Posted on 06/20/2015 4:27:34 AM PDT by stevie_d_64
HOUSTON (AP) — A Houston attorney on the National Rifle Association's board of directors is blaming the deadly Charleston church shooting on one of the victims, saying the slain pastor had opposed concealed carry legislation as a state senator that could have saved him and his fellow worshippers.
Related Stories
1. NRA executive suggests slain Charleston pastor to blame for gun deaths Reuters 2. Slain Pastor Clementa Pinckney’s Mission Suited His Storied Church The Wall Street Journal 3. And The First Person To Blame The Charleston Shooting On A Lack Of Guns In Church Is... Huffington Post 4. White gunman caught in killing of 9 in historic black church Associated Press 5. South Carolina shooting victims united by their devotion to church Reuters
In an interview Friday with The Associated Press, Charles Cotton confirmed writing that "innocent people died because of (Clementa Pinckney's) position on a political issue." The post appeared Thursday in an online discussion board about concealed handguns.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Idjit.
I back Charles Cotton’s opinion 150%...
This is nothing but the usual, and expected backwash, from anyone not falling into line with the usual race pimping mouthpieces...
Funny how the S.C. legislator is a republican...Not surprising...Now the fire is getting close to the fuel...
I personally hate it when someone puts blame on the victim. It was the gunman’s fault.. in its entirely... If someone wants to put “partial” blame (a smaller %) on the room mate who knew this guy was planning this attack and he did nothing/said nothing.. that seems fair. But to suggest a person’s political opinion caused their murder is just wrong. IMHO.
It depends. Sometimes, a “victim” was doing something mind-blowingly stupid with an obviously high risk of serious harm, like that banker who was shooting up heroin with a prostitute who advertised herself as dangerously insane. “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”
No, he did not BLAME HIM FOR THE SHOOTING he just pointed out the FACT that he could have defended himself from the shooting if he had a concealed carry weapon, but he was against that type of thing.
Far cry from BLAMING HIM for the shooting.
Yes... that is different. I would say that person was actively participating in something that turned deadly. I just think a person worshiping God.. in His house.. has nothing whatsoever to do with their own murder.
You are missing the point...
Charles pointed out that a measure (bill) proposed in S.C.’s legislative body, that would have tweek’d the existing law to allow no penalty to carry a concealed firearm into a church in S.C. was given a “nay” vote by this pastor, that just also happens to be a S.C. state Senator...
The pastor did not have an “opinion”m he was elected to a state office to debate, and vote on measures, bills, in the conducting of state business...
It IS NOT implying that if someone in that room had had a firearm would have stopped the massacre...That is not part of the overall problem here...
Several years ago a man walked into Mass carrying a back pack and looking somewhat deranged. This was right after the Amish Church shooting.
I told my wife that if I stood up she was to get under the pew and stay there until I came to get her.
I knew that I might not be able to stop him but I was going to distract him and make me his focus long enough for others to hopefully grab him.
Fortunately he was just a homeless guy looking for a hand out, but in todays day and age you never know.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I probably need more coffee, Stevie. :)
In this case, from a certain perspective, yes, it did...
Is that so abhorant??? Disrespectful???
I believe it is a great, yet unfortunate example of hindsight being 20/20...
The pastor and the other “victims” surely have nothing more to offer to the discussion at this particular time...
But if they were still here, and able to tell us right now, if they had had the ability to defend themselves, would they not have???
Put yourself in their shoes...And see how you feel then...
And please don’t go in the direction that it is God’s will to be murdered in church, or really anywhere for that matter...
If you believe God wants us to just die at the hands of other people without some respect for the gift of life you have been bestowed...
Then why would suicide be considered a “sin”, possibly unforgiven???
Death is death, it is only the beginning of another phase in our souls existence...
It is right to believe that, and look forward to eternity in the light and presence of our God...And Hell is not being there for eternity...
Some people cannot grasp that fact...Nor are they faithful enough to at least give life a fighting chance, right???
You do not have to just die, be murdered, I believe you are allowed to protect life, by taking a life intent on murdering you...
I would love to buy you a cup...No problem...
BTW, I feel the media is misrepresenting Charles on his position...
It is kinda obvious, it is designed to deflect from the real solution to the issue...
And Charles knows I have the ability to put an interesting perspective on incidents like this, because of the things I said in my last post, before this one...
Charles is a great guy, he is in my opinion the epitome of being an Ambassador to the Second Amendment...
He has worked tirelessly for years since he was a direct part of drafting and getting the Texas CHL law passed 20 years ago, and he and many others, including myself, have been working to tweek the laws of this state, and influencing other states to do the same on this issue...
It would go unsaid, I do not believe, he meant any malice or disrespect of the “victims” of this criminal act...
The act itself is yet another example of the decline in the general, social decline of the value of human life...
And those that do carry a firearm for lawful, self-defensive purposes, should not be considered the problem, we are in cases like this, if we are in that position...
The Solution...
He’s RIGHT. The guy was hoisted by his own petard.
Our pastor is always armed here in PA, along with several members of the congregation. If someone came into our church intending a large slaughter, they wouldn’t get any further than killing one or two people.
It is a simple fact. Just like it is a simple fact that if you have a kitchen fire and never prepared for that possibility by having a fire extinguisher, people can rightly say that it was too bad you didn’t have one and the whole house burned down.
The pastor is not to blame. The murderer is to blame.
AP found an NRA board member who violated a cultural taboo, and it makes headline news...
Who would have thought it!
AP has been rabidly anti-second amendment and anti-constitutional for decades.
Did kinda come back and bite the good pastor on the ass, didn’t it.
“I personally hate it when someone puts blame on the victim.”
You can’t blame the victims but you can put the blame squarely on the shoulder of the preacher for for the size of the massacre due to the fact that he PREVENTED anyone from having the legal right to bring a gun into his church.
In essence, he made them helpless targets of such an assassination when they legally could have protected themselves.
Blame is a word of a liberal. How about he pointed out the obvious, that someone with a concealed carry in that church could have saved lives.
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.