Nice unsecured guns by the "common sense gun safety" folks, eh? Oh well, I suppose if someone had been foolish enough to do a snatch and grab, there were plenty of legitimate credentials ready to open fire in the crowd.
Those who would disarm us demand to control everything, even a citizen asking a question of a public figure at a public event at a public place. And they'll use the force of the state to bend us to their will. It's the "progressive" way.
Things could have gone differently, had the man in the suit been a bit dumber and more kneejerk violence-prone, at which point, he'd have had a full continuum of force at his disposal. Naturally, when an indignant hive insect who witnessed the official intimidation attempt wrote a letter to the local paper, his beef was with gun activists "self-righteously cloaking themselves in the First Amendment," or some such language.
Want a quick example of what would happen if citizens didn't so "cloak themselves," and left everything to the "official" narrative spinners?
Realizing that the only job a guy like me could ever hope to get with a "real" newspaper would be delivering them, here's how my hometown paper imposed its ignorance on its readership over Operation Fast and Furious. Here's my response, which is confined to a niche readership, ensuring the record wouldn't be corrected for those exposed only to parroted talking points.
1 comment:
"authorized Journalists" means willing to republish talking points without deconstructing them. I'll take "rogue journalists" any day. In fact, maybe you shouldn't sully your name by labeling yourself as a "journalist" anything seeing how little it actually resembles true journalism. Try "People's Watch-Dog" or "Fact Warrior"
Post a Comment