If Nazism still controlled Germany and if the Third Reich were still going around attacking other nations it would be quite reasonable, and not a partisan political position to blame Nazism in the wake of any occasional Nazi attack reached our shores. Or would any disagree?
So when Islam, being responsible for thousands and thousands of attacks on innocents all over the world sometimes attacks us here, it ought not be the least bit partisan or political to blame Islam....but this gentleman seems to feel that it is. But why would this be different? Or does the gentleman not think we ought to have blamed Nazism in the first case?
Instead, the gentleman compares blaming Islam in the wake of such an attack to blaming the laxness of laws about possessions of weapons....and wonders why we are disgusted at somebody leaping to gun policy while we waste no time in condemning an ideology that promotes killing innocent people....uhm...well the opinion that guns should be more available is actually not the same thing (except in the minds of excitable people like our fine gentleman) as promoting the killing of innocent people. Many who want laxer weapon laws think it might make people safer on average because armed law abiding citizens may shoot back, or even discourage such attacks in the first place. Even if such people are mistaken, it is grossly unfair to compare them to people that actually want innocent people to die.
But these moral and intellectual considerations seem beyond the grasp of the respectable gentleman.
Dems won’t stop until they, like their communist forbears, take everyone’s guns away.
They are totalitarians.
The Orlando shooter was. Didn't make a difference for your gun control agenda.
This headline tells me hen probably was and they’re trying to discount thenpissibility in everyone’s minds.
Paddock wasn’t a member of the NRA was he?
Friedman is an a$$hoe. Always has been.
Girlfriend is a person of interest. She’s from the Philippines which a problem with Muslims.