Posted on 04/07/2015 8:37:43 AM PDT by rktman
Richard Martinez’s right wrist bulges with rubber bracelets, each one inscribed with a name and given to him by a grieving family shattered by an act of gun violence.
Around his left wrist is the watch his son, Christopher, was wearing when he was killed. Martinez was given the watch when he went to the morgue to identify his 20-year-old son’s body. “It was the hardest thing I’ve ever had to do,” he said.
It’s been almost a year since a killing spree in Isla Vista, California, left six people -- including Martinez’s only child -- dead, and more than a dozen injured. Speaking the day after the tragedy, Martinez made national news with an emotional denouncement of lawmakers afraid to act on gun control. "Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians," he raged. “Too many people have died. We should say to ourselves, 'Not one more!'"
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
If his beef is taking illegal guns out of the hands of criminals, I’m all for it. If his beef is taking the guns from law-abiding citizens, not so much.
The narrative is subtly changing from ‘gun control’ to ‘gun violence’.
His beef appears to be with some entitled, elitist, leftist, shooting some folks after stabbing some other folks in his little gun control paradise. Not my fault, not my problem.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. —Benjamin Franklin
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. —Benjamin Franklin”
You betcha. BUMP!
No mention of significance to the folks NOT killed by the firearm.
I’m sorry for his loss, but his pain does not trump my rights. Disarmed citizens make the world safer for tyrants and criminals.
I’m sorry for his loss but you could tell this guy was going to ride the gun control gravy train from day one.
Maybe if he had taught his son to use a gun he could have defended himself.
So he must be for arming law abiding citizens to protect themselves, right? "Not one more!"
You sir, are correct. He should direct his rage at those who effectively disarmed the victims.
Some who have lost loved ones do this. We see those rail against the presence of guns, because those are the ones the media brings forth as speakers. Those are the ones the media deems legitimate. This is all agenda driven political theater.
There is a reason that the DART center for Journalism has chosen to have, as one of its speakers, a victim who wants more gun control, and not one who wants to restore second amendment rights.
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/03/dart-center-speaker-selection-for-gun.html
The very term “gun violence” biases the argument. It chosing shows a set of assumptions about reality that are not true. All violence is not evil, and violence committed with guns is not more evil than violence committed with bombs, or cars, or knives, or hands and feet.
“We see those rail” should be:
“We see those who rail”
Utilizing his logic, we should also ban cars because they are often used to kidnap people, and take them to non populated areas to kill them. Furthermore, they are used by drunks, drug addicts, and the insane to kill themselves and/or others. They also have mechanical failures which make them unsafe, they go off the road and kill pedestrians and puppies.
Murder is already illegal. Taking away guns is not going to prevent much in the way of murder. People hell bent on killing others can and will find ways to accomplish their goals.
You will read a few gun control stories in coming weeks. This is not because gun control is a goal for the left. This is fund-raising season for the next election and gun control makes some of the deep pocketed leftists write big checks to the Dems. The Dems would love to have another tradegy or bad event happen right now so they could fund-raise off it.
That’s what you are witnessing—nothing more.
It wouldn’t surprise me one bit to find out that the same outfit that wrote Martinez’ spiel supplied Sarah Brady with her talking points as well. Such people aren’t that smart and are only useful as mouthpieces and must have their words supplied to them, like 0bama...
What is gun violence?
You mean like this little piece of work known as the gun violence messaging guide?:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/748675/gun-violencemessaging-guide-pdf-1.pdf
Exactly, a few self-appointed know-nothing knowitalls come up with distilled talking points consisting of nothing more than knee-jerk reaction painted on contrived straw-man victims and disseminated via their complicit activists in mainstream media. All fake but swallowed wholesale by those who have been taught not to think for themselves during the time they spent in the public education system... But seriously, yes—cheesy yet slick propaganda disseminated wholesale for free.
Three stabbed to death. Three shot to death. Four shot and injured. Two hit by a car and injured. Exactly why is this liberal nutcase trying to ban guns and not trying to ban knives and cars (rhetorical question - he's doing it to profit from his own child's death, since Bloomberg and similar rich liberals reward those willing to exploit tragedy)?
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.