[Still Thinking]

So with its usual attention to fact and detail, the Times has reported that the DELIBERATE Regime initiated sale of more than 2000 weapons to known straw purchasers is actually the result of gun ownership being “…such an ingrained part of the culture in Arizona…that it is difficult to tell straw purchasers from legal ones without conducting surveillance to determine how the guns [are] being used.”

Where to start, where to start...

First of all, the government has no prima facie right to "know how guns are being used" any more than they have a similar right to know how toothbrushes are being used without their prior consent.

Secondly, how is "it's hard to tell when sales are legitimate or straw purchases" justify failing to interdict those transactions you KNOW are straw purchases?? That fact, even if it were true, is completely unrelated to what they're accused of having done. The Old Gray Whore is SO desperate to defend the actions of statists, especially her chosen and approved statist, that they're resort to complete irrationality, delivered in completely grammatical sentences, to produce the impression of a defense. In a sense, that's as strong an indictment as any. If the people defending you are forced to stoop to irrational irrelevant arguments, there must in actual fact, be no excuse for your actions.

[muawiyah]

The NYT is trying to justify the actions because “they knew” and many of their people could be charged with complicity in murder. They are attempting to pollute the jury pools.