Skip to content

White supremacist rhetoric deafens gun control, mocks mass shootings

Gins from the San Bernardino mass shooting ( Image Source: San Bernardino Sheriffs Department)

Guns from the San Bernardino mass shooting (Image source: San Bernardino Sheriffs Department)

The gun control debate took center stage after the brutal terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. In an historic first, the highly respected news giant the New York Times has thrown its considerable weight into the debate. TheTimes issued a front-page editorial on Saturday titled, “End the Gun Epidemic in America” authored by its editorial staff. This is the first time since 1920 that the newspaper has broken from tradition with a front-page editorial. The piece calls out politicians and the proliferation of killer weapons stating, ​“It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.”

The power of the Times has made and broken politicians and issues since its founding. It is read throughout the world by the small and the powerful. By taking on the gun control debate it puts its reputation and power on the line by indirectly challenging gun control advocates. Most notably of course is the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA is the one of the most powerful lobbying group in Washington, D.C., and gives millions in campaign contributions. Its policy initiatives and stances oppose any restrictions on the “rights of Americans” to own firearms. The highly conservative and overwhelmingly republican group is opposed to universal background checks and The 2013 Assault Weapons Ban. Surprisingly, some politicians still cling to the NRA narrative in the face of gun horror.

Just two days after the San Bernardino massacre, Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz held a gun rally in Johnstown, Iowa. This prompted “Daily Show” host Trevor Noah to state, “Fourteen people just lost their lives in a shooting, and Ted Cruz’s first thought is ‘Oh, that reminds me: Gotta send out my invites to my gun party.’  ‘Yeah, that seems like something you’d only do if you’re an a—–e, which is turns out is exactly what voters are looking for.”

Although the New York Times piece is historic in nature, the glaring omission of the opinion piece is that it fails to directly challenge any specific politicians, political party or gun advocacy group. This is a significant failing that underscores the need to address the hard facts and not just skim the surface. The article also fails to take to task the racist and radical element that exists within those who oppose gun control.



2 Comments

  1. tom2 on December 6, 2015 at 11:02 am

    Epidemic? There is no epidemic. If the leftists don’t soon focus on the problem, America will discover what they’re really up to. By now, a majority know we have a small problem with mental health treatment and institutionalization. But it’s “a” problem, not “the” problem. Fact is “the” problem is vanishing before our lying eyes. Here are some facts not generally discussed.

    The Congressional Research Service study entitled “Mass Murder with Firearms…1999-2013,” found that mass shootings continue to be rare and the annual incidence is flat. Criminologist James Alan Fox found no solid trend in the numbers. Fact is, mass shootings account for only .004 percent of all deaths, about .66 percent of all murders and less than two percent of non-firearm murder victims. James Alan Fox clarified the data by pointing out the chance against a person being killed in a mass shooting would be about one in three million. I’m thinking the political screech is about ordinary crime that’s common in big cities, e.g., armed robbery, burglary, muggings & whatnot. Regardless, it seems bizarre leftists still believe disarming the victims is a rational solution.

    And another thing. Instead of blindly accepting what leftists feed us, we need to start dealing with the real problem — not gun murders — just murders. Of 218 nations, the U.S. ranks 108th. Stated another way, your chances of being murdered in the U.S. are 47 ten-thousandths of a percent (.000047). In France, your chances are one ten-thousandths of a percent (.000001). That’s a difference of 46 ten-thousandths of a percent, a pretty small number any way you look at it. A statistician’s trick perhaps.

    Regardless of the infinitesimally small differences, nations with higher murder rates include Greenland, South Africa, Kenya, Thailand, Brazil, Argentina, Lithuania, Eritrea, Palestine, Pakistan, several UK and French islands, a number of other South American nations, many Gulf and Caribbean resort vacation islands, Russia and of course Mexico. Most have draconian gun control. Those ranked near the U.S., within two murders per hundred thousand, include India, Egypt, New Caledonia, Taiwan, Nepal, Malta, Micronesia, Cuba, Fiji and Maldives. When considering those with lower murder rates, think about the number of murders by illegal aliens, a major factor in the U.S. and no other place on earth.

    The bottom line is this. According to the 2014 FBI Uniform Crime Report, Expanded Homicide Data table 8, between 2012 and 2014 total firearm murders declined 8.7%. Total homicides committed with a rifle declined 16.6%. Shotgun homicides declined 15.5%. These declines were not due to the constant yammering by leftists and in fact Congress consistently declines to take action, even after the after Sandy Hook atrocity. Seems our Congresspersons are getting smarter. Since 2010, murders with rifles declined 32.5%. Choosing how you feel about gun control is as easy as choosing up sides on a playground. The only ones who favor it are nuts, felons and democrats. All you have to do is choose those you want for teammates.

  2. Angela on December 6, 2015 at 3:05 pm

    Dear Mo, I agree that it’s not enough, and I think it’s time for a major newspaper – one that has the financial resources to put into serious investigative journalism at least – to write about the increasingly White Supremacist rhetoric coming from mainstream Republican politicians.

    I have had many twitter battles with pro 2nd Amendment folks, who often use the the gaslighting technique of pummelling a glut of juked statistics along with their (incorrectly) inferred meaning, then declared as fact. The whole twitter battle is a futile because of the inexhaustible stream of meaningless jabber. However, IF I shift my tone to a pro-2nd amendment stance and then explain, “yes it was the Black Panther Party who were some of my favorite open-carry advocates”, my twitter nemeses will always, and on cue, tell me that I am a racist for supporting racist terrorists, and then slam the proverbial door in my face. Conversation over. Ipso-facto, they are only interested in White Supremacy. Armed White Supremacy. The sentiments are there, they are real, and the rhetoric in support of it is toxic. It’s not a fringe group. These are mainstream elected officials who both speak it and enable it, and often are the first to dial it up in times of mass violence. A black man got his ass kicked and called N****r at a Trump rally. He was a target of racial hate and violence, and it was he who was escorted out by Police, not the other way around. No charges filed against any of the participants in this act of candidate endorsed mob-violence.

    I do believe the majority of us disagree with the vitriol… I do believe that there are those of us who just want love, compassion and kindness, those of us who want reasonable, sane discourse, those of us who want tolerance, fairness and honest democracy. We have only our solidarity and our willingness to stand up for it. We don’t have guns. We don’t have money. I’m not even sure we have our votes anymore. We only have our hearts. Is that enough? I’m starting to lose hope. I have written to my members of Congress, I have called them, I get in touch with my local politicians too (all democrats). I vow to never to vote for them if they don’t stand up for gun legislation. They politely tell me they are listening and the continue to plug their ears, sending out their thoughts and prayers, and then, they do nothing. We gave a donation to the Brady Campaign. I think they spent it all on stationery and postage (monthly mailings, to us, to ask us for more money).

    Today, Erick Erickson riddled his NYTimes front page Op-ed piece with bullet holes, in defiance of what I consider to be call for sane discourse. It’s ridiculously absurd, first. But it’s frightening. Very very frightening. Erickson has a platform, and sadly, an audience. Their rhetoric of hate and the violence they stand for, can and does produce real actions of hate and violence. We are seeing it in front of our very eyes. If the pen is mightier than the sword, then what’s a pen that has millions of swordsmen ready and willing to take up the cause that such a pen purports?