“This shooting did not involve an assault rifle but a revolver. The shooter was not an angry white male but black.”
According to news reports and standards set by liberal media, a “mass shooting” is any shooting where three or more people are shot or killed. Just the other day, another mass school shooting happened, this time in San Bernardino at North Park Elementary School. The shooter walked in, shot and killed a teacher as well as a student who was sitting at the table near her. The gunman than turned the gun on himself. Another student was also wounded in the initial barrage of gunfire. The shooting should be a major story for the anti-firearms groups and Bloomberg’s paid activists to use to cry foul of guns and anyone who uses them.
So why have we not heard the usual crying about guns, mayors holding press conferences, and protests about guns by the local community? Why has the mainstream media not been carrying on about assault rifles or magazine capacity or all the other typical discussions that follow a mass shooting, especially one in which children are killed or wounded? Because this shooting did not fit the agenda they support.
This shooting did not involve an assault rifle but a revolver. The shooter was not an angry white male but black. The firearm was illegally obtained and the shooting took place in one of the strictest gun law states in the nation. This shooting does not fit the description that anti-firearms groups use to try and convince people this was the fault of the gun.
In this case it was a revolver and the shooter had time to shoot, reload, and shoot again. There is no indication the shooter used a “speed loader” to reload, which means he had to load the rounds one at a time. That takes some time. Sources indicate he shot the teacher first and was out to kill others but ran out of bullets according to one aide who was in the room at the time of the shooting. But he obviously had one more bullet to make sure he wasn’t going to be taken alive.
So why don’t we hear more about this shooting from anti-gun groups? Because it does not fit their narrative and they don’t want all the preconceived notions they have implanted into the mindless drones to be shocked that maybe they were not told the truth about these types of shootings. The truth is, you could create all the laws you want but none will be enough stop evil people from doing something like this. For the very same reason cops carry firearms, law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry firearms to defend themselves and others from these murderous psychopaths. How do you stop an active shooter on a rampage? The only way is to confront force with more force. That’s why cops are taught to seek out and engage the shooter as soon as they can. What would the outcome have been if the teacher was armed? Maybe nothing. Maybe something. We don’t know but there could have been a chance that the outcome may have been different
It’s time for people to realize that you cannot legislate safety and morality in people. You can however, allow and equip them to be able to defend themselves and others.
If this subject is of further interest to you, please read my article on arming teachers.
