Lawdog Dago Dom Posted May 2 Posted May 2 Hard to beat John Lott for cutting through the hyperbole and getting to the facts. At The Federalist: No, Gun Control Wouldn’t Have Prevented The Latest Trump Assassination Attempt - Crime Prevention Research Center 3 Quote
John Kloehr Posted May 2 Posted May 2 (edited) Bloomberg is casting it as "spent years quietly acquiring his arsenal." Should instead acknowledge waiting periods would not have had any benefit. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/suspect-in-dc-dinner-attack-spent-several-years-acquiring-guns/ar-AA21Lijd On edit: I find it a stretch to call 2 guns an "arsenal." Edited May 2 by John Kloehr 1 2 Quote
La Sombra Posted May 2 Posted May 2 Important facts/data in that article to remember. They could and should bolster any anti-gun control discussion. La Sombra 2 Quote
Blackwater 53393 Posted May 2 Posted May 2 WELLLLLLL, two years IS “years” in the strictest sense of the phrase and while I agree that two weapons could be loosely defined as an “arsenal” if you’re being nitpicky. In taking this tack, the bloominidiots have openly admitted that their demands for waiting periods are pointless and ineffective by definition!! I would suspect that many of these hand wringing, simpering, totally insincere, self serving imbeciles probably own as many guns, (although they would never admit it) and acquired them over even longer periods of time!! Should we then be investigating all of them and checking for unfinished “manifestos” in their sock drawers??🤔🤨 3 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.