, President Clover will not tell you the reason these mass murdering thugs do not, as a rule, assault police stations. Though they know full well it’s because the shooter knows everyone in the place is armed and will resist.
Sure, while a “Call of Doody” wannabee may through the element of surprise manage to shoot one or two people initially. The odds are nearly 100% that doing so will lead to the immediate termination of their assault via return fire.
Though President Clover will argue otherwise let’s look at the recent events, shall we? The movie theater in Colorado posted a “gun free” sign. Ditto for the mall. And, of course, under federal law schools are “gun free” zones — the government, along with gun-banners, assert that paper (laws) “protect” against bullets.
But the law only applies to and is followed by law-abiding citizens, and as it has irrefutably been shown before, once someone commits their first murder there is no law that can add to their punishment since they have already elected to suffer the maximum available penalty.
Therefore, the logical place for such a person to commit a mass assault, where the odds are highest that they will be able to murder the maximum number of people, is to select a location to target where the odds of lawful defensive use of force are minimized — or non-existent.
This is why the assailants choose movie theaters or malls that are posted “gun-free” zones — and schools.
Occasionally, however, their plans go awry. Like, for instance, in the Oregon Mall shooting.
“He was working on his rifle,” said Meli. “He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side.”
The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.
“I’m not beating myself up cause I didn’t shoot him,” said Meli. “I know after he saw me I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself.”
Indeed the shooter did shoot himself next, despite having multiple additional unarmed people available near him to continue his rampage, along with additional cartridges, once he unjammed the gun.
He saw the man who, despite a sign claiming that there were no guns in the mall, was in fact armed and able to return fire. The assailant’s illusion of a free-fire zone where all the people he wanted to shoot were free from the risk of returning fire had been dispelled; had he elected to shoot another unarmed and helpless individual the odds are good that he would have exposed himself to being shot as he would have had to move in a fashion that would have given the CCW holder a clear shot at him.
As such he elected to take his own life since he knew, at that point, that he no longer had the ability to continue to murder people without reprisal.
Nick Meli saved lives with a gun. As did Devin McLean. Both Nick and Devin did so without discharging a weapon as occurs more than one million times a year in the United States; the mere display of a weapon breaks the illusion of a risk-free target zone for the shooter. Without firing a shot, a citizens mere display of his gun alters the shooter’s calculation of risk and reward.
The Oregon Mall Shooter elected to kill himself rather than continue his rampage. The Autozone Fake Beard Bandit elected to flee the scene, rather than continue his robbery and endangerment of the store’s management.
Compare the actions of Meli to those of the police who shot the ’empire state shooter’. Meli, concerned for theose behind the shooter should he miss, did not fire. The police, who fired wildly and with recless disregard for the innocent folks behind, wounded eight bystanders.
Who is it that needs disarming?
I don’t want to get a ticket for spreading internet misinformation, but Devin McLean (VA Autozone) said “One of the officers asked why I didn’t shoot the robber???!!!”
Is it still legal to post things that don’t emanate from official podiums and police microphones, I’m not sure when Lanza’s Law about Internet News Responsibility kicks in?
things do need to change, stop stifling freedom and allow people to defend themselves as they see fit as long as they don’t violate the rights of others.
the implied solution of “banning” guns isn’t a change, it is a progressive continuation that has been going on for decades. the only change they are talking about it ramping up the pace of their desired end.
According to Dear Leader, violence visited upon our children (read American) is an unacceptable price for our freedom. The rest of the world’s children? Fuck yeah! Game on! Let the drones fly, Baby!