Mark Silva And Our "Gun Happy Culture"
Predictable, but still pretty sad via The Swamp. What's missing from Silva's rationale for Black Friday mayhem? Government's fault - check. Media's - check. Gun happy culture's - check.
Funny, if I didn't know better, I'd think individuals actually undertook the actions. Perhaps there's just too few of those people left?
Of course, coming from a media that abandoned any sense of responsibility for itself over the last year or so of political coverage, it's probably unfair to expect them to get the concept of personal responsibility when it comes to anyone anymore - except maybe a conservative. They at least seem to retain the ability to judge them and their political positions.
Some "Black Friday.''
First a temporary maintenance worker died opening the doors of a Wal-Mart to a bargaining-hunting crowd of human wolves. And now two are dead at a Toys "R'' Us.
Lay a little blame at the feet of the government, for exhorting Americans to spend more money and shake off that recession gripping the nation. Lay some blame on the media, for stoking the hype surrounding one day of retailing which is, in fact, nothing more than the first of 28 shopping days left until Christmas, with cable news hawking footage of ravenous shoppers storming the doors of stores opening at 4 am.
And in Palm Desert, California, where police say an argument preceded the shooting at a Toys "R" Us, lay some blame on a gun-happy culture which encourages the resolution of simple domestic disputes with the pulling of a trigger.


Hey, what about all the auto accidents that happened yesterday? And all the people who died in hospitals, nursing homes, and hospices. Why is Mark Silva covering up for the government?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Saturday, November 29, 2008 at 10:31 AM
I take it all as a sign of how blue states celebrate the holiday spirit.
Posted by: mark l. | Saturday, November 29, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Isn't it hard to get a concealed pistol license in California without some sort of political backing from the liberal establishment?
Ergo, the person who did the shooting is either a choirboy or one with political favor.
Posted by: scaramouche | Saturday, November 29, 2008 at 05:14 PM
"What is the point if[of] having policemen with guns if they refuse to use them? I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera."
The above was said by an Indian journalist who managed to get a photo of a Paki terrorist. He said there were armed police around the railroad station who did not fire though they were armed. I hope I never have to decide to use my gun, but this kind of incident is the reason I carry one.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article14086308.ece
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Sunday, November 30, 2008 at 08:01 AM
A diversion, if one is allowed. Where have we heard these truths before (From an Investor's Business Daily editorial):
"The CRA [Community Reinvestment Act] coerces banks into making loans based on political correctness, and little else, to people who can't afford them. Enforced like never before by the Clinton administration, the regulation destroyed credit standards across the mortgage industry, created the subprime market, and caused the housing bubble that has now burst and left us with the worst housing and banking crises since the Great Depression.
The CRA should be abolished, along with the government-sponsored enterprises that fueled the secondary market for subprimes — under pressure from Clinton, who ordered HUD to set quotas for "affirmative action" lending at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
But powerful Democrats in Washington want to protect the act — along with Fannie and Freddie — and spin the subprime scandal as the result of too little regulation, not too much.
"Repealing or weakening the CRA would be a mistake," warns Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who argues that the CRA should be strengthened.
Dodd, the top recipient of Fannie donations and himself a beneficiary of a sweetheart mortgage brokered by a subprime lender, recently invited one of Clinton's top enforcers of the CRA to testify."
http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=312766781716725
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Sunday, November 30, 2008 at 09:49 AM
cue the "John Birch Society" of the left.
'it wasn't fannie or freddie(or any democrat's fault)...it was Phil Gramm's fault.'
"Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act"
"On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8 [7] and by the House 362-57.[8] This legislation was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.[9]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act
"Summers and Rubin also helped secure passage of the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, aimed at spurring competition in banking. The law repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, which had prohibited commercial banks from offering investment and insurance services. Summers, 54, helped craft the legislation, and Rubin urged Congress to pass it and Clinton to sign it. . ."
http://prorev.com/2008/11/foxes-in-chicken-coop_22.html
Posted by: mark l. | Sunday, November 30, 2008 at 02:53 PM