November 30, 2020

Anti-Gun Editorials Hitting The News Stands

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Kyle Huff went on a shooting rampage in Seattle over the weekend killing six people and the anti-gun editorials are filling up newspapers all across America. Robert L. Jamieson Jr. a columnist for the Seattle PI, rants on in the same old fashion about why guns have to be banned. The thinking is typically irrational and contradictory.

He first blames everything and everybody who has nothing at all to do with Huff killing 6 people.

Don’t blame the rave scene for the Seattle’s worst mass murder in more than two decades.

Blame the guns — and a culture that celebrates firepower.

Blame the murdering madness on a country that has seen Columbine, Kip Kinkel and bullets at the Tacoma Mall, but lacks the common sense to clamp down on weapons of mass carnage.

Blame the gun lobby on the other Capitol Hill — not the rave crowd on Seattle’s Capitol Hill.

He then spends way too much time dumping on supporters of the 2nd Amendment including the NRA and then makes this statement.

Huff is the latest example of what happens when high-powered weapons end up in the wrong gun user’s hands.

He is exactly right but banning guns isn’t the solution. The oldest trick in the book by anti-gun ranters is to instill fear, to convince the masses that they are going to be the next target and to describe every act of a mad gunman in the most gruesome way.

Jamieson goes on to tell all of Seattle why Huff had all the guns in the first place and describes how this act could have been prevented in the first place but that isn’t his focus. His focus is to take away 2nd Amendment rights.

In Montana, he faced a felony criminal mischief charge in 2000 for blasting a statue of a moose with gunfire. He later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.

Had Huff shot up a statue in, say, downtown Seattle — as opposed to in gun-friendly Montana — he would have been dealt with more seriously, law enforcement and public-policy officials tell me. Had the felony charge stuck and led to conviction, it would have been illegal for Huff to own firearms.

Bingo! This is what gun rights advocates have been saying for years. If the liberal courts, which is comprised of those who think like Jamieson, would clamp down of violent criminals like Huff, maybe he would have still been a prison somewhere cuddling up with a fellow inmate.

This is all old hat coming from Jamieson. If you used the same reasoning that he uses in his arguments, then other changes should be in store. Huff drove a Dodge truck to the scene of the crime. Therefore, we need a vehicle ban. Had Huff had no means of getting to the scene to commit the murder, it never would have happened.

Most of the guns that authorities found in Huffs home after, were assumed to have all been bought legally. Would he have been able to do that if that conviction back in Montana had been made to stick, instead of reducing it to a misdemeanor by a liberal court system? Seriously, who shoots up a statue of a moose for kicks?

The ranting and raving will subside as it always does but knee-jerk legislation is what always gets us into trouble. Let’s hope this doesn’t result in the wrong legislation when the root of the problem goes back to the Montana courts.

Tom Remington

Share