Dumbest Story of the Day from WaPo:

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Rebecca
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 5 hours ago
Joined: 05/07/2008 - 3:17pm
Dumbest Story of the Day from WaPo:

A response to the Washington Post

Dumbest Story of the Day from WaPo: ‘France has strict gun laws. Why didn’t that save Charlie Hebdo victims?’

Posted by Jammie on Jan 09, 2015 at 8:35 am

When American audiences read of a dramatic event in a foreign country, they often frame it in terms of the political debates occurring at home. As such, it was no surprise that after shootings at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris this week, some Americans began to wonder about gun control laws.

“Isn’t it interesting that the tragedy in Paris took place in one of the toughest gun control countries in the world?” American reality television star Donald Trump wrote on Twitter shortly after the news broke. The tweet prompted both praise (over a thousand retweets) and scorn (Trump was labelled a “moron” and an “idiot” by other tweeters).

Sure, Trump’s the moron. But “journalists” asking stupid question aren’t. Right.

Trump, a perennial attention seeker, was likely attempting to score political points and insult liberals with his tweet. But behind the disingenuity, there is is a genuinely troubling question: Why didn’t France’s gun laws save the Charlie Hebdo victims?

-------------------------------------------------

As The Post’s Thomas Gibbons-Neff notes, the men who attacked Charlie Hebdo appeared to be carrying two different types of Kalashnikov rifles. Such weapons are highly restricted and require extremely stringent background checks to buy (CNN describes it as rivaling the “clearance work done by the FBI for anybody employed at the White House”).

Almost certainly illegally. Bloomberg reports that weapons designed for military use, such as the Kalashnikov AK series, have been illegally flooding France over the past few years, with state bodies recording double digit increases.

But behind the disingenuity, there is is a genuinely troubling question: Why didn’t France’s gun laws save the Charlie Hebdo victims?

This is the question of the day among many, many journalists who have just discovered that they to can be targets/victims.

Read the rest of the story: http://www.jammiewf.com/2015/dumbest-story-of-the-day-from-wapo-france-h...

Strict gun laws prevent the law abiding from protecting themselves. Forget Trump’s attention whoring for a minute and ask yourself: If some of those dead Charlie Hebdo employees were armed, would they all be dead?

Cheech
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 03/15/2014 - 8:56am
As I understand it, the two

As I understand it, the two police officers arrived at the scene unarmed on bicycles, an obvious case of terminal dumb-a$$ on the part of their policy makers. If you hadn't already heard differently, you'd think the manchurian or big bird de blasio were running the show.

Dale Tudor
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/23/2010 - 12:57pm
An armed society is a more

An armed society is a more polite society. Crime goes down when the number of folks carrying concealed or open carry goes up. If you carry a badge, you should also carry a gun. And if you are not carrying a gun, regardless of your occupation, you are simply adding yourself to those who are volunteering to become a victim of someone with bad intentions who may be armed with any sort of weapon.

Log in to post comments