I have no idea what you just said here, I can't decide if I agree or disagree......
Here's the Dick and Jane version. Remember it was addressed to
boodle's post 14, which predictably dragged the irrelevant topic of gun rights (See 2d Amendment) into this killing.
1. Those rights are thanks to the Supreme Court's interpretations over the years. The Courts are part of the system of laws that's supposed to make the streets safe from those who gun down the unarmed. The 2d Amendment has nothing to do with self-appointed vigilantism.
2. Self-described 'responsible gun-owners' would serve gun-rights better by condemning such morons instead of picking an unnecessary quarrel over gun-rights, and lining up on the killer's side, instead of public safety and civil society. See
boodle as an example.
3. Since he brought in D-Day—more irrelevance—he should be aware that we were there too, and were fighting that same enemy for years before those American anti-tyranny gun-owners got around to it, and all without any 2d Amendment rights at all. Y'see our nation is founded on 'peace, order and good government*', and this is Canada, here on TERB.
4. So screw on your thinking cap, leave the simplistic 'saving us from tyranny' crap for the ignorant, and easily led and address the real issue. No one should be gunned down and killed for doing something as innocent and ordinary as going out to buy Skittles.
Sorry, there were some multi-syllable words and subordinate clauses, in the Dick and Jane version.
Anyone who doesn't see that shooting innocent people is something bad, that the killers need to be investigated and charged and the circumstances leading to it need to be fixed is part of the problem.
Fortunately this is a 'you guys' problem. Let's keep it that way.
*Says so in our
Constitution.
