Monday, 10 January 2011

Into the abyss.

Longrider has peered into the abyss of non-thought that is the Guardian and striven to discover how deep that particular hole goes. He's still a long way from the bottom of that pit, I think.

The article is frankly disgusting, an attempt to conflate a murderous nut with a particular, unrelated political movement which seems, at this stage, diametrically opposite to the gunman's beliefs. In fact, without the gun, he might be spouting his bile on CiF to cheers from the commenters. The same commenters who actually tried to dissociate a definitely Muslim woman who stabbed an MP for a definitely Muslim reason from all other Muslims. Yet a random gun kook is proof of 'far-right links' in what passes for minds among these people.

So who do I think he was shooting for? Himself. I don't think he took the shots for political reasons. He was a Democrat and he shot a Democrat congresswoman. That makes no political sense.

Aside from the congresswoman (who is, so far, recovering) he killed six others. One was a judge. He was known to be anti-pretty much everything, and involved in illegal drug use, so was he going for the judge?

He shot a nine-year-old girl. Not just any nine-year-old girl, but one who was born on the day the Twin Towers were destroyed. If she lived locally and he knew about her through local talk, could there have been a connection made in that twisted mind? Logically, you're thinking 'Ridiculous' but this man wasn't thinking logically nor making logical connections.

Any one of those three would have gained him what the deranged always crave - worldwide fame as a killer. The rifle in the clock tower, the pistol in the schoolyard, none of them have any reason to happen other than some obscure link in the dark recesses of a madman's mind. And yet the Guardianistas, those who drool over the prospect of Thatcher's death and hang Nick Clegg in effigy, are already making political capital by linking the loony to white supremacy groups and the Tea Party on the basis of... he had a gun.

They are not linking him to Paul Flynn's campaign to legalise cannabis, even though he was a heavy user. They make much of his reading of Mein Kampf but little of his reading of the Communist Manifesto. They insist he is the Right Wing Ideology made flesh and they accuse all those they see as 'right-wing' of being capable of the same.

They shriek and wail like ghouls over fresh corpses, they hold aloft the still-warm bodies and use them as totems for their cause. And then they claim they hold the moral high ground.

Why did he really shoot those people? We might never know. It's entirely possible he doesn't really know himself.

Sarah Palin's website is blamed although there has been nothing to suggest he ever saw it. Political groups are blamed even though no evidence has come forward to suggest he is involved with any of them. He is madder than a bag of badgers but that is the one thing that the Socialists will not blame. They can't. Their equality agenda won't let them.

So now, as in the aftermath of Dunblane, there will be renewed calls for gun bans. This particular nut bought a 9mm Glock last November. He already had a history of erratic behaviour and drug use. So would a gun ban have stopped him?

Or would he have done what the UK youth now do, and bought an illegal weapon in the shadows of a pub car park? If he was determined to go out shooting, he could do that in the UK where guns are banned just as easily as he could do it in Arizona where they are sold over the counter. the only real difference is that in the UK, he can be certain that none of those in the crowd have guns.

If he believes he was acting with a political agenda, that's one thing, but there's really scant evidence for it so far. None to link him to any of the groups now being villified by hysterical socialists. The only evidence so far suggests he was nuts.

Really, there doesn't need to be any more motive, incentive or trigger than that.


PT Barnum said...

Under Arizona gun law, I learnt, so long as you have no criminal record of violence and no diagnosed psychiatric illness you can own as many guns as you like, no licence necessary, and take a gun with you everywhere you go. So the surprising thing about this case is that no one in the crowd shot the bloke dead. Seems that, even if you can carry, most folk choose not to. Not a very Guardianesque stereotype, that.

Smoking Hot said...

and now we have the occult coming into it. From the Tattlegraph:-

"FBI agents combing through Loughner's life will also explore whether he was an enthusiast of the occult after a fake skull was found at his home, sitting in a plant pot with shrivelled oranges. There were candles next to it in what appeared to be some form of shrine."

Truly a lunatic being investigated and condemned by lunatics.

Trooper Thompson said...

"was he going for the judge?"

That's an interesting question. The judge was one of the most constitutional judges out there, who ruled against the Brady Act, one of the most infamous gun-grabbing pieces of legislation. And the Senator is pretty conservative too.

Leg-iron said...

PTB - all they would need was a cooling-off period in which the gun shop, before handing over the gun, passed the customer's details to the local sheriff. It would have to be local because national inquiries won't work.

The local authorities will be able to tell very quickly if the customer has a reputation as a mad bugger.

The cooling-off period is essential, really, because it stops people getting enraged and buying the gun while still furious. Your gun is reserved, come back in a week when you're not red-faced, shaking and muttering 'Die you bastard'.

then again, if we had a gun law that stated anyone could have one as long as they are not unhinged, most politicians wouldn't qualify.

Also, I did notice the lack of guns in the crowd. Odd, that, considering we are led to believe that America is still full of Clint Eastwoods and John Waynes.

Leg-iron said...

SH - you just know Satan is going to get the blame for anything over there.

It's a sign of the times that Sarah Palin was blamed first.

Leg-iron said...

Trooper - there's some evidence he was after the Congresswoman but now he's clammed up. He took pot-shots at random people but some of his shots were aimed to kill. Could be accidental but then, he could have been after more than one.

Here's an interesting connection - it happened just after the UK Government decided that a British company was being naughty in selling lethal injections to the States.

Object now, Cable.

richard said...

This stinks of a set-up. David "Ikkey" has been blamed as a factor. Gun control and internet restrictions to follow, convenient indeed in the land of the FEMA camp.

kitler said...


knirirr said...

...those who drool over the prospect of Thatcher's death...

Ah, yes. Their drooling is in remarkably poor taste.
When she dies there will be a deluge of smug lefties making Wizard of Oz references and thinking themselves incredibly witty.

Amusing Bunni said...

The lefties were just waiting for an incident like this to villify the conservative right, in order to take away our free speech and freedoms. It's that "don't let a good crisis go to waste" that bo's henchmen love to implement.

Another patsy and if you look at spidey's blog, and also my post in the comment section, really errie stuff about how the congresswoman on youtube was following the nutter shooter! Something strange afoot here, LI.

opinions powered by