Donate search
close

Share

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print

Brady Campaign Politicizes Synagogue Shooting

Politicizing tragedies is the natural result of polarization.

There used to be a time when politicizing a tragedy was tacky.  I personally never had a problem with it.  If there is a policy solution that might have mitigated the bad act, of course it’s worth discussing.  But there is a difference between accurately identifying a problem and a solution and using tragedies to bolster your pet policy initiative.

According to USA Today, “San Diego County Sheriff William Gore said the shooter at Chabad of Poway used an “AR-type assault weapon” that killed Lori Gilbert-Kaye, 60. Three others were injured in the shooting. That type of weapon, also used in the 2015 shooting that killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, and the 2018 high school shooting that killed 17 in Parkland, Florida, among other mass shootings, can be altered in ways that make it legal in California.”

As usual, the minute anyone hears or reads “AR-style assault weapon,” the gun control crowd leaps into high dudgeon. 

USA Today included a segment that featured a statement from the Brady Campaign.

The AR-15 is a version of the M16 that used by service members in the Vietnam War. “These are weapons for soldiers to use to fight an enemy in the jungle more effectively,” said Kyleanne Hunter, vice president of programs for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Hunter, a Marine Corps veteran who was deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, said while the civilian semi-automatic version of the rifle doesn’t have the automatic function of those used in combat, there are few differences between the two. Hunter said soldiers in combat tend to use the semi-automatic function more because the fully automatic function has a tendency to jam and is less accurate. The rifles, whether the civilian or military models, have the same velocity and range, Hunter said.“Functionally, these are guns designed to kill as many people as possible and as quickly as possible,” she said, adding that she doesn’t believe AR-type rifles are appropriate for hunting or home defense.

Is anyone else concerned that someone like Hunter could serve in the military and come out without a basic understanding of firearms?

That is the hallmark of the gun control left.  Emotion and rage overcome a dispassionate review of the facts.  Because they think humans are inherently good, they need to blame inanimate objects.  But they can’t even do that without stepping all over logic.

1: Hunter gets the history of the AR wrong. The AR was designed in the 50s.

2: Hunter insinuates that the military’s use of semi-automatic fire is somehow indicative of its destructive capability.  *GASP* accuracy is bad.

3: Hunter does the same thing when discussing the velocity and range. These are determined by round, barrel length, windage, and elevation. The type of rifle is irrelevant.

4: Hunter trots out the hackneyed claim that the AR is designed to kill as many people as possible.  There are only cosmetic difference between the AR and other rifles.  The AR-15 fires one of the smallest rifle rounds available.

5: Hunter doesn’t believe that the AR is useful for hunting or home defense. The AR is useful for small game, coyotes, raccoons, and pigs.  It isn’t big enough for deer.  And the AR’s cosmetic features do make it useful for home defense.  The collapsible stock and mounting rails make it suitable for defending one’s home.  As with any rifle, you have to worry about over-penetration, but the presence of multiple hostiles may override that concern.  The ability to have a large capacity magazine is also helpful in circumstances with multiple hostiles.  That is something a pump-action shotgun cannot address.  But magazine size is not limited to an AR.

If the shooter’s rifle was in fact California compliant with a bullet-button, Hunter bemoans the existence of the AR for no reason. California compliance neuters the AR.

According to USA Today, “In Poway, witnesses said the gunman’s rifle appeared to be jam at the time he fled from the synagogue, and Rudolph said configurations to the weapon required by state law make it difficult to fix malfunctions. “They can jam easily, especially when you can’t fix a malfunction,” she said.”

While that may have helped in this circumstance, the propensity to jam (as compelled by state law) places a terrible burden on firearm owners.  The state and the Brady Campaign are set on rendering legal firearms inoperable in the name of gun control. 

Consider an alternative:  Let’s say the shooter only had a pistol, thereby escaping all the claims by the Brady Campaign regarding the AR.  A pistol can kill just as easily as an AR.

Now let’s say the synagogue has a security guard with a California Compliant AR.

His AR jams due to California law and the shooter proceeds in his massacre.

That failure is the State of California’s fault.  That shooting would have been stopped but for California law.

And you might say, well this shooting could have been stopped but for laws permitting the possession of ARs. 

I’m sorry, did you read about this dude’s history?  He allegedly tried to set fire to a mosque.  That did not require a firearm.  He’s evil, and evil people are going to do evil things unless stopped by society.

The Brady Campaign can pontificate all it wants, but they know it’s not going to change anything.  While they politicize the tragedy, we always get stuck having to politicize it in response.

Share

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print

Advertisement

More Top Stories

Donald “Master Of The Platform” Trump Tweets He Didn’t Hire The Best People

While some praise his use of Twitter, Trump’s tweets are not always covfefe and sunshine. Yesterday, Trump was the master of the platform.  Today, Trump exposed his own stupidity on Twitter …

Can a Democrat Be Pro-Life Today?

It’s no secret that the debate over abortion has ratcheted up to a higher level than anyone has ever imagined. Each side has drawn its lines, and both sides of the debate seem to be retreating t …

When ‘Fairness’ Becomes Censorship

On April 10, 2018, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz grilled Facebook Chairman and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg over the social media platform’s content moderation policies. Citing examples of Facebook ce …