Reading articles by gun control zealots is interesting because they’re often laced with countless editorializations that attempt to make a case for disarming the people. Take this recent case from Wisconsin where a 75 year-old man shot a 16 year-old kid because the older man thought the kid stole his firearm collection:
75-year-old John Henry Spooner from Milwaukee, WI, appointed himself judge, jury and executioner when he gunned down a 13-year-old boy whose only crime appeared to be…his appearance. The victim, Darius Simmons, was black, unarmed and brutally shot in front of his now grief-stricken mother.
At issue was a gun collection, which had been, according to Spooner, stolen. Simmons lived next door. Spooner confronted Darius, who was in sixth grade, and his mother, Patricia Larry, when the boy was moving a garbage can in the front yard. Darius denied involvement in the theft. In fact, he was in school at the time of the robbery, but that answer was unsatisfactory to Spooner, who proceeded to point his 9mm handgun at Darius.
[…]
According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Spooner was upset that his neighborhood had turned from a majority Caucasian neighborhood to a mixed-race neighborhood. Darius and his family had recently moved next door to Spooner.
There is some editorialization that attempts to build a case of racism against Spooner, something we saw in the Zimmerman case. Speaking of the Zimmerman case, the author of this article doesn’t forget to make a spurious editorialization to play on the death of Trayvon Martin:
Wisconsin does have both Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws on the books, although it probably be even more difficult for Spooner to make the case that he was under any sort of threat than it will be for George Zimmerman, the killer of Trayvon Martin.
The article attempts to convince the reader that Spooner was a racist who gunned down an unarmed black teenager for the sole reason that the teenager was black. Because of the Zimmerman case I won’t believe any such accusations unless absolute proof is brought forward. Let us not forget that both MSNBC and CNN were caught fabricating evidence to make Zimmerman’s motivation appear race-related. The media has shot what little credibility it may have once had when it comes to reporting the facts in any crime that involves a black individual being shot by a person of a differing race.
Not only has the author attempted to make this shooting appear race related but it attempts to make the Zimmerman case entirely race related. The paragraph should read, “Wisconsin does have both Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws on the books, although it probably be even more difficult for Spooner to make the case that he was for the racist murder Zimmerman who had no claim of self-defense whatsoever.” Seriously, if you’re going to editorialize go big or go home. Either way the author forgets to bring up the fact that evidence exists supporting Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. Of course it took ages for this evidence to come to light because it didn’t fit the media’s narrative, and it’s possible Spooner’s action was legitimate self-defense and we’ll only learn of evidence supporting such a claim much later down the road, and it won’t be reported to any extent.
Let’s take a look at another recent story written by a gun control zealot:
BAD boy swimmers Nick D’Arcy and Kenrick Monk have sparked outrage after they posed with high-powered weapons in a US gun shop.
The pair smiled and looked smug as they handled automatic pistols and pump-action shot guns similar to those used in the Port Arthur massacre.
[…]
Mr Crook said Monk was holding the same pump-action shot guns used by Martin Bryant, who murdered 35 people in Port Arthur in 1996.
D’Arcy was pictured holding semi-automatic pistols, similar to those used by Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui.
The only story here is that two Australian Olympic swimmers went to an American gun shop and took a picture of themselves holding firearms while exercising poor trigger discipline. I forgive the poor trigger discipline simply because they are from a hoplophobic country where firearms training is probably suppressed as much as firearms. After all, you don’t want the peasants to familiarize themselves with firearms or they might find out they enjoy shooting and thus demand the strict firearm laws be struck from the books.
The author of this article tries to make this non-story appear to be a scandalous one but tying the swimmers to two massacres. According to the article the weapons were similar to those used in the Port Arthur massacre and the Virginia Tech massacre. Since no logical argument can be made for gun control proponents must appeal to peoples’ emotions. They must pull at your heartstrings and rely on your fear in order to push their agenda.
These articles are perfect examples of gun control zealots editorializing stories to push their agenda. Because of these editorializations they’ve taken potentially serious issues and turned them into irrelevant gibberish that people have become entirely desensitized to due to the constant Chicken Little claims that never pan out. Editorializations have also made the media entirely unreliable, credibility cannot be granted to organizations that continuously lie in order to push an agenda. Thankfully the people have become wise to these tactics and are no longer buying the gun control zealots’ malarkey. You idiots advocating gun control screwed yourselves in the end. While lying worked in the short term people eventually woke up and called you out. When you refused to back down after being called out people recognized you for the cheats you are and began ignoring you. In all honesty I should thank those of you who editorialized in an attempt to push gun control, you lies basically did gun rights advocates’ work for them. Instead of having to argue ideas gun rights advocates’ merely had to point out your lies, which destroyed your credibility. Victory was handed to all of us in the gun community, by yourselves, on a silver platter.
