NYT Opinion Page whopper: Gun control doesn't work, but we need it anyway

[FormerlyIndifferent]

End the Gun Epidemic in America

(all emphasis mine)

Law enforcement and intelligence agencies are searching for motivations, including the vital question of how the murderers might have been connected to international terrorism.

The attention and anger of Americans should also be directed at the elected leaders whose job is to keep us safe...

Uhm, their job is to keep us free. But (in Jeff Kuhner voice) "we'll let dat goh..."

America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism.

Uhhh, so it goes from being a "vital question" about international terrorism connections, to being a "distraction", in just 2 paragraphs.

These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

Now it's terrorism again. I thought it was a distraction.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true.

They admit that gun control does not work.

...They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did.

They admit it again.

...But at least those countries are trying.

But we need gun control anyway. Everyone involved gets a trophy for "trying".

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

Gun control doesn't work, but, we need to "try". The answer, opines the NYT, is confiscation. (A few paragraphs ago however, the NYT admitted that laws would do nothing to stop shootings).

Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...-in-america/ar-AAg2dhB?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=LENDHP

 

[Lip]

Dupe but great analysis.

 

[FormerlyIndifferent]

Dupe but great analysis.

Do'h! and thanks.

 

[Lip]

Do'h! and thanks.

Like the Kuhner man voice.

 

[FormerlyIndifferent]

Like the Kuhner man voice.

Lip.....Liiip......Liiiihp.......we are talkeeng-KUH, about radical. islamic. terrorism.

Are we talkeeng-KUH about catholic nuns? Noh. Quakers? I meen, dewey meen.....da Quakers? Noh.

How bowt the AAHMish. Eet must be DEM, blowin up train stations and shooteeeng-KUH, up da malls.

You say Jeff.......Jeeeffffff........Jehhhhhffffff, it's gotta be the Menonites.......and I say no-noh-noh-noh-nooo!

We are dealing-KUH, with an enemy, the likes of which we have never. seen. before.

And Barack. Hussein. Obama.....dat radical een da White House.....who refuses, to call dis, what dis is.....

sits idly by with regard to terrorism, but wants to take. away. our guns.

 

[bill o]

Lip.....Liiip......Liiiihp.......we are talkeeng-KUH, about radical. islamic. terrorism.

Are we talkeeng-KUH about catholic nuns? Noh. Quakers? I meen, dewey meen.....da Quakers? Noh.

How bowt the AAHMish. Eet must be DEM, blowin up train stations and shooteeeng-KUH, up da malls.

You say Jeff.......Jeeeffffff........Jehhhhhffffff, it's gotta be the Menonites.......and I say no-noh-noh-noh-nooo!

We are dealing-KUH, with an enemy, the likes of which we have never. seen. before.

And Barack. Hussein. Obama.....dat radical een da White House.....who refuses, to call dis, what dis is.....

sits idly by with regard to terrorism, but wants to take. away. our guns.

Lol. Spot on.

 

[HuntMaine]

Lol. Spot on.

My response is to throw more support to NRA NAGR GOA and GOAL. Id rather spend several hundred on them versus going out for that extra dinners etc.

 

[Lcstyle]

i read the article and came to the same conclusion. We have to try anything, even if we know it probably won't work because we have to do something, anything.

the whole article is an appeal to emotion.

it's for the children.

 

[Hoover]

Why can't we try to follow the constitution? Pretty simple!

 

[Lcstyle]

Why can't we try to follow the constitution? Pretty simple!

ppfffffff.. that old thing. that was written in the age of potato.

The founding fathers were idiots. When they wrote the constitution, they couldn't have possibly had any foresight or knowledge of what America would become two hundred years later.

/sarcasm

(but what's scary is that the above is seriously the left's argument)

 

[GlockJock]

Yeah, and "Meh"... and on Monday when ISIS blows up a train at Grand Central and simultaneously kick in the doors at NY Times HQ, in a Charlie Hebdo redux, and shoot and behead everyone in their path, the NY Times wingnuts will "Just call 911"...

" Your call is very important to us. Please stay on the line and an operator will be with you shortly".... And then, in desperation, they'll scream for a citizen gun owner (one of the seven or eight in Manhattan) to please please PLEASE come and save their liberal (and soon to be rigor-mortised) asses...

Yet they didn't report (or "overlooked") the Baltimore suburbs... back when Antis were calling friends in neighboring states asking to borrow a gun(s) cuz the advancing mob was getting closer... and it was busy signal after busy signal down where the blue-clad badge holders were busy "running around like wet hens" as my grandmother used to say...

Meh.

 

[FormerlyIndifferent]

I heard on the radio this morning, that this was the NYT's first "front-page" editorial commentary since 1920.

I said "Wait, wut?"

And then I realized that I debunked their "logic" on my couch this morning. The alleged smartest journalistic minds in the world at the "newspaper of record", write a front page non-sequiter (gun control does not work, but we need it anyway) that anyone with a brain can pick apart. For their first "front page editorial" in nearly a century, I'd expect better.

What strange times we live in.

 

[GaryO]

For the good of our fellow citizens? Like the trash that is destroying Chicago or every other major city?

 

[kevin9]

Been "discussing" gun control with a neighbor on a local town discussion board off on and on since the Oregon community college incident. Responding with facts usually causes him to revert to emotional arguments whereupon I usually declare game-set-match and walk away. He trotted out this editorial today, as if it were a tablet of stone from the mountain. Ripped it apart and pointed out it was pure opinion, illogical and uninformed, at that not news or fact.

 

[GlockJock]

Regional argument, also. Up here (and in other liberal areas) the "mood" is "control/ban/confiscate" etc...
This morning I said to a gathered group of LibDems (ugh. felt like puking in my pancakes) "OK, why don't we settle it the American way then. Just like you wanted to just do the "popular vote" thing and elect "President Gore", why don't we take a weekend and let all America vote on a binding ballot question: "Should we ban all non law enforcement citizens from owning guns?" and whatever the results are, we'll all agree to be bound by it... Everyone. No defense with firearms whatsoever. Ban them totally or status quo? Popular vote. What say you all?

("Cricket... cricket")

 

[gene]

If they really wanted to make the world a safer and better place they would go bankrupt and put their leftist writers on the street to do honest work!

 

[calsdad]

I say it's up to the "ban guns and let the police protect us" crowd to PROVE IT.

Give them a goal: Starting now , if you can go two full years and stop EVERY murder, every ARMED ROBBERY, every MUGGING, and every TERRORIST ATTACK , I will admit that you are correct and the police are there to protect us and we don't need to have 'civilian' ownership of guns.

So go ahead anti gun statist government worshipers, put your money where your pie-holes are and stop ALL OF THE CRIME. I don't know why you haven't done this. It would make your job so easy - all my arguments about why I need to have a gun to protect myself would be blown right out of the water and I wouldn't have any logical reply to your demand that I 'hand them all in".

It's easy - just go do it.

I'm waiting.

 

[Zappa]

If they really wanted to make the world a safer and better place they would go bankrupt and put their leftist writers on the street to do honest work!

They're not qualified to do anything else, that's all a $100+k journalism degree gets them.
But the good thing is, when the SHTF and someone pushes the "GO" button for real, they'll be among the first to end up as long pork.

The moonbats on the left coast are just as stupid as the East coast variety.

I found this in the Oregonian:

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/i...g.html#incart_most-commented_portland_article

What surprised me was the vast majority of the comments were pro-2A, meaning they're not edited out like the NYT.

 

[seanc]

I think the papers are largely jumping the shark here. The harder and more outrageous they are lately, I think they expose themselves. It seems that with the latest Islamic terrorism in Santa Barbara, even people on the fence are realizing that there IS a problem out there, the police can not be everywhere to protect people and the fact the citizens are the first responders.

I think at some point, this will be marked as what kills the MSM/ NYT.

 

[Pelikan]

They're not qualified to do anything else, that's all a $100+k journalism degree gets them.
But the good thing is, when the SHTF and someone pushes the "GO" button for real, they'll be among the first to end up as long pork.

The moonbats on the left coast are just as stupid as the East coast variety.

I found this in the Oregonian:

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/i...g.html#incart_most-commented_portland_article

What surprised me was the vast majority of the comments were pro-2A, meaning they're not edited out like the NYT.

My browser may not be working properly, but all I could see are two anti- comments... ?

 

[frenchman]

This kind of articles will become more comon. Keep in mind that gun control is one of, if not THE biggest liberal sales pitch in the upcoming election. The papers are just getting behind their favorite candidates agenda and kinda "prepare the terrain".

 

[Portagee]

This kind of articles will become more comon. Keep in mind that gun control is one of, if not THE biggest liberal sales pitch in the upcoming election. The papers are just getting behind their favorite candidates agenda and kinda "prepare the terrain".

You're absolutely right, the Dems have nothing else to go on.

 

[sieveboy]

I think the papers are largely jumping the shark here. The harder and more outrageous they are lately, I think they expose themselves. It seems that with the latest Islamic terrorism in Santa Barbara, even people on the fence are realizing that there IS a problem out there, the police can not be everywhere to protect people and the fact the citizens are the first responders.

I think at some point, this will be marked as what kills the MSM/ NYT.

Completely agree. This editorial destroys so many anti talking points. If they think NRA/gun lobby was difficult before, now the anti flagship is openly touting total confiscation.

 

[hv55maxx]

sounds ridiculous but more and more common toting the confiscation route. i'll be in the reloading room....